Sourav Ganguly in the 2003 World Cup final

[Dulex9]

I've read his ebook and was disappointed he did not have a section on the 2003 world cup, especially when this was one of the most significant thing to happen in his career and also captaincy.

Has anyone read his strategy for the final?

I watched a video of him and he wanted to put the Australian batsman under pressure and be in control of the game, something like 100 runs for 5 wickets down.

Also Ganguly took Harbhajan off where he should have bowled him out with 4 overs to go when the ball was turning. Maybe Ganguly thought Sehwag, Tendulkar, Mongia would get some turn and grab a 2 wickets and then he will bring back harbhajan to take another wicket.

However unfortunately it just did not go Ganguly's way at all and the game was literally slipping out of his hands even after he 25th over where he still did not bring back Harbhajan.

 

[Saurav]

We lost that game at the toss

 

[sweep_shot]

Australia was too good at that time. India lost to a better team.

 

[Bigboii]

Australia was too good at that time. India lost to a better team.

just reaching the final for other TEAMS WAS GOOD ENOUGH

 

[Ab Fan]

Ganguly made a poor decision after winning the toss in WC. Honestly though, it won't have made any impact. That Aussies team were simply phenomenal. We used to be a good ODI team hungry for wins and play to our potential.

However, Ganguly had the knack of losing a lot of ICC finals. India lost plenty of tri series finals after WC final 2003 and while a lot of them were vs Australia, we lost a few tri series final vs other team as well.

All in all, we couldn't win a champion team under Ganguly's captaincy but we did form a unit which went on to become a champion team years later under Dhoni's captaincy.

 

[jeetu]

The game was lost because Indian pacers failed to get early wickets. I think Australia were 100 in 13 overs without loss of a wicket.

 

[pakistanisgreat]

Australian were too good from 1999 to 2007.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

We lost that game at the toss

As if the result would have been any different if India won the toss.

 

[hitthestump]

We lost that game at the toss

What? Any side at the time would have needed divine intervention to beat that Australia team. Forget the toss bro.

 

[Slog]

We lost that game at the toss

You lost that game when the draw was made.

India played Australia twice that tournament and both times the gulf between the sides was insane

 

[tyron_woodley]

toss would make no difference I reckon. India were a strong odi team no doubt but Aussies were just better.

 

[Heisenberg111]

As if the result would have been any different if India won the toss.

Actually Ganguly won the toss and decided to field first.

 

[Saurav]

What? Any side at the time would have needed divine intervention to beat that Australia team. Forget the toss bro.

Batting first would have given us better chance for sure

 

[kingusama92]

That Australian team was ridiculously good.

Even in the group game, they whooped India despite bowling first.

So, the result was a foregone conclusion before the toss and the only thing India could hope for was a miraculous "once in a lifetime" innings from Tendulkar which didn't happen.

 

[Ab Fan]

You lost that game when the draw was made.

India played Australia twice that tournament and both times the gulf between the sides was insane

Which draw? I didnt get that.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Batting first would have given us better chance for sure

India batted first in the Group game at Centurion and got cleaned up for 125, which Australia chased down in a little over 22 overs.

India (or any team for that matter) never even had a chance against Australia in 2003. Ditto for 2007.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Actually Ganguly won the toss and decided to field first.

He was probably fearful of a repeat of Centurion where India won the toss and batted first only to get shot out for 125.

 

[tyron_woodley]

in bouncy wickets like in s.a and Australia india had no chance vs australia in 2003. had they played in Asia, or maybe England then there is a 40% chance they could have won.

 

[Slog]

Which draw? I didnt get that.

The final lineup I mean.

 

[Slog]

India batted first in the Group game at Centurion and got cleaned up for 125, which Australia chased down in a little over 22 overs.

India (or any team for that matter) never even had a chance against Australia in 2003. Ditto for 2007.

South Africa were really good in 2007 and 2011.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

South Africa were really good in 2007 and 2011.

Being really good doesn't matter if you can't win the trophy. And in South Africa's case there were a number of teams (besides the champions) that were better than them in both tournaments like Sri Lanka (2007 & 2011), Pakistan (2011) and New Zealand (2007 & 2011).

 

[Ab Fan]

SA were always among the top 3 teams except the '19 World Cup. Their best bet had to be 1999 World Cup. They failed there and allowed Aussies to take over from there.

I think now their next best would be when a world cup is hosted by them next.

 

[light]

Winning a WC these days is meh ... winning a WC against the mighty AUS back in the days, now that was an accomplishment.

 

[Saurav]

India batted first in the Group game at Centurion and got cleaned up for 125, which Australia chased down in a little over 22 overs.

India (or any team for that matter) never even had a chance against Australia in 2003. Ditto for 2007.

That was in earlier phase where we barely beat Holland.Got all out for 250 I think vs them

Also Gillespie was playing and was wrecker in chief.

The final was at Joburg which was patta batting first wicket

 

[big_gamer007]

Australia was a beast team back then. To beat them we needed to play at our best and hope they had a bad day. It didn't happen and we lost.

Simple as that.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

That was in earlier phase where we barely beat Holland.Got all out for 250 I think vs them

Also Gillespie was playing and was wrecker in chief.

The final was at Joburg which was patta batting first wicket

Yeah I don't think so. Even if India somehow scored 350 Australia would have chased it down in 40 overs

 

[Saurav]

Yeah I don't think so. Even if India somehow scored 350 Australia would have chased it down in 40 overs

They weren't all that invincible.England nearly beat them earlier.They needed Bichel to bail them out .

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

They weren't all that invincible.England nearly beat them earlier.They needed Bichel to bail them out .

They were. They had a winning streak that stretched from the Group Stages of the 1999 World Cup to the 2011 World Cup. Ironically the streak began after and ended with a loss to Pakistan.

Also, 'nearly' is meaningless in ODI cricket: a game of fine margins. South Africa have 'nearly' won 2 World Cups.

 

[Ashraful_Rox]

No way any team could have beaten Australia, only Pakistan had a decent shot but Waqar messed it up. Before the world cup he was picking up 6fer and 7fer in ODIs vs England and Australia, but in WC it was only beamer

 

[Bhaijaan]

We lost that game at the toss

Zaheer Khan's first over was a diasaster we never received from.

 

[tyron_woodley]

No way any team could have beaten Australia, only Pakistan had a decent shot but Waqar messed it up. Before the world cup he was picking up 6fer and 7fer in ODIs vs England and Australia, but in WC it was only beamer

Pakistan never had a chance vs india in 03 let alone ausstralia. india were easily the second best team in 2002-2003.

 

[Saurav]

They were. They had a winning streak that stretched from the Group Stages of the 1999 World Cup to the 2011 World Cup. Ironically the streak began after and ended with a loss to Pakistan.

Also, 'nearly' is meaningless in ODI cricket: a game of fine margins. South Africa have 'nearly' won 2 World Cups.

Which suggests SA werent a bad team. And Australia weren't invincible.They were much better in 2007 where all their wins were convincing

 

[Saurav]

Zaheer Khan's first over was a diasaster we never received from.

Nerves.This is where huge credit needs to go to Dhoni,who taught us to remain calm under intense pressure

 

[tyron_woodley]

Which suggests SA werent a bad team. And Australia weren't invincible.They were much better in 2007 where all their wins were convincing

funnily enough india were also very strong at the time. So we're pakistam. But we both choked so bad. India even beat australia away in a odi series. VB cup.

 

[Pakpak]

Pakistan never had a chance vs india in 03 let alone ausstralia. india were easily the second best team in 2002-2003.

Never had a chance Had Razzaq not dropped a dolly from Tendul India would be 53-3 with three wickets lost in the space of 5 balls. Pakistan had also just beaten Australia in Australia not long before the WC.

As for us against Australia we had them down and out at 86-4 and 146-5. Only Symonds saved them.

 

[Pakpak]

Add to my point [MENTION=150610]tyron_woodley[/MENTION] who am I debating? The same guy who considers an average in the 20's as 'duds'. I'm sure you thought Brett Lee was a dud too.

Stop wasting people's times. Block list welcome.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Which suggests SA werent a bad team. And Australia weren't invincible.They were much better in 2007 where all their wins were convincing

In 1999 South Africa and Pakistan both had better sides than Australia. In 2003 and 2007 though they were absolutely invincible which is evident by their unbeaten runs in both tournaments. Out of literally 20 matches in those two World Cups they were threatened once by England. All of the other 19 games were basically cakewalks which they won comprehensively. In World Cup history that kind of dominance by any team is simply unparalleled.

 

[Heisenberg111]

In 1999 South Africa and Pakistan both had better sides than Australia. In 2003 and 2007 though they were absolutely invincible which is evident by their unbeaten runs in both tournaments. Out of literally 20 matches in those two World Cups they were threatened once by England. All of the other 19 games were basically cakewalks which they won comprehensively. In World Cup history that kind of dominance by any team is simply unparalleled.

Correction, Australia played 22 matches in both the world cups not 20. They had a 34 match unbeaten streak in the world cups from 1999-2011 which is just remarkable.

 

[GBK_Fan]

No way any team could have beaten Australia, only Pakistan had a decent shot but Waqar messed it up. Before the world cup he was picking up 6fer and 7fer in ODIs vs England and Australia, but in WC it was only beamer

It was surreal to see a bowler of Waqars calibre lose it against Symonds

 

[tyron_woodley]

Never had a chance Had Razzaq not dropped a dolly from Tendul India would be 53-3 with three wickets lost in the space of 5 balls. Pakistan had also just beaten Australia in Australia not long before the WC.

As for us against Australia we had them down and out at 86-4 and 146-5. Only Symonds saved them.

should have could have and would have. But you don't. So shut it. Pakistan would have lost regardless to india in 03 anyway. If tenda dint step up, someone else would have.

 

[tyron_woodley]

Add to my point [MENTION=150610]tyron_woodley[/MENTION] who am I debating? The same guy who considers an average in the 20's as 'duds'. I'm sure you thought Brett Lee was a dud too.

Stop wasting people's times. Block list welcome.

who had an average of 20? amir ? rofl

 

[tyron_woodley]

In 1999 South Africa and Pakistan both had better sides than Australia. In 2003 and 2007 though they were absolutely invincible which is evident by their unbeaten runs in both tournaments. Out of literally 20 matches in those two World Cups they were threatened once by England. All of the other 19 games were basically cakewalks which they won comprehensively. In World Cup history that kind of dominance by any team is simply unparalleled.

Australia were not the strongest in 1999 but neither were pakistan who still lost a game to india rofl. India were just starting to get better at that stage.

S A were the strongest in 1999.

in 03 australia by far were the best team. India by far the second best team. Huge gap and then other teams like s.a pakistan etc.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Australia were not the strongest in 1999 but neither were pakistan who still lost a game to india rofl. India were just starting to get better at that stage.

S A were the strongest in 1999.

in 03 australia by far were the best team. India by far the second best team. Huge gap and then other teams like s.a pakistan etc.

So? South Africa lost to Zimbabwe. Does that mean Zimbabwe had a better team than South Africa? Pakistan's '99 team had everything from good batsmen, versatile all-rounders and the best bowling attack in the tournament. Waqar was on the bench. They beat Australia in the Super Sixes and the trophy should have been decided between them and South Africa had both teams not messed up so royally.

In 2003 there was Australia, daylight followed by more daylight and then India, followed by the other teams. The massive gulf between India and Australia was evident in both encounters between them. India never even looked like threatening them, in the group game or the final.

 

[MenInG]

Former India captain Sourav Ganguly is confident that if given three months to train, he can again start churning out runs for Team India in Tests. Speaking to Bengali newspaper Sangbad Pratidin, Ganguly said that he would have scored more runs had he not retired in Nagpur.

Ganguly played his final international game against Australia in November 2008. His last ODI appearance came against Pakistan in 2007. Prior to the start of Australia series, the left-handed batsman had announced that he would quit international cricket. In 2012, he had told The Telegraph that he regretted his decision.

“If I was given two more series in ODIs, I would’ve scored more runs. If I hadn’t retired in Nagpur, I would’ve scored runs in the next two Test series too. In fact even now give me six months to train, let me play three Ranji games, I’ll score runs for India in Test cricket. I don’t even need six months, give me three, I will score runs,” Ganguly told Sangbad Pratidin.

“You might not give me an opportunity to play but how will you break the belief inside me?”

“It was kind of unbelievable. I was dropped from the ODI side despite being one of the highest scorers of that calendar year. No matter how good your performance is if the stage is taken away from you then what will you prove? And to whom? The same thing happened with me,” the 48-year-old added.

Once a regular member of the team, Ganguly was first sacked from captaincy and was then often dropped from the national team. He was a member of the 2007 World Cup team, which crashed out of the tournament from the league stage.

Ganguly did retire from international cricket in 2008 but continued to play IPL and domestic cricket. His career seemed to be over after he failed to bag a bid in IPL 2011 auction but played two more seasons with Pune Warriors. He captained the Pune-based franchise in his second season.

Sourav Ganguly put in quarantine after elder brother contracts COVID-19Sourav Ganguly in home-quarantine as brother Snehasish tests positive for Coronavirus
Prior to IPL 2012, Ganguly made his last appearance for Bengal in the final of the Vijay Hazare Trophy, which they won.

He took over as Cricket Association of Bengal's chief in 2015 and was appointed BCCI's President in 2019. He has also donned coach's hat and was an advisor to Delhi Capitals in IPL 2019.

https://www.timesnownews.com/sports...r-india-in-test-cricket-sourav-ganguly/622899

 

[Bhaijaan]

It was a great decision by Ganguly to retire on a high.

Retirement of Kumble and Ganguly was a huge farewell moment in Indian cricket and as told by Sehwag in an interview the farewell was one of the most special celebrations he was part of.

Apparently Dravid, Sachin, Kumble etc who do not generally drink alcohol, all had multiple shots of alcohol that night. Whole team did.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

You lost that game when the draw was made.

India played Australia twice that tournament and both times the gulf between the sides was insane

The gulf between Australia and every other side was huge back then - even with warne banned. Australia were an unbelievable team in ODI's those days . Current england side can be beaten on their off days, slow pitches, bouncy pitches, etc. That team would claw back and beat any team no matter what the pitches, conditions etc. were

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Never had a chance Had Razzaq not dropped a dolly from Tendul India would be 53-3 with three wickets lost in the space of 5 balls. Pakistan had also just beaten Australia in Australia not long before the WC.

As for us against Australia we had them down and out at 86-4 and 146-5. Only Symonds saved them.

Post that series in Australia , Pakistan were the worst top 8 team going into that World Cup. Had a record of 2 wins and 10 losses against other top 8 sides and were struggling against Kenya and Zimbabwe in a couple of odd matches. India had made the CT final in 2002 and were favourites to win that. Even in the group stages , PAK were struggling.

 

[Slog]

Former India captain Sourav Ganguly is confident that if given three months to train, he can again start churning out runs for Team India in Tests. Speaking to Bengali newspaper Sangbad Pratidin, Ganguly said that he would have scored more runs had he not retired in Nagpur.

Ganguly played his final international game against Australia in November 2008. His last ODI appearance came against Pakistan in 2007. Prior to the start of Australia series, the left-handed batsman had announced that he would quit international cricket. In 2012, he had told The Telegraph that he regretted his decision.

“If I was given two more series in ODIs, I would’ve scored more runs. If I hadn’t retired in Nagpur, I would’ve scored runs in the next two Test series too. In fact even now give me six months to train, let me play three Ranji games, I’ll score runs for India in Test cricket. I don’t even need six months, give me three, I will score runs,” Ganguly told Sangbad Pratidin.

“You might not give me an opportunity to play but how will you break the belief inside me?”

“It was kind of unbelievable. I was dropped from the ODI side despite being one of the highest scorers of that calendar year. No matter how good your performance is if the stage is taken away from you then what will you prove? And to whom? The same thing happened with me,” the 48-year-old added.

Once a regular member of the team, Ganguly was first sacked from captaincy and was then often dropped from the national team. He was a member of the 2007 World Cup team, which crashed out of the tournament from the league stage.

Ganguly did retire from international cricket in 2008 but continued to play IPL and domestic cricket. His career seemed to be over after he failed to bag a bid in IPL 2011 auction but played two more seasons with Pune Warriors. He captained the Pune-based franchise in his second season.

Sourav Ganguly put in quarantine after elder brother contracts COVID-19Sourav Ganguly in home-quarantine as brother Snehasish tests positive for Coronavirus
Prior to IPL 2012, Ganguly made his last appearance for Bengal in the final of the Vijay Hazare Trophy, which they won.

He took over as Cricket Association of Bengal's chief in 2015 and was appointed BCCI's President in 2019. He has also donned coach's hat and was an advisor to Delhi Capitals in IPL 2019.

https://www.timesnownews.com/sports...r-india-in-test-cricket-sourav-ganguly/622899

is he high?

 

[WhenSultansBowled]

It was a great decision by Ganguly to retire on a high.

Retirement of Kumble and Ganguly was a huge farewell moment in Indian cricket and as told by Sehwag in an interview the farewell was one of the most special celebrations he was part of.

Apparently Dravid, Sachin, Kumble etc who do not generally drink alcohol, all had multiple shots of alcohol that night. Whole team did.

It's extremely hard to imagine likes of Dravid and Sachin drinking alcohol.

Aargh!

 

[Bhaijaan]

It's extremely hard to imagine likes of Dravid and Sachin drinking alcohol.

Aargh!

It was the end of an era.

Crushing the Aussies in a test series is a great way to retire too.

 

[Pakpak]

Post that series in Australia , Pakistan were the worst top 8 team going into that World Cup. Had a record of 2 wins and 10 losses against other top 8 sides and were struggling against Kenya and Zimbabwe in a couple of odd matches. India had made the CT final in 2002 and were favourites to win that. Even in the group stages , PAK were struggling.

????

I am not talking about winning the WC. I am talking about the match against India, where had it not been for Razzaq's missed dolly we were in with a massive chance of beating India by getting Tendulkar. So yeah, we had every chance against India. But like every other WC against India our drops at crucial stages let us down.

 

[tyron_woodley]

????

I am not talking about winning the WC. I am talking about the match against India, where had it not been for Razzaq's missed dolly we were in with a massive chance of beating India by getting Tendulkar. So yeah, we had every chance against India. But like every other WC against India our drops at crucial stages let us down.

drops also cost india plenty of games vs australia so that's not an excuse. Fielding ability is just as important as batting and bowling.

 

[Pakpak]

drops also cost india plenty of games vs australia so that's not an excuse. Fielding ability is just as important as batting and bowling.

It is an excuse, since in 2003 and 2011 our drops contributed directly to our defeat by Tendulkar single handedly.

Like all Indians you yap nonsense here, my comment was aimed at saying we were in with a big chance at defeating India only if Razzaq had held on. Nikhil I can debate bur you're a ***** better on my ignore list.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

????

I am not talking about winning the WC. I am talking about the match against India, where had it not been for Razzaq's missed dolly we were in with a massive chance of beating India by getting Tendulkar. So yeah, we had every chance against India. But like every other WC against India our drops at crucial stages let us down.

OK fair enough. I still think india would have won simply considering the way Yuvraj batted but yeah It would have been a tight match had sachin been caught

 

[tyron_woodley]

It is an excuse, since in 2003 and 2011 our drops contributed directly to our defeat by Tendulkar single handedly.

Like all Indians you yap nonsense here, my comment was aimed at saying we were in with a big chance at defeating India only if Razzaq had held on. Nikhil I can debate bur you're a ***** better on my ignore list.

You were in a big chance of defeating india? Drops happen due to pressure. Pakistanis couldn't handle the pressure vs india.

India also dropped plenty of dollies in those meaningless sharjah games which cost them the game vs pakistan.

Infact even recently india made mistakes by not reviewing for a drs call and it cost them the game vs england.

Your fielding sucks so you lost.

 

[tyron_woodley]

OK fair enough. I still think india would have won simply considering the way Yuvraj batted but yeah It would have been a tight match had sachin been caught

pakistan could have caught tendulkar 3 times in 2011 but dropped all 3. That's just poor fielding. Dropping once is fair but if you drop 3 times then there is something wrong with your fielding ability.

That's like saying if india had a phassst bowler like shaoib pakistan wouldn't even get past 200. Should pakistan have a jadeja or a a raina fielding for them, they may have beaten india.

fielding is part of the sport and only fit teams would know the importance of fielding and physical fitness. Pakistan would definitely have no idea about that unfortunately.