Students of psychology and history will have to tell us why M.S. Dhoni is not considered the greatest of Indian cricketers while many others with much less to show for themselves are considered worthy of this title by many? I agree that comparison between generation can be misleading but comparison between achievements should not be.
If he is not considered greatest because of a lack of technique or "graceful" hitting then one wonders about our value system. If one gets his job done very well despite of having a bad technique, should it matter? Or should he be considered incredibly creative?
In addition to being the most successful captain, he is one of the finest batsmen (consider the spot at which he bats), a good wicket-keeper and the most self-reliant and mentally strong sportsman. How many times have you seen him compensating his lack of skills by a boyish display of aggression?
Moreover he belongs to a sub-species among Indians who rose to the top with little or no help from anyone else. Anyone who is from a disadvantageous background has to be more than average to do the average. And he had accomplished some great things, he must be the greatest.
Credit is due to Mr. P.C. Podar and Raju Mukherjee who noticed and recommended him for U19 team. A special thanks to Mr. Dilip Vengsarkar who has a long a glorious history of nurturing cricket in India for selecting him. It is always a joy watching him on the ground play and lead.
- Dhoni is best finisher I have ever seen: Vengsarkar (thehindu.com)
- The revelation that at first wasn’t noticed (thehindu.com)