There is one aspect of batsmanship which is seldom noticed save by the real connoisseur. This is the art of leaving the ball. Sourav Ganguly, even in top form, was not good at leaving the ball alone when it swung or spun away from him. It is now clear that the art of leaving has completely escaped him. It is a pity that a situation arose when he had to be asked to leave the Indian team. He could have avoided this insult by reading the signs correctly and by choosing to leave himself. What were those signs? The most important was the irrefutable fact that he was not batting as well as he once did. His timing had become poor, his footwork had become non-existent and his stroke-making shoddy. The runs he made in the test in Delhi were not exactly memorable. Add to these the fact that his running between the wickets and his fielding, which were never very good, had suffered a remarkable decline. His position in the side had thus become very vulnerable indeed. Add to this the externals: the Indian team has a coach who not only emphasizes performance but is also committed to building an Indian team that would be in peak form during the World Cup of 2007. An out-of-form and thirty-three -year-old Sourav Ganguly has no place in this scheme of things. Ganguly?s fans, especially those in Calcutta, may find these facts unpalatable but a coach and a selection committee cannot be driven by the force of jingoistic public opinion.

Many past cricketers have expressed the opinion that Ganguly?s exit could have been better managed and he been given a more gracious farewell. This opinion bypasses one important question: what other method is there for a player who refuses to retire? There is none. He has to be dropped. Ganguly?s position in the team in test matches has always been as a middle-order batsman. Therefore the choice before the selectors was between a young, in-form Yuvraj Singh and Ganguly. But this is actually not a choice since the selection committee and the coach are already committed to the project of building a team for the future. The older player has to go. Age and current form are both against Ganguly. There is no other way to manage the situation unless one privileges sentiment over logic and planning.

The game of cricket is a team game, and is more important than any individual even if that individual is made to wear the crown of a local hero. An ageing Ganguly has no place in a process of planning directed at building a team for 2007. The present series and the forthcoming ones are the occasions to locate and nurture future talent. This invariably raises the question of Sachin Tendulkar and how he can continue to be in the side despite his age. The answer is simple: Tendulkar is a genius and as a batsman there is no comparison between him and Ganguly. Any cricket lover with a modicum of understanding and appreciation of the game knows this. The Ganguly era in Indian cricket is over. So be it.