Is he the luckiest?

Robin Chatterjee, Deputy Managing Editor, Gulf News thinks Ajit Agarkar is the luckiest Indian cricketer alive (dead?)

Cricket, to some, is a game of numbers. And to those number idiots, it is the number of wickets in the 'wicket-column' in the scoresheet that really counts when analysing the performance of a bowler.

To suggest that Agarkar has been playing for India only due to the fact he is from Mumbai is such a load of crap. I have been following International cricket for more than three decades.

Chatterjee writes:

Much of Agarkar's stint in international cricket can be attributed to a generous dose of providence. Conceivably somewhere in the alcoves of the BCCI, or maybe even in the hallowed portals of the Mumbai Cricket Association, our protagonist has always enjoyed the patronage of powerful godfathers. If that be true, then his largely unfulfilled career is yet another sad testimony to the zonal politics that constantly rears its head and affects the selection of able Indian cricketers.
It is true, much of Agarkar's ODI career has been under Ganguly's captaincy. Was Ganguly too under the influence of the 'Mumbai Cricket Mafia?'

Chatterjee has only looked at some stats, which doesn't tell the whole story.

Let's take a look at Agarkar's last 30 ODIs.





Agarkar is an unlucky bowler; he beats the bat too often and too many catches have been dropped off his bowling. Having said that, Agarkar is also extremely inconsistent - gives too many 'four' balls to the batsmen.

I have never been a fan of the Mumbai mafia in Indian cricket; have always objected to it. A senior editor resorting to a personal attack on Agarkar is bad journalism.

Agarkar has been playing for India for the last ten years - if he was so bad as Chatterjee thinks he is, it is not Aggy's fault that he gets selected.

No comments :

Post a Comment