|
|
|
|
|
| HOME | NEWS | DEAR REDIFF | |||
|
ASSEMBLY POLL '98
|
|
|
'This article reads like Laloo Yadav writing about a Ray film'
E-mail from readers the world over
Date sent: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 01:53:35 -0800 It is more than clear that Mr Gangadhar has absolutely zilch understanding of the game of cricket and is probably better off enduring slam-bam games like baseball. It is a highly uneducated article and it seems Mr Gangadhar has forgotten (I am sure he doesn't know either) that his army of "unorthodox" and "aggressive" cricketers played like dodos against the minnows of Test cricket in Zimbabwe -- with the exception of the 'unsuited' Dravid who got a century using his unattractive technique. Well, I am sure Mr Gangadhar thinks that Sunil Gavaskar (for his orthodox and aggressive batting) got all his records, won all those matches thanks to an extremely "competent" team (who did not think it important to master the art of facing pace bowling -- of course, it is more fashionable to play in aggressive, unorthodox style) and it is just thanks to the media that Sunny is probably the best opening bat in cricket history. It is a shame that every Tom, Dick and Harry is writing cricket articles on the Rediff site. I am sorry if I sound harsh, but this article reads like a Laloo Yadav writing about a Ray film.
Date sent: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 15:22:08 +0530 This report seems devoid of logic. Dravid is not a fine one day player, fine, but the author doesn't prove any point by his somewhat illogical references to Rajendra Kumar and Sushma Swaraj. When he is talking about cricket he should stick to references of cricket. It seems he wants to be a cricket expert, film critic and a political commentator together, but he gives the impression that he is none. Puneet Dhar
Date sent: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 18:54:54 +0530 A good hatchet job on Rahul. The article proves only one thing. Hit a man when he is down and sure enough you won't get hurt. I thought he was pretty good against the South Africans. But then, V Gangadhar would call that a flash in the pan. And moreover, it happened ages ago. The guy Rahul has been successfully emasculated and VG and his ilk can take all the delight in quartering him. Unlike Gavaskar, Dravid is placid. I think he will take everything lying down. Ravindran
Date sent: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 20:09:23 +0530 Does a person need to have any qualification to write on Rediff? Or is it enough to be just supercilious and full of hate? As far as I can see, all Mr V Gangadhar's words seem to show is his festering hatred for Dravid and a very poor understanding about a team game like cricket. Maybe he needs to learn a bit more of the game before trying to analyse it and its practitioners... The gumption of the man to compare Dravid with Rajendra Kumar, I can only laugh. Can I too judge Mr V Gangadhar on the basis of this article as being one of the 'millions of Indians, occupying positions for which they are totally unsuited'. He found it pretty easy to do that in the case of Rahul Dravid, I wish I knew ... Since my mail also seems to match the afore mentioned article in tone, maybe I can be a cricket writer too!! Vinay N Das
Date sent: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 14:30:08 PST This guy talks nonsense. I think the quality of the articles in Rediff is going down. How can you just publish an article when some guy in search of cheap publicity wants to write crap like this?(You know, no one talks about you if you praise someone.) Prem Panicker, you are such a good writer. You have to comment on this article. Sampath
Date sent: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 06:41:06 -0800 (PST)
From: Prakash Purushotham Was there a printer's devil at work? The title should have read: V Gangadhar, Rahul Dravid, Rajendra Kumar and Sushma Swaraj
Date sent: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 09:57:15 -0500 Highly personal against Dravid, not a responsible article.
Date sent: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 10:24:35 -0500 Perhaps Mr Gangadhar would be able to give us a detailed analysis of Rahul Dravid's strike rate that makes him incompetent as a one day batsman. Mr Gangadhar mentions that Rahul Dravid will not win a Test match for India. He does though try to do a good job of making sure that we don't lose one. Even against Zimbabwe. Or perhaps we would prefer batsmen who can get out quickly. After all, losing is fun. Mr Gangadhar may be better at reviewing films. After all, some years ago he did mention that Srinath and Prasad should never be compared with India's other famed opening pair of Nissar and Amar Singh. Did he see Nissar and Amar Singh play? In 1932 when they played their first Test? In 1936 when they played their last? Perhaps we should let cricketers judge Dravid.
Date sent: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 10:17:52 -0500 Mr Gangadhar, With due respect, are you out of your mind to write such an article criticising Rahul Dravid?The problem is not with his technique. It is with his confidence. If he is in and out of the team frequently, is he going to feel confident to play his shots? Don't throw stones at other people if you stay in glass houses. It is easy to criticise, but it is different out on the ground. Just don't write anything like this because his fans are out there and they might cause you harm. Take care.
Date sent: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 10:41:30 -0500 I would like to know who the hell Mr V Gangadhar is. If he wants to criticise Rahul Dravid, he should limit his focus to Rahul Dravid. He need not dare say that millions of Indians are enjoying unsuitable positions. I wonder if V Gangadhar himself is one of these millions. I also would like to know about his depth of understanding about cricket, politics, Hindi movies. According to me, this article is ridiculous and written with a totally negative attitude. I think Rediff On the NeT should not entertain such stupid articles. Samir
Date sent: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 11:18:16 -0600 (CST) The article on Dravid by Gangadhar (who??!) was the only misfit I could see. The author is so disillusioned in his understanding of what one day cricket is and what Test cricket is. It appeared as though he had some personal grudge against Dravid. No good writer will go to the extent to which this man did to pull a sportsman down. Please do not publish articles that paint such a negative picture of anybody.
Date sent: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 10:42:38 -0800 Gangadhar is just like most journalists we have made a living by writing garbage. Just like a few of our selectors who do less and talk more. I do not know much about Sushma Swaraj, but I know she just took over as CM of Delhi and he wants her to solve all the problems in a jiffy. Rahul Dravid might not be a great one day cricketer, but he did save India in one dayers a couple of times. About Rajendra Kumar, he pretty much insulted all the great hits he has given, irrespective whether he was good or not. Maybe he should go see Ek Phool Do Mali and re-evaluate his opinions. Granted Rajendra Kumar is not a great actor, but calling him a misfit is going too far.
|
||
|
HOME |
NEWS |
BUSINESS |
SPORTS |
MOVIES |
CHAT |
INFOTECH |
TRAVEL
SHOPPING HOME | BOOK SHOP | MUSIC SHOP | HOTEL RESERVATIONS PERSONAL HOMEPAGES | FREE EMAIL | FEEDBACK |
||