From the publishers of THE HINDU

Published : Sep 01, 2001 00:00 IST

Great cricketer

Sir, - The Cover Story on Steve Waugh in The Sportstar issue dated July 28 was a good one. It's only appropriate that a magazine of the calibre of The Sportstar brings out a Cover Story on Waugh who is in a class of own. Over the years, Waugh has transformed the Aussie side into a record-breaking one. He is one of the few cricketers who have seen Australia through the troubled times in the late eighties to the happier moments of the 90s.

When the world says Sachin Tendulkar is the best batsmen, the Aussies disagree vehemently. For them Steve Waugh is the best. Their logic is simple. Time and again, he has not only saved the side, but steered it to victory as well. Who can forget his match-winning hundred against South Africa in the World Cup which changed the course of the tournament.

Steve Waugh is a perfect model for the up and coming players. He is a master player, captain and a philanthropist.


Sir, - It was wonderful news for the Indians as well as for Sachin Tendulkar himself that he has made it to the all-time best Test team selected by the late Sir Don Bradman.

Sir Don ranked Sachin above Brian Lara, Waugh brothers, Viv Richards, Greg Chappell and a few others. And that is a great thing. In the opinion of Bradman, Sachin has a very strong defence and at times he can be very aggressive which is a plus point. Of course Don had expressed his views that he did not want any 'argument' regarding his selection of a best Test team.

Yet there are certainly discussions and arguments going on now. It is certainly a matter of great satisfaction for those whose names are included. The selected 'dream team' looks wonderfully balanced and very strong and those who are selected deserve congratulations.


Sir, - Wisden's list of 100 top batting and bowling Test performances, as published in The Sportstar dated August 11th issue is indeed baffling, to say the least. There are glaring omissions both in the batting and bowling departments.

Everyone knows that the two greatest fast bowlers, produced by Australia in post-War cricket, are Ray Lindwall and Dennis Lillee. Neither of them finds any mention in the list. B. S. Chandrasekhar's 6 for 38 at The Oval in 1971, giving a great victory to India is also missing.

Alec Bedser and Maurice Tate of England were highly rated by Sir Don Bradman. Did they not have any performance worth mention and inclusion in the list?

So also the batting list, which excludes many notable performances. As rightly pointed out by Nirmal Shekar, K. S. Ranjit Sinhji's 154 not out at Manchester in 1896, on debut against Australia, should never have been excluded and should have been given a high rating, being the first Test century, scored before lunch.

Well, these are only some instances that readily come to mind, without any racking of memory and it only goes to show how imperfect the list is.

L. N. PANDEY, KANPURThe omission of Sachin

Sir, - I have been reading The Sportstar for almost 10 years now. It is my favourite magazine and I have not missed a single issue of it during the last 10 years.

The magazine has contributed a lot towards the improvement of my laguage. Vijay Lokapally, Nirmal Shekar, Harsha Bhogle, Amrit Mathur, Ted Corbett, Tony Cozier are my favourite writers. The Cover Story and Hitting Hard are my favourite columns.

The Cover Story of August 11th issue,' A list that raises many a question' was a critical one. I agree with the writer's view on the Wisden Listing. The two innings of Sachin Tendulkar that Nirmal Shekar has mentioned are worth a place in the list.

If winning was one of the criteria to judge the innings, at least the 155 against Australia at Chennai should have been included in the list.

The other great knock of Sachin Tendulkar was his 136 against Pakistan at Chennai. He almost won the match for India. Sachin's name should have certainly found a place in the list.


Sir, - In the league stage of the recently concluded Coca-Cola triangular series in Sri Lanka, each team beat one opponent twice and lost twice to the other opponent, proving that there was no great difference between the three teams. Sri Lanka ultimately won, thanks to a spiritless batting display by India. The major mistake India did was in going to the final with only three recognised bowlers, Nehra, Zaheer and Harbhajan who are all relatively inexperienced.

But one solace is that despite the absence of Tendulkar, India managed to reach the final.

It would do well for the selectors and the team management to understand that tinkering with the opening slot will lead to calamity. Tendulkar and Ganguly are one of the best opening pairs and in the absence of either, only a specialist opener should be tried. Any other batsman being forced to open will lose his morale resulting in overall inefficient batting.


More stories from this issue

Sign in to unlock all user benefits
  • Get notified on top games and events
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign up / manage to our newsletters with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early bird access to discounts & offers to our products
Sign in


Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide to our community guidelines for posting your comment