Mr Shah's views aired publically only tries to influence and preempt the BCCI and its selection committee. Mr Shah has been less than honest. Dravid can not be compared with himself, but with needs to be compared with Fleming/Jayawardene/Ponting/Vaughan/Smith/Lara for their captaincy and, would Mr Shah find him as good or better? Dravid needs to be compared with Indian Captains of the immediate past - Ganguly/Tendulkar/Azharuddin and would he still rate better? It is indeed true that among all our captains of the past, Captaincy has not affected Dravid's batting. But that makes him a good batsman about which in any case there has been no dispute. Captaincy obviously has many dimensions - tactical superiority, feel of the game, sharp thinking, regaining control over match situations, field placements with the right player at the right places well beforehand not lamenting after lapses i.e. not shutting the barn after the horse has bolted,degree of flexibility in batting and bowling order, ability to do the off-beat, innovation, imagination, courage to stick by your team and having a say in team composition, commanding respect for personal skills and accomplishments. the list is inexhaustive. Some of these attributes the Captain has to have within his own personality, some depend on the enabling environment provided by the BCCI, some others which can not be rationally explained away may be attributed to the unknown element of luck. What Mr Shah has done is to attribute everything to Dravid's poor luck. This is not an encouraging sign that the BCCI would do anything to set India's cricket house in order. I hope Mr Sharad Pawar and others would show a more rational approach. all of us cricket lovers can in the meanwhile pray in expectation. sunilkumarkurup@rediffmail.com
