Sourav Ganguly's captaincy in the 2003 World Cup final

[Dulex9]

Watching the 2003 world cup final.

I'm baffled as to when the Aussies were 127/2 at 20 overs he decided to bring on Tendulkar, Sehwag, D Mongia, Yuvraj in that crucial 21-30 over period where wickets were necessary and pegging back the run rate.

Surely you want to take wickets and give Zaheer, Nehra the over and bowl Bhajji out?

By the time he brought back Zaheer, the score was 183/2 after 30 where who know if he brought back his main bowlers in the 21-30 over period it could have been 171/4 with the game going either way.

I am baffled to what his tactics were to put on his part time bowlers when india were in desperate need of wickets.

 

[big_gamer007]

Don’t exactly remember it but I guess he thought if he bowled out 10 overs of part time during 21-30 for 5.5 RPO and get a wicket or two would be great whereas if main bowlers couldn’t take wicket then when he bowls part timers during latter stages they might get hit for 90+ in their 10 overs..

Something along those lines he might have thought? Defensive thinking basically if it works it’s genius if it doesn’t then we can criticise.. At the end of the day australia was a better team if you look at it in any which ways and deserved the cup.

 

[Rightarmfast]

Zaheer tried bowling express quick. I remember him continuously touching 148. And he kept getting whacked. And hence, Ganguly didnt have the confidence to bring him back.

 

[Dulex9]

He may have felt he could get lucky with a wicket or two with these part time bowlers and save the main bowlers for later.

Zaheer was getting hammered. However he should've bowled Bhajji out and gave Nehra 3 overs. Surprised he brought back Srinath for two overs as he got even more hammered then Zaheer.

At this stage you simply need wickets to bring yourself back into the game.

 

[LastManstanding]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. We we're against a much Superior Australian team and when your most successful bowler starts getting whacked, there is very little you can do.

 

[Bhaijaan]

When everyone's getting hammered its hard to question bowling changes. He tried some tricks that didn't work. Had they worked/fluked people would have been hailing his guts. Thats how hindsight bias works.

 

[RamLakhan]

Australia had long batting line up and all of them were top-notch and on top of their form! So even 171/4 wouldn't have made much difference (they would have smashed the part-timers whenever they arrived).

Also I remember Ganguly used to always ask his bowlers to bowl at top of their speeds. Sometimes bowlers should vary their pace (especially against quality batsmen). Those bowlers were not that smart. Srinath was on his last legs, Zaheer was excited...

 

[subbu]

foolish decision to chase in a Big game
it is always better to bat first ..knock out games India lost chasing 1996 semi final, 2003 final, 2015 semis, 2017 CT final

 

[Varun]

I still maintain - Sehwag would have got us there if he hadn't run himself out stupidly:

 

[hafeezrocks]

I still maintain - Sehwag would have got us there if he hadn't run himself out stupidly:

What was the req rate when Sehwag got out?

 

[TM Riddle]

That Aussie team was something else. The game was finished by the time Harbhajan got Gilchrist.

 

[Varun]

What was the req rate when Sehwag got out?

We were going at faster than a run a ball when he got out: 147/4 after 23.5 overs. So we needed another 213 runs to win from 157 balls.

 

[Dulex9]

The game could have turned interesting if Sehwag had not been run out. The score as Varun metioned was 147 into the 24th over.

There would have been a period were 9 overs of part time bowlers would have to be used (excluding Hogg, McGrath, Bichal, Lee). So who knows, in those 9 overs India may have scored 80 tonking them around.

Ponting was delaying his 5th bowling option.

However, I guess Ganguly was hoping his part time bowlers may have a got a wicket in that 21-30 over period so he could save the best bowlers for later.

 

[Proactive_]

The "main" bowlers were as big a failure as any in the Final. It was a clobbering from start to finish. Get over it, India got hard done by a much much better team. Ganguly's captaincy throughout the tournament was outstanding.

 

[Ab Fan]

Decision at toss went wrong for Ganguly. There was a slight of rain a day ago and hence he decided to field which was a mistake. After that it was hammering all the way.

 

[Ab Fan]

The game could have turned interesting if Sehwag had not been run out. The score as Varun metioned was 147 into the 24th over.

There would have been a period were 9 overs of part time bowlers would have to be used (excluding Hogg, McGrath, Bichal, Lee). So who knows, in those 9 overs India may have scored 80 tonking them around.

Ponting was delaying his 5th bowling option.

However, I guess Ganguly was hoping his part time bowlers may have a got a wicket in that 21-30 over period so he could save the best bowlers for later.

They won't have won whether Sehwag got run out or not. The target was simply too big for that era. He would have got out later because he had to go all guns blazing even against McGrath and Lee too. There was no choice really.

 

[Bilal7]

Imran would have brought Zaheer or Harbhajjan back...

 

[Bilal7]

They won't have won whether Sehwag got run out or not. The target was simply too big for that era. He would have got out later because he had to go all guns blazing even against McGrath and Lee too. There was no choice really.

Well, if Sachin did not choke, India could have had a chance.

 

[Ab Fan]

Well, if Sachin did not choke, India could have had a chance.

Naah! Aus bowling attack defending 359 waa too good that day. 15 years down the line, the difference between those two teams at that time looks so big.

 

[Brodipet_baadshah]

Well.. the same aussie team toured India the same year and won the tvs tri series final against the same Indian team by scoring 350 again on India soil..werent they?ganguly or sehwag or sachin or anyone could have done nothing either way...in 2003WC India was the second best team next to Australia and final result reflected the same

 

[Hasan123]

Australia were much superior to India. Ganguly could have done something else instead of using those part timers, but Ponting played a great knock. Would have been difficult to stop him regardless of who was bowling imo.