XYZ Newswire: May XX 20xx

Doctor Vijay Mallya hit the nail on its head, pierced the bull’s eye and put his finger on the problem all at once when he commented, “At the end of the day people need to understand that the IPL has a corporate side to it, and a very definitive corporate side at that. It is not at all cricket in the traditional sense.”

This was indeed refreshing news to be greeted with first thing in the morning. We happened to be staying in the same hotel as the Royal Challengers and were not shocked to find a slip of paper under our doors outlining Team RC strategy. Or so one thought.

In today’s world where people hear of banks rationing toilet paper, Team RC’s strategy wasn’t uppermost in the mind of the writer(s) of the piece of paper. It was about controlling the team’s expenses in these times of high inflation. A few salient features which could pass the test of the Censors are reproduced below.

“As all the players may be aware, the US-led global economy is entering a recessionary cycle and the Royal Challengers team is showing no signs of coming out of one. As the good doctor mentioned, it’s not at all cricket in the traditional sense. The buzzword is ‘performance’. Repeated stress on this key issue seems to have inexplicably increased the stress levels of the players, coaches and managers. This is clearly unacceptable. The franchise is losing money faster than Ricky Ponting is losing friends and the writer losing his hair. With a view to bring back some semblance of business sense to the said undertaking, players are advised to adhere to the following principles.

1. It has been observed that each player has been carrying more than 8 bats in his kit. Team work is all about sharing and caring. Henceforth, the team will have a rolling stock of 6 bats with 6 more being kept in reserves. The remaining bats will be sold off at auctions. Players are requested to get autographs of other teams’ star players to enhance ‘bat valuations’.
2. For ‘home’ games, local players are requested to take care of their team mates’ boarding & lodging requirements.
3. During the remaining tenure of the IPL, players will be provided with rations of 3 bottles of beer. This step has to be taken as the cost of a beer bottle for the owners is higher than the cost of bottled water, which is produced only to be displayed on TV ads. Players will have to pay a (subsidized) rate for additional beverages consumed.
4. Players who haven’t played in a single match till date are requested to take care of the laundry of the entire team. A washing machine will be provided at all venues for assistance.
5. All players will have to attend a daily crash training course for pursers. All future flights will have to be undertaken as pursers/air hostesses (there’s no cause to worry as all uniforms will be provided by the management). In an extreme case, a player may be accommodated as the co-pilot. Players with international driving licenses are requested to register themselves with the management.
6. At the end of every match night, there will be a round of ‘match ka mujrim’ (for the uninitiated, this program is a witch hunt on a popular news channel after every loss of the Indian national cricket team) to decide who pays for that night’s drinks and dinner.
7. It is proposed that Katrina Kaif be sacked as the team ambassador. A search for the replacement is on. One of the cheerleaders has shown keen interest in the said position.
8. One of the members of the accounting team has expressed his surprise at bats being treated differently from abdomen guards and has ….

The remaining part of the text has been edited to prevent offending the sensibilities of the millions of sensitive souls out there.

One common refrain of most commentators on the Mallya episode has been – We told you so. This is what the IPL will do to cricket. Make it a slave to accountability taken to its extreme, at best and the whims and fancies of the owners at its worst.

What Mallya has done by publicly criticizing Rahul Dravid’s team picking ability is nothing but publicly castigating his team’s captain for it’s pathetic performance. Accountability may be one thing but the manner in which people are held responsible for a debacle is quite another. Mallya went too far.

But does this incident prove that IPL is out to convert cricket into a completely different entity. Let’s take the case of the other 2-3 teams which haven’t done too well. The Deccan Challengers seem to have been the underperformers of IPL season 2008. With big name signings like Gibbs/ Gilly/ Laxman / Styris/ Rohit Sharma / Andrew Symonds and Shahid Afridi, they can be safely called one of the top contenders for the wooden spoon. The DC owners may be extremely upset with the results, but one has hardly come across any statements or actions from them. Similarly Mukesh Ambani may have the right to feel peeved about his team’s standing and also the sort of team that was picked up for the tournament. No harsh words/actions from him either.

Maybe the problem with Mallya is that, despite his utterances he thinks he knows the game himself. To draw an analogy, one has to go back in time by just an year. The kind of reaction after India’s WC debacle from the ‘knowledgeable’ public and experts and the team selection demanded for the Bangladesh tour was very similar. They were over reacting and so is the good Doctor.

The English Premier League which is supposedly a role model for the IPL has enough and more examples of Team Owners conflicts with managers. Jose Mourinho, who was brought to Chelsea by the Russian billionaire Roman Abrahamovich, quit at the start of the season as matters between the two had come to a head. Two EPL titles in the past didnt matter. Ostensibly, Schevchenko not playing was a point of contention. Or so says the omnipresent rumour mill. But really it came to a standstill / standoff when Chelsea got just 11 points from their first six games this season and Arsenal and Man United were running away. Then there’s the current struggle between the American owners of Liverpool and their current manager Rafa Benitez. In most of the cases, team performance has been an issue. But normally the owners haven’t claimed to possess sports knowledge worthy of the managers.

Mallya taking hardly 3 weeks to blame someone for failure and the years it took for the Indian Sports Ministry holding Gill responsible for the IHF functioning are two extremes of the spectrum. It’s not the IPL that is bringing this phenomenon single handedly to cricket. The inexorable march of modern sport to professionalism will ensure its presence in the near future. Amen.

But, is it really all evil and dangerous ? Were the 1 crore bonuses paid to the selectors for daring to choose a largely newbie team which resulted in the ODI series win in Australia not “corporate” ? Are all the brand endorsements that everyone so strongly condemns as a reason for our defeats (in the oh-so-pure forms of cricket ) really a corruption of the game ?

Sure, Vijay Mallya’s behaviour was “signature” egoistic, but if thats good enough to generalise the corporate evil then we’ve seen it before.

Not that we agree but thats a bit like saying
“Pawar corrupts. Absolut power corrupts absolutely”….

Posted by Rahul and Sfx

Running a race is the closest a human being can come to feel and express one’s natural abilities. It’s a pure show of physical strength and stamina sans any artificial extensions like a tennis racket or a cricket bat. The 1500m or a 10km race is not only about speed. Its about tactics, its about outguessing one’s opponent, its about pacing the race and timing the final assault on the finishing line.

However the sexiest event of an athletic competition happens when the guns go boom to a line up of 8 human F1cars. The 100 meters is the most watched one unarguably. It’s a bit like T20, it’s over before one says ‘twiddledums’. It’s thought to be pure speed. But just like T20 it has it’s own nuances, its own strategies. Those 9.some seconds are what most sprinters live for. Some choose to sacrifice themselves for the same by using banned substances. Probably because the stakes are so high and one has no second chances. No time to pull back. Well almost.

They kneel down to push their torsos up from their bent down position, every muscle in the body ready for the assault. They have their goal literally in sight, only 100 meters away. The start is important, the finish more so.

Beijing 2008 will be witness to a muted but intense rivalry to decide the title of ‘the fastest man on earth’. Asafa Powell has always been in the race (pun intended). The sixth son from 2 country pastors from Jamaica has been one of the more soft spoken faster guys around. His biggest clean competitor around has been another soft spoken guy. Tyson Gay.

Powell is the world’s fastest man with a 100 meter timing of 9.74 seconds but has no major championship medal to show for all that speed. Tyson Gay is the triple event winner of the 100m, 200m and the 4 X 100 meter winning team in the 2007 Osaka World championships. Their rivalry has been at best an underplayed one, at worst nonexistent.

ESPN had a brilliant interview with both the protagonists before the world championships at Osaka in 2007. Both of them talked about respect for each other (unlike a heavy weight boxing title aspirant who Maurice Greene represented). They thought that they were the best. They reminded one of a Federer and a Nadal. Fierce competitors in a nice way. They were egotists maybe, but they had enough humility to disguise it. There was a shared respect amongst the world’s two best sprinters. And it seemed genuine. What is interesting to note is that no matter which sport, there’s only one road to excellence. It is about being in the zone. It is about relaxing. It is about doing simple (?) things perfectly right.

The Perfect 100

Powell: Every race is about 48 steps. At the start, you try to stay low out of the blocks. Then you go to your drive phase, then to your lifting phase, at about 50 meters. After 60 meters you can’t go any faster, so you’re trying to stay relaxed and maintain that speed to the 100-meter mark. My toughest part has been the end. But I’ve worked really hard on that — maintaining form and trying to stay relaxed.

Gay: I’m trying to work on my start. As a 200m runner, you can have a bad start and still catch up. You don’t have room for mistakes in the 100.

Powell: When you’re head-to-head with one or two guys, the natural reaction is to try harder to go faster. It will mess you up. Start to finish, don’t pay attention to anyone. It’s just you.

Gay: It’s scientifically proved that if you relax, you run faster. I’m still trying to understand it.

Powell: You have to visualize, make the race happen before it actually does. At 50 meters, I’m thinking, Lift! Lift! And, Swing your arms! That’s the only thing going through my mind.

Gay: The big thing is not changing anything when you get out there. You’ve got to practice the same thing over and over, so it’s basically muscle memory. For me, the perfect race is more a feeling, not necessarily the time — a race where I feel at ease, like I’m not trying.

Some one had to lose at the show down at Osaka 2007. Powell did. And he did it badly. Tongues wagged about his inability to perform under pressure. People talked about his inability to win major championships. With the Olympics looming in, tongues have started to wag again. This is what Michael Johnson, the legend had to say about Powell just a week back

SALVO, North Carolina, April 29 (Reuters) - Jamaican 100 metres world record holder Asafa Powell is not the world’s best sprinter, retired 200 and 400 record holder Michael Johnson said.

That honour, he said, goes to American world champion Tyson Gay.

“I measure sprinters based on consistency and (Gay) is the more consistent,” Johnson said during an online chat on the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) Web site (www.iaaf.org).

“He’s got better performances at championships,” Johnson added of Gay, the world 100 and 200 metres champion.

“Asafa Powell is a great talent but he can never get it done. He’s failed time after time at the championships.”

Powell’s world record of 9.74 seconds is a 10th of a second faster than Gay’s best of 9.84 but the Jamaican has never won a global sprint title.

That will not change in Beijing, according to Johnson.

Asked by an online questioner how Powell could win 100 metres gold at the Beijing Games in August, Johnson replied jokingly: “Trip Tyson Gay.”

He made the comment before Powell’s manager announced the Jamaican would not compete again until late June because of a pulled pectoral muscle.

Johnson also predicted Gay would win the 200 in Beijing to match his 2007 world championship sprint double.

It is possible that Johnson is practising ‘mental disintegration’ on Powell. Powell failing at major championships is a fact, but maybe it wasn’t due to choking every time.

Rafa Benitez, the Liverpool coach had commented on Didier Drogba’s diving capabilities before the second leg of the Champion League’s semi final with Chelsea. Many people might agree with Benitez (I sure do), but the timing of the statement was dubious. Here was a coach who was trying to pull down a player from the opposition before a crucial match. He was showing his desperation but he was also playing with fire. Drogba maybe a Greg Louganis on the football field, but the man can use his legs to perfection. He did. Drogba scored 2 goals in a 3-2 extra time win over Liverpool. This is what he did after scoring the first one. If a picture could tell a story, this one would be nominated at the Oscars.

Drogba said in an interview later that he had pinned Benitez’s photo in his locker to motivate himself. He wanted to react to Benitez’s allegations by scoring goals. And boy he did. Maybe Asafa Powell should take a leaf out of Drogba’s book and answer his critics once and for all by winning gold at Beijing. It will be a pity if he doesn’t, after dominating the short race for years. One can always send him Michael Johnson’s photo to pin in his room.

Powell will do well to remember what Sun Tzu has said in his ‘The Art of war’ – “Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win.”

Posted by Rahul

Its not just a game, they say. Its an artefact which we must preserve. And they’re right, of course. Cricket is a game of immense skill and strategy. Of ebbs and flows. The essential cricket battle is not just about which side scores more runs - but the manner in which innings are constructed and bowling strategies countered. A drama of ability calibrated to such high levels that everything extempore seems beautifully choreographed. The time honed skills when on peak display are a rivetting spectacle - their spontaneity making it better than theatre.

But what good is that theatre if it isn’t watched? And how far can we go to make it watchable ?

Thankfully for us, cricket has always been up to the task.

In its early form, Test Cricket was a timeless fight to the death, so to speak. Once a game began , it would end with a result. No rain nor storm could force a draw. It was a Test of many things, not the least of which was patience.

Then, the “I-have-to-catch-a-boat” Test happened and Timeless Tests morphed into those with an end date. 5 days (with an interspersed rest day) was a major innovation which fiddled with Test cricket’s fundamental traditions and actually set a deadline for when a match would finish. Now that one thinks about it , it must have been fairly blasphemous when first suggested but it brought a new set of nuances in. Now you had to construct and pace your innings, strategise (occasionally declare) and develop plans with time constraints. The idea of this first major - and all subsequent - innovations was to retain the sanctity of the inherent skills while also respecting the time of those involved ; spectators, players and administrators alike.

By the 1960s, having tasted the aggression of people like Don Bradman earlier, even that was beginning to seem long - and in response to growing demand for more action , One Day cricket was first introduced in England. This not only reduced the format from the existing 6 days to a single day but also brought it to one innings per side ! With limited overs !! As with all things which are built in response to market needs, it was (despite its fair distance from the traditions of the game), a resounding success. In 1971, somewhat by accident , a Limited Overs international was born and although it was the first time that national sides were playing each other in this form, it captured the World’s attention enough for the World Cup of One Day Internationals to be born a few years later.

Test cricket meanwhiled trundled alongside. It had travelled a long way from the Timeless Test age when it all began and now cohabited the sports’ stage with a compressed form of the game which increased the sports popularity as more countries joined in striving to compete with the best. Surely it could only be downhill from here. And for a while it seemed like thats what it would be.

Kerry Packer came and with him came the World Series Cricket circus. Not only were players not playing for the establishment, but there were other breaks from tradition to infuriate and sadden the purists. Night cricket , coloured clothing (pyjama cricket, if you please), white balls, players wearing double entendre’ T shirts (Big / Bad Boys play at night), Tina Turner videos and players playing (gasp !) for money rather than nation. Kerry Packer’s crew played Tests as well as Limited Overs Games and admittedly they were not well received initially but soon, the concept of the Day-Night game caught on. And Kerry Packer became legend. “There is a bit of whore in all of us, Gentlemen. Name your price”, he said to the Australian Board. And ultimately they did. In the words of Dr Greg Manning ” Packer paid $12 million not to buy cricket but to turn the cricket into something he could buy. The real meaning of his victory was that the game would never again be beyond price.”

At the height of the dramas surrounding World Series Cricket, Packer vouchsafed in a press conference that cricketers had long been exploited by authorities, and that they deserved better pay and conditions because of the pleasure they gave to millions. A journalist took up the thread for his remarks and wondered if the businessman was saying that his enterprise was “half-philanthropic”. Packer’s realism was too embedded for him to agree. “Half-philanthropic?” he said. “That makes me sound more generous than I am.”

Kerry Packer was the “commercialisation of the sport” as we now know it.

And yet, Australia now consider him the second biggest influence of the game (in a good way) for the sport in Australia after The Don. On his passing , the MCC observed a minute’s silence as a mark of respect for his contribution to the game.

Justifiably so. For Kerry Packer not only provided a much larger audience for a sport, and money that made the crumbing finances of cricket worldwide viable , but with the influence of his initiatives and the growing popularity of one day cricket - Test Cricket changed forever as well.

The ODI inarguably enhanced Tests. More results , more entertainment (of the pure cricket kind) and more revenues made it a bigger audience attraction than ever. Most importantly, in terms of skills - Better running between the wickets and fielding standards were natural offshoots but techniques went outside the textbooks and worked ! Of course, players of aggressive intent were part of the sport before the advent of ODIs but clearly that aspect of the game got more widespread.

So why this big hue and cry about Twenty20 in general and the Indian Premier League in particular ? How different is it from the Limited Overs game and how different is the inherent commercialisation from what Kerry Packer was doing ? Why are we so keen to dismiss the format at its very inception ? Why is there a school of thought that considers it so sacrilegious that they won’t watch ! Why are some so upset that obits of Test cricket are being considered and no positives - absolutely none can be seen ?

Equally importantly, why is something that was invented (yet again) by the British (in 2003 in response to the “Man and his dog watching County Cricket” syndrome), suddenly now Brutish ?

The origin of Twenty20 was really to bring cricket into a time “zone” which was comparable with other popular sport like Soccer or (Grand Slam) Tennis. The idea was, as most ideas are, a response to market needs as Cricket sought viewership. The idea was not to replace other forms of the sport - and just as the ODIs have not replaced Test cricket or other forms of first class cricket, its early if not erroneous to assume that Twenty20 will.

Initial cynicism is acceptable - and even welcome. After all, sixes and fours rain. Bowlers feel good with 7ish economy rates. Batsmen ostensibly don’t value wickets. Building an innings is almost a sin. Greed obliterates fear. Almost each toss has the losing skipper saying “conditions won’t change much”. With 3 hour match durations those are understatements. Things move lightning quick. Dot balls are gold. Risk is not a four letter word.

And without denying one’s own early cynicism , its also completely wrong to call T20 a parody, caricature or clone of the game. As we’ve said before , there are always those that will crucify themselves between regret of the past and fear of the future. Understanding the value of every delivery is an intensification of the game rather than a dilution of it. Striving to maximise returns and cut down errors from the word go is placing a big premia on performance.

As far as the IPL itself is concerned, the criticisms are many but the targets keep moving so they’re hardly easy to address. Is it the amount of money ? The source of the money ? Bollywood ? The T20 format ? Lalit Modi ? Loyalty ? Royalty ? Media ? All of the above ? There must be something right, surely.

How different are these concerns from the ones that were doubtless raised when Kerry Packer surfaced ? How long did that last and how much good did it bring ? These are questions which we are in the process of answering every passing day.

Somewhere the “off the field” entertainment, which is causing so much unrest amongst the connoisseurs, will find the right balance with the on field skills but as of now its doing the same job that coloured clothing, black sightscreens and their ilk were doing in the 1970s. And getting as much attention at the expense of the cricket from fans and critics alike.

Somewhere we’ll begin to realise and accept that Brendon McCullum’s 150 in 20 overs (an astonishingly good score for a team at the 20 over mark in the one day game) was an act of great cricketing skill and while the element of orthodoxy was missing , it was perhaps telling that Mike Hussey of the phenomenal Test average nearly matched it soon enough. For those that say that this does not adequately test enough to separate the best from the rest, its equally significant that at the time of writing , these two share the top batting slots with cricketers such as Matt Hayden , Sangakarra, Adam Gilchrist, Andrew Symonds and MS Dhoni. Isnt it a vindication of skill that 4 of those 7 are Australians and come from a team that are thrice World Champions ? Haven’t Glenn Mcgrath and Mohd Asif shown their class ? Haven’t the leadership bluffs of the weaker captains been called?

Another concern is that it pays so much that it’ll destroy the first class structure - already moribund in terms of spectator interest. And there are two aspects of this - money and format.
Money first : These are professional sportsmen and if they bring in the revenue, a share of that to them is really a matter of justice. How else would we like it to be ? But spectator interest for the longer version first class games is a concept that struggles because of the premium that we now place on our time. The ICC bravely tried a “Us and Them” Super Test as a concept and it failed from the start and thats because the problem isn’t one of quality, which is high enough to justify interest - but of time.
Perhaps the format itself will go through changes. Maybe we’ll now have 4 innings of 25 overs each instead of 2 innings of 50 in a One day game to get a hybrid of sorts. But either way, the better cricketers will adjust. Sachin Tendulkar was born about the same time that limited overs internationals were. As were Rahul Dravid, Saurav Ganguly, Shane Warne and Glenn Mcgrath. They grew with, and indeed helped grow One Day internationals - but so seamless was their transition that its unlikely that any of them will be considered as having harmed Test cricket. If anything, they have embellished it.

And the performances will undoubtedly improve. And the IPL - and maybe other leagues of value - will contribute to them because they remove barriers to learning that geography created. First class cricketers and newbie internationals are rubbing shoulders with all-time greats. Getting encouragement, strategising along , playing in the nets , understanding preparations, celebrating victories and analysing losses alongside and imbibing mindsets. Even seasoned players see the value in competing with and against contemporaries that national duty would not typically allow them to.

Test Cricket has survived as long as it has because it has adjusted along with the times. Its monumental oceanic presence taking in the shades and shapes of all the new streams that joined in.

Test cricket is not going to die because the highest form of theatre lives on and because the art form is constantly evolving. It’ll probably get squeezed into an increasingly niche audience but those that are willing to carve the time to watch a performance will always stay. However, if we are to make time for it , then it too must keep with the times.

“Without tradition“, said Winston Churchill, “art is a flock of sheep without a shepherd“. Then, as with all things Churchillian, he added the punch line - “Without innovation, its a corpse.”

Earlier post related to the IPL here.

If you’d been trapped in a time warp for a while now and haven’t noticed Asia’s growing influence in sport - virtually all sport ; well, its happening.

Rohit Brijnath, himself a symptom of this growing ascendancy, and writing now for, among others, the Hindu, the BBC and here in Singapore for the Straits Times, penned the following piece on the subject for the ST last week. Its typically balanced and invites thoughtful debate.

 “There has been no call from Augusta but then I wasn’t expecting one. There are enough Brits in the field. Now if I were the only person in the country, a la China, I might get in. It’s a strange way to make up a field for a Major championship – TV rights.
– Colin Montgomerie

. . .

Given all the media hype about the upcoming Olympics - the security surrounding the torch, Bhaichung Bhutia, Aamir Khan and Tibet;  and the Indian hockey team -  one question that always begs to be answered is - How many gold medals can India win at the Beijing Olympics. This is as standard a topic one does hear before the commencement of a competitive multi-country sporting event like the Asiad or the Olympics, as the real estate prices in Mumbai, as how the only difference between a first class and a second class compartment in a Virar local is that the sweat is perfumed, as how the new generation is so irresponsible, as how inflation is affecting the monthly household budget, as how the Indian middle class is not so middle any more, as Shekhar Suman laughing and arching his already arched plastic surgery related eyebrows on a comedy show. One can go on listing more standard topics of discussion but respect for space and a distinct lack of creativity forces the conclusion of the same. Most sportswriters, it is alleged, have one standard piece, which is submitted to editors. The year and the location are variable. Everything else is unchanged. Death, taxes, people falling in borewells (how do people manage to do this is beyond one’s imagination) and these Olympic related pieces are the only certainties in an otherwise subprime hit uncertain world. The article generally starts with – “India’s chances of securing a medal are as good as L.K. Adwani embracing Bardhan. —— our only hope is the hockey team —– what we need is a complete overhaul of the system —- the administrators need to be made accountable —- everything will be forgotten till the next Olympics — we suck’. Period. One hopes that the editor edits the hockey bit this time around.

It is whispered (now one understands why that game is called Chinese whispers) by informed sources within the CPM (After consultation with the Chinese delegation which attended some annual meet some where in India) that 4 honorary gold medals are assured by the hosts as a prize for the CPM’s dogged support.  Yechury wins one for blabbering, Karath wins one for intransigence, Bardhan wins one for existence and Buddhadeb wins one for his singurar, oops, singular focus on Industry. Any other Olympic medal 2008 is as distant a dream as Leander lauding Mahesh, as the shooters getting ammo, as the archers getting arrows, as weight lifters going without drugs, as distant as the swimmers coming 7^th in heats (there are 8 lanes,  remember?), as the boxers landing a punch.

Bollywood has a solution for all these problems. If you can’t beat them, make a movie. We have seen ‘Lagaan’, ‘Chak De India’ and ‘Dan Danandan Goal’ transform the normally dour, humourless common man into an aggressive, patriotic and adrenaline charged animal. These movies confirm our suspicion as a nation that we are slated for ‘greatness’ in sport.

(The first rider to the clubbing of these 3 movies is that in no way is one trying to equate the movie quality from a movie critic’s perspective).One common thread that runs across all these movies is the nature of sport involved. Cricket, hockey and football are all team sports. By the inherent nature of a team sport, there will be a lot of potential to show contrasts, underlying tensions and the spirit of camaraderie. There is always a ‘win at all costs’ loathsome opponent who is the hands down favourite. (To be fair though, Chak De didn’t delve into this caricature).  One has seen enough Hollywood back-from-the-brink, David-beats-Goliath, feel-good sports movies. But the audience reaction to their Indian movie counterparts is way more enthusiastic. Just as in any Hollywood action movie, the entire room (mostly full of army men) gets up and claps at the end to cheer the hero for services rendered, at all the multiplexes one visited the mood was as jubilant. Every goal was cheered, every wicket celebrated. How one wished this was a real life event. One has watched all these movies in a cinema hall and the rousing audience response to the underdog’s (read India) victory has set off some introspection.

We, as a nation have been witness to very few sporting achievements since independence -  but that was acceptable a decade back. We ourselves had very low expectations. A champion was celebrated by the nation but winning wasn’t every thing. We were an emerging economy with very little to show for our 50 odd years of freedom. The 21^st century has brought a booming economy and a burgeoning middle class. Serious problems still exist but there is a new spring in the step of the nation. The biggest change that has come about is the one in attitude. The country exudes self confidence (some view it as arrogance). We are not the dregs of the world any more. We don’t perceive ourselves to be inferior to anyone. But there is still this small matter of almost non-existing sporting excellence.

The advent of satellite TV opened up a whole new world to the passionate Indian sports lovers. Gone were the days of the woefully inadequate 1 hour of ‘World of  Sport’ on a Sunday evening with Dr. Narottam Puri. The world’s best talent in almost every sport, be it soccer, Tennis, Formula 1, Badminton, Golf, Bowling (Sfx in Singapore, I believe is queuing up to file mental harassment claims) could be viewed with shock and awe. You name it and you get it. What the nation saw were champions at work. Mediocrity was passé. The nation wants more from its sportspeople. Just like the famous cola tagline of yesteryears (which incidentally is creatively borrowed from a Bengali song). India wants her sporting heroes and she wants them quick. The one glaring problem in this ambition is that the world has moved too far ahead and India is playing catch up. The Milkha Singh record was broken only a few years back. Our FIFA world ranking is in mid 100’s. We have one player in the Top 50 in Tennis. Sporting underachievement rules.

There’s enough ‘respected’ opinion out there on how to tackle the problem. Heartfelt angst is poured out in articles and pieces about the pathetic condition of Indian sport. Well meaning advice is freely circulated to get rid of the ailments. Administrators are lambasted, the ‘system’ is blamed and a new beginning is advocated. Talking to a friend, who was one of the top TT players of the country, one realised the challenges faced by any budding talent. Matches were played on Badminton courts, there was little or no monetary aid, facilities were non existent and there was no future financial security. Many will say that this is a common story in our country and one would tend to agree with it. (Today she is happily married and settled.) But what hurts is to see talent go to waste. This was about 8 years ago - and what is perhaps typical and what one must realise, is that the biggest reason for her to stop playing was that parental suport existed to a certain stage, but not beyond. Sport as a ‘pastime’ was fine but not at the cost of one’s ‘career’.

All this finally brings one to the moot point. Should we as individuals keep on moaning and ranting about the obvious problems? The problems always lie externally. The ’system’ is the soft target. The oft cited villain. Is one’s responsibility to the cause fulfilled by writing caustic articles on the state of affairs? Or can one make a small but significant contribution to the sports culture of the country. Can one build a sports culture?

The point about the burgeoning middle class and new found confidence, made earlier in the piece was not a random one (readers may assume that all others were). If one pledges to make one’s kids play at least 2-3 sports and whole-heartedly support the kids’ progress in case of any visible signs of talent, then that can be construed as a good start. There will be years of blood, tears and perseverance that will be needed to attain any decent level. There will be disappointments along the way. Education might have to be given a back seat. A lot of sacrifices will have to be made (both by the kid and the parents). One tends to agree that as an individual, one can hardly try to cleanse the mess in team sports like Hockey. Because the mechanics of a team sport work in a way such that no one player can control/change the system and thereby the destiny of the team. But individual sport is where one sees a ray of hope. As mentioned in an earlier post, the player controls his/her destiny.

If one looks at the rare success stories of Indian sport, excluding cricket, most games where we have excelled have been games which can be afforded by the middle/ upper middle class and some facilities were available. Golf, Tennis, Chess, Billiards, Snooker and Shooting, to name a few. Waiting for the government and/or various associations to come up with radical and fundamental changes is too much to expect .

A better way is to contribute to the story by deeds and actions rather than mere words.

A lot of things have been left unsaid in this piece. And of course, this is only the tip of the proverbial (albeit non melting) iceberg.  

Maybe one can start by taking a look at the following -

The Special Olympics oath is:

“Let me win. But if I cannot win, let me be brave in the attempt.”

These words were spoken by Roman gladiators as they entered the arena, facing the greatest battle of their lives.

We are too !

Posted by Rahul

This is the best of times. That was the worst of times.

Indian cricket had let the nerves get the better of them. Pragmatically, winning the World Cup had been a fanciful dream - but a shock first round exit was an unjust blow. As those seniors sat looking into the distance, disconsolate and depressed, tied between the pain of shattered dreams and the fear of the reaction and that picture flashed across our eyes, the mood was a dark shade of grey.

A million theories bloomed. Money was the root of all evil. It was all those sponsors and their ads and the clauses therein. Guru Greg was the one to blame. Not enough practice. Too much practice. Change the coach. Change the captain. Change the team. Change the mindset. Drop those egotistical has-beens; for they never will be again. Bring on an effigy. (For the not so faint hearted a house was better). Committees were formed. Former captain’s opinions sought. Selection committees were slammed. Gag orders were issued. Conspiracy theories floated. All of the above.

Inspiration, it seemed,  could only come from imagination.

It was at such a time, a year ago (to the day), that this blog was born.

In hindsight, things have moved swiftly. Partly because so much has happened.

First, a coach was fired and a captain retained. Then shortlists for a replacement started floating around. Since the choices were few and the expectations (as always) high, an interim manager-cum-coach was appointed for a series against the minnows.

Even as normal breathing was restored, a couple of seniors were “rested”. Gasps resumed. We won what was partly a grudge series (this was after all, Bangladesh, that had gotten us out of the World Cup), but it was significant for many other reasons. Ravi Shastri (manager cum coach) and co decided that the frontrunner for the coach job, Dav Whatmore was not the man for the job anymore. Youngsters gained confidence and the seeds of a good season without a few seniors were sown. The country’s mood improved but this was not the real thing.

Back home, the BCCI clearly trying to slow things down and let the nerves settle had its own set of battles to wage. Subhash Chandra had floated the idea of his own parallel cricket league and a number of top flight cricketers were being linked with it. The BCCI reacted with all the grace of a monopolist. Everyone associated with the Indian Cricket League was banned and even if they had once won India a World Cup, their pensions suspended. Elsewhere, the omnipresent committee offered the coach job to Graham Ford, who having been a players choice and having been spoken with earlier and having edged out a largely symbolic John Emburey, decided to stay with Kent rather than become Superman. None of this was cricket.

Come the second half of the year, things were to get busy on the field. For a triseries in Ireland and the ensuing England tour, India had a new vice captain (its nth) and somewhat surprisingly his name was Mahendra Singh Dhoni. With a Twenty/20 World Cup to follow, it seemed like the selectors were in the mood to experiment.

India won the tri-series beating South Africa and Ireland and headed to England where they had not won since 1986. It was somewhere here that Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid and Saurav Ganguly announced that they would not be available for the Twenty/20 World Cup. It would prove to be an important development.

The rain helped India through a tricky situation at Lords but after that it was an Indian Summer in England. A first Test series win in over twenty years was followed by a 7 match ODI series. 3 all and one to the umpires, in our opinion. We should have won that but the mood was improving and the confidence growing and a far cry from the World Cup barely 5 months ago.

A young bunch under MS Dhoni went to South Africa to represent India at the ICC Twenty/20 World Cup. India had played one T20 game before this. The team had a number of “yoohoo, who-you’s”. Two cricket superpowers that had been humiliated and brought to their knees at the One Day World Cup met in the finals. India had already beaten Pakistan once (with a bowler shootout) in the early rounds. The format itself was new to audiences in the subcontinent and much skepticism was countered the best way possible. India beat England, South Africa and Australia on the way to the finals. En route Yuvraj Singh got Stuart Broad for six sixes in an over. And a 12 ball fifty. In the finals, the old neighbours met again in a match that would ensure that Twenty20 was the next big money making machine. 3 hours after it all began, India cradled cricket’s latest child. MS Dhoni was king. For many, what that win represented to India and the dreams it ignited would prove to be a life changing event a few months down the road.

Meanwhile in India, having led India to amongst its greatest Test victories in England, Rahul Dravid resigned captaincy. He did not offer any public reasons. The BCCI unveiled the Indian Premier League with the approval of most cricket boards (or most of the important ones anyway).

India wrestled with the captaincy conundrum. Sachin Tendulkar, the only logical choice for both forms of the game turned it down and that opened the door for India’s first venture into split captaincy. It was too early for Dhoni to be captain for the Test series (particularly when the upcoming ones were Pakistan at home and Australia away). Anil Kumble had retired from the one day form of the game after the World Cup and (considered then largely a no-choice compromise candidate) was chosen as Test captain.

Australia visited for a short series. But the events on and off the field were to have far reaching consequences. The younger, brasher fringe of the team chose to be raucously aggressive. And announce it. Andrew Symonds and the racism saga blew up even as he expressed distaste at the country’s T20 World Cup celebrations. Equally importantly though, Australia won and won convincingly. And though some of the seniors performed, it was clear, to Dhoni anyway, that to be competitive India needed to improve at least two areas significantly. Running between the wickets and fielding.

Pakistan visited but there was none of the brouhaha that surrounds a Indo-Pak series. Too much of a good thing ?  India won and the series finished just in time for India to squeeze into Australia before the crowds gathered for the Boxing Day Test at the MCG. All this while, (since the Bangladesh series) India had been playing without a fulltime coach. Lalchand Rajput had been the caretaker for the most part and Robin Singh and Venky Prasad had cabinet rank positions. Just before the departure to Australia, India appointed Gary Kirsten. But he wouldnt be part of the Australian epic. (Guest appearance notwithstanding).

India were creamed in Melbourne but it was Sydney that would shape things. India lost their way when they should not have to go 0-2 down but the game had it all. Cricketing brilliance from a few , umpiring controversies, an (lets be polite) inefficient match referee, racism charges, dubious appeals, short fused post match conferences and Australia had won 16 Tests in a row. The enormity of it all was only dwarfed by the jingoism that ensued. Tour pullouts, BCCI appeals, ICC interference, an Umpire dropping being dropped and with lots of things shoved under the carpet,  somehow the tour went on.

On we went to Perth and the Australian stronghold for Ricky Ponting’s men to grab their 17th victory in a row and history along with it. Anil Kumble’s men though, had other ideas and for the second time Australia were stopped in their tracks at 16. Given the background of events, it would rank as amongst India’s greatest Test wins. And though India lost the series after the drawn Adelaide test, Sydney and Perth represented a possible momentum shift in matters cricketing. 

On the evening after the Perth victory, the selectors announced the team for the CB series. Absent were Rahul Dravid and Saurav Ganguly. The decisions, we were told, had been as much acceding to Dhoni’s request as purely selectorial. Dada’s 1200+ runs in the year gone by were not enough for him to negate the premium Dhoni placed on young legs.  Sachin Tendulkar was the only one from the “senior” brigade. The last man standing. India was to contest the last triseries in Australia with a bunch of young upstarts with nothing to lose.

Dhoni’s men boys won - guided to the finish line by youth, exuberance, fearlessness and Sachin Tendulkar. A straight sets victory was, for many, vindication of the summer’s torment. For Dhoni and Tendulkar , it was simply vindication.

And so here we stand today. One year on.  The cause of the gloom a year back is considered addressed. India have beaten the World Champions and the Runners Up in ODIs. And won the Twenty20 World Cup. They’ve changed the coach. They have new captains and a new mindset. They’ve won the Under19 World Cup (under Dav Whatmore - now a NCA coach as Guru Greg sets up a state-of-the-art academy to nurture youth) and a Test series in frontiers long considered unassailable. There is a power shift thats sending tremors across the cricket world as the BCCI goes from strength to strength. Money is hardly the root of evil anymore. In fact, with the IPL and with Ricky Ponting at bargain prices and Sachin, Dada, Dravid and Dhoni with iconic millions, nothing could be more virtuous.

Thats been the year that we invested in a year ago. To the day. It would probably suffice to say that for a supporter, its been a truly gratifying return. Results have, after all, defied imagination. The darkness following the World Cup has reinforced what we believed in. Much of what we see today would probably not have happened if the World Cup had not been a flushout. Its always ok in the end. If its not ok, its not the end.

Most importantly its been enormously satisfying because of the number of friends that have been made. Along the way we have “met” a few idols who are not idols anymore. Just more believeable heroes. 

And while we’ve diversified into occassionally writing about other sport- most importantly we’ve learnt to appreciate sport more than ever.

What could be better.

Cheers and Thank you all.

This is an excerpt from Geet Sethi’s wonderful book Success vs Joy. An unassuming book with lots of depth  - much like the man.

 On being highly strung.

There are certain sportspersons who hype themselves up with gestures, punching the air with fists and other such gesticulations, which they think will induce a rush of adrenaline. This may prove to be beneficial in highly physical and contact sports such as rugby and wrestling – but in most sports I find that this becomes a distraction rather than a means to help you focus.

What is important at the crucial stage of any activity is to be calm and composed; to be able to enjoy the moment; to be able to concentrate on the stroke, not the deal that one is negotiating or any other task. Instead of being hyped up oneself, it is imperative to remain calm, on an emotional, even keel. For that you need to focus on your breathing and be zoned-in on the present.

There are some who develop a connived hatred for their opponents, believing this will enhance their performance. They are merely fooling themselves. The whole game is about finding harmony and that elusive alignment of body, mind, and soul. This alignment cannot be discovered with a road map of hate. It can only be found with peace within and peace with the world outside.

For a performer there is no competitor. In the book of success there is, but not in the book of excellence. Competition exists only in your mind. Talent and practice can hone your skill but the discovery of excellence will come from the discovery of the self. So you have to forget the opponent and delve deep within to master your own frailties and insecurities.

In an individual sport such as golf or billiards it is easier to relate to this, but even in team sport one has to look within. Sachin Tendulkar and Rahul Dravid are two sportspersons who exemplify this introspection. I have never heard either talk about their opponents. Of course there will be exceptional, solid, and ordinary bowlers, but they don’t care who the bowlers are. For them, the bat is in their hands alone and what they do with the ball depends only on them.

Remind you of anything ?

Posted by Rahul

JP Morgan Chase have bought Bear Sterns for a price less than what LA Galaxy paid for David Beckham …

Childhood was a wide eyed concept of reality. Every thing was 70 mm. Every thing was magic, everything was fantasy.

By the time one entered ones teens, one was still starry eyed about love, longing and life in general. Being a 17 year old was a challenge in itself. Being realistic itself was beyond imagination.That was a long time back. Decades back. It was an entirely forgettable decade ‘personally’. Not playing any professional sport, loving sport at the same point in time and being from a middle class back ground was an impotent mixture. It could never work. It never did. But one knew of 3 guys, who also came from a middle class back ground, were doing very well as sportsmen even at that age and were being tipped to be destined for glory.

Every one had read of the SRT – VK partnership and one felt that these guys were achieving what one had dreamt of, but never had the talent to really target. Somehow one couldn’t feel connected to the duo as Shivaji Park seemed an elitist joint, wrinkling its nose at people from the northern suburbs. The fact, that SRT lived in Bandra and Kambli in Kanjurmarg (if memory serves one well) was overlooked. They played at Shivaji Park. End of argument. The 3^rd guy on the other hand, stayed in the same suburb. One would see him on his scooter once in a while and what would one give to be on his scooter (just like being in his shoes). He was one of the most famous guys in town and he knew it. He was touted as THE future cricketer of the sleepy suburb who would make the country proud. He would be our answer to that high brow Shivaji Park cricketer. He was Abhijit Kale. One never managed to talk with him but was always aware of his presence on that one main road in the small suburb. That was the only road guys would walk on, trying to impress some girl who was more beautiful than Aishwarya Rai and more intelligent than a Judith Polgar (there’s this saying in Sanskrit – prapte tu shodashe varshe … -  meaning that once you reach the age of 16, even a donkey looks beautiful).

We moved on in life. Luck favoured self. He kept on playing cricket. And he was doing well. One hoped he would still make it in the big league because of his talent. He had the talent, one believed. SRT had already achieved icon status then. (Well before anyone had heard or imagined an IPL.)

But somewhere down the line, frustration started building up. Being on the same pedestal with SRT at the age of fifteen wasn’t helping him secure an assured place in the Mumbai Ranji team for 3 years. He shifted to Maharashtra where he found a permanent place. The overwhelming ambition of playing for the country fuelled intense competitive spirit. But he always remained on the fringes. He was good but he was no good. The selectors were not willing to hear his side of the story. A first class average of 50+ wasn’t getting him in a test team which boasted of the Big 4 in the middle order. Maybe at that point in time, regional loyalties of selectors also played a role in denying him his chance. The more he was overlooked, the harder he tried, the more bitter a person he turned into. As normally happens in cricket, the harder a batsman tries to hit a ball, the more awry goes his timing and the more the chances of him getting out.

Cricket, being a team sport, makes an individual player subservient. As in any team sport. A player has to first be in the team to showcase his talent. A player’s team has to win consistently for the player to be noticed. In a rare instance, one might find an individual shining in defeat and making it big despite his side’s poor showing. Especially rare in cricket where one reaches the big stage only when one plays for his country. (voices may be raised about IPL but there’s some time to go for that to be irrevocably proved.). To be in a team one is at the mercy of the selectors. Team sport vis-à-vis individual sport makes a fascinating study. One’s dependence, or lack of it, on others, being a substantial difference. As a Tennis player, one might feel hard done some times with a draw (at the start of one’s career, say on the junior circuit). But all the Tennis prodigy has to do is to go and win every single match in a tournament there is to win. And lo behold, (s)/he has arrived. Success in a team sport has too many external variables. Individual success of a player and his team’s success may be interlinked but not necessarily so (Ask SRT’s many detractors). The external variables were not favouring Kale and time was running out. He was getting close to 30, still not considered for an India cap. Still not financially secure.

In April 2003 he was selected to play an ODI against Bangladesh. Gathering from the reports one has come across, some time then he was offered a contract by Percept D’Mark with a clause which specified that if he did not play within a year for India or India ‘A’, the company would not be bound to pay him his money. This information came from a statement by Kamal Morarka, the then vice president of BCCI.

In November 2003, two selectors - Kiran More and Pranab Roy - brought two charges against Kale, who they claimed tried to pressurise them and offered bribes to get selected into the team, The evidence offered was a few phone calls made to More, Kale’s mother’s visit to More’s house where she pleaded for his inclusion in the team, and Kale’s meeting with Roy at an airport. There was no witness to confirm any verbal offer to bribe. Whether it was a question of his being pressurised by the system or being naïve in dealing with the case, one doesn’t know. It was two men’s word against another. A country was stirred into action when similar accusations were termed ‘baseless’ using the same rationale. But Kale wasn’t Bhajji and the selectors were not ‘Australians’.

In June 2004, he was banned from cricket up to Dec 2004. He obviously hadn’t played between Nov 2003 and June 2004. Now how does a ban affect a player? And how does one respond to career threatening events? He didn’t take it too kindly. With a few years of cricket left in him, almost no chance of making it to the national team because of the taint and shattered dreams, he tried picking up the broken pieces. There was too much going through his mind. Extreme focus can some times easily turn into complete disinterest from a shock. To add to his woes, he shifted teams from Maharashtra to Tripura on an impulse for being left out of the team. What followed was a barren period. Dec 2006 was the most recent Ranji trophy appearance for Tripura. Since then it’s been a walk through wilderness again.

This article was a culmination of a lot of issues that one has come across. It was about a journey of a person one felt close to. It was about a journey that went wrong somewhere. History always likes winners. Most of us do as well. But it may be just one small incident that can change one’s claim on history.

The other issue has been a fresh approach by the current selectors and the news of a Rs 1 crore bonus paid to the selectors after the CB victory. Maybe this will reduce the chances of more Kales suffering from the system.

The Percept D’Mark contract clause in the AK saga and the current mad rush to sign up u19, fringe players - hoping for a gold mine some where at the end of the rainbow, might see such incidents revisited.

Kiran More left the BCCI and has now joined the ICL.

Kale in marathi means ‘black’, hence the title ‘Black n White’

Last heard, Abhijit Kale will be player/coach at the Linden Park Cricket Club playing Division 3 in the Kent League for the 2008 season.

Posted by Rahul.

Evander Holyfield won his title but lost a part of his ear to Mike Tyson’s hunger.

Photograph from Sports Illustrated by Jed Jacobsohn

With all the IPL auction dust settling down, the per ball income for Ishant Sharma calculated, the anguished cries of non Indian socialists the world over (How can a nation with so much poverty, display such obscene wealth) heard politely, reasons for the success / failure of the league analysed to bare bones, Ricky Ponting’s self targeting jokes laughed at (Though the best joke might still be out there – Saurav Ganguly captaining Ponting and Akhtar – now that has the potential to be a winner. The only competition to this one maybe the top order of the Bengaluru team viz.,  Jaffer, Chanderpaul, Dravid and Kallis – that’s a separate topic for discussion), Mike Hussey’s SMS to his brother relayed the world over, Bhajji’s post auction shopping spree well documented, SRK’s touching gesture of ‘giving back something to the people of India’ by buying the Kolkata team members well appreciated, Mrs. (!!!!) Preity Zinta (that’s Lalit Modi, not me) overcoming the shock by buying Irfan Pathan for a shocking USD 925K. One can go on and on but guess the reader has got a crash course of the notable headlines during/ after the auctions. If this was the trailer for the league, one hopes that the actual movie lives up to the trailer.

In all this glittering glamour (or is it glamorous glitter), there were a few stories that stood out. The underlying theme of many of these stories was - “Sacrifice”. Maybe it’s a strong word to use. Maybe modern day human beings are unused to such strong actions. Maybe one can call it “compromise”. One just wants to draw the public attention to the men and their stories. One is not trying to pass judgments here in terms of who is better ‘morally’. Nor is one trying to portray the participating players as petty money minded individuals. They are professionals and have as much a right to secure their financial future as, say you and I. But what drove the exceptions to renounce the lure of instant riches. Was it their own internal voice or was it circumstances that drove them? The 3 men that most attracted one’s attention were Justin Langer, Michael Clarke and VVS Laxman.

The first two have been adequately covered and hailed by the Australian media. Justin Langer will honour his commitment to play for Somerset instead of joining the Jaipur team. “When you go to your grave, people will remember what you did with your life rather than how much money you made…” he said. Noble thoughts indeed! One wonders what he felt when he initially signed up for the IPL. Because a person with such philosophical bent of mind would have not signed up for such money making soulless machine. One may give him the benefit of doubt for having second thoughts. But was that related in any way to the fact that he was not bought in the first round of the auction? One wouldn’t want to question his ‘integrity’ (its become a buzz word now days in Australia. It seems one has to take a spelling test before being signed up by CA. Current test players are exempt. That explains Symonds.), so one leaves it at that.

Michael (Pup) Clarke is an interesting contrast. He decided against joining the IPL to spend time with his ailing father. One of the biggest sacrifices made by a player! He also pointed out to the fact that he had a hectic international career which needed him to rest and recuperate. Fair enough. Now let’s read the entire text of the letter sent to Mr. Lalit Modi.  ”With no disrespect to the IPL, I feel my body and mind needs a break and with the hectic international schedule over the next 18 months, I feel I need to freshen up and a break will do me good. By trying to continue to advance my profile and reputation with the Australian team, I hope to one day become an asset to your tournament“. The Australian newspapers have gone overboard in praising Clarke who stood his ground after being caught in the first slip at the Sydney test. He hasn’t rejected IPL totally has he? But yet, one respects his family commitments and his personal ethos to reject IPL as of TODAY…  

One Hyderabadi has been at the forefront of this ‘sacrifice’ business.

VVS Laxman downgraded himself from an “icon” status to a normal citizen status. He went ahead and told the owners of the Deccan Chronicle team that he wanted to buy the best team that money could buy. He didn’t care about what he was paid. Today VVS is paid less than a fourth of what Andrew Symonds gets. He reminds me of Laxman from the great Indian epic ‘Ramayana’, where Laxman threw away his kingdom and went to the forest with Ram. He was the supposed KING but went on to become Ram’s right hand man. Even Hanuman the “monkey” competed with him for Ram’s affection. So what were the modern Laxman’s compulsions? VVS has never been an integral part of the Indian ODI team? He never could make it to an Indian T20 team in his wildest dreams. He chose the next best option (Did he have any another option?). He was named the captain of the team. And paid LESS! MUCH LESS!

So which Hyderabadi is one talking about? It HAS to be Pullela Gopichand. Being an All England Champion in 2001, he won money which isn’t actually even going to get some pocket money for most of these kids. And YET he refused to endorse a soft drink because he thought that no youngster should drink a cola because it’s not ‘healthy’. AND he sacrificed a lot of money for that. To me ‘he’ has been the biggest ‘sacrificer’ that I’ve ever seen. People forget so easily. And not getting the money is easily forgotten than getting that money. So can we please stand up and salute the guy..

Maybe Hyderabad still has some Nawabs left. Hopefully I know at least one. But maybe he doesn’t play cricket …

Posted by Rahul

The finals of the CB series had to be between these two teams. There was a fatalistic predictability that it would be. Anything else would have been inadequate. Thats where the predictability ended.

Mahendra Singh Dhoni’s side is the new India. When they were chosen and others sidestepped, the justifiable feeling among many was that the move was too drastic. You don’t really throw nobodys newbies into the deep end. Not that MSD seems to think in that kind of manner at all. The nobody-upstart-contender-winner-champion transition seemed ingrained somewhere As each passing gamble started coming off, you had to admire the man for his leadership and his troops for their guts and gumption. Battles don’t come tougher than this.

And much as India looked starved for action, Ricky Ponting’s demeanour (inspite of a series of wins) suggested that they’d rather this ended real quick. Dogged by controversy, he’s called it the most frustrating experience of his 12 year career. Hardly the best way to motivate troops.

And that has been the difference.

So we’ve lasted the summer. And proved the critics wrong. We’ve taken the abuse and (in some regrettable cases) given back as well as we have received. And we’ve adjusted to alien conditions. And converted inexperience to an advantage of fearlessness. We have drawn strength from the controversy. And we have been the better behaved team on and off the field. And when some have not had a good day, others have shouldered the burden. Importantly, we’ve played better cricket.

And much of this, we’ve probably learnt from you.

P.S. The original (quite brilliant) Aussie tourism campaign.

A Dialogue from the Kill Bill : Vol 2 script.

It’s Bill speaking - the one who’s supposed to get killed as the title suggests. z

“I find the whole mythology surrounding superheroes fascinating. Take my favorite superhero, Superman.
Not a great comic book.
Not particularly well-drawn.”

“Mmmmm”

“But the mythology…
The mythology is not only great, it’s unique.
Now, a staple of the superhero mythology is, there’s the superhero and there’s the alter ego.

Batman is actually Bruce Wayne,
Spider-Man is actually Peter Parker.

When that character wakes up in the morning, he’s Peter Parker. He has to put on a costume to become Spider-Man.

And it is in that characteristic Superman stands alone. Superman didn’t become Superman.
Superman was born Superman.
When Superman wakes up in the morning, he’s Superman. His alter ego is Clark Kent.

His outfit with the big red “S”, that’s the blanket he was wrapped in as a baby when the Kents found him. Those are his clothes.

What Kent wears - the glasses, the business suit - that’s the costume.

That’s the costume Superman wears to blend in with us.

Clark Kent is how Superman views us.

And what are the characteristics of Clark Kent.
He’s weak… he’s unsure of himself… he’s a coward.

Clark Kent is Superman’s critique on the whole human race.”

Hearing the whole dialogue makes my nerves tingle. Reminds me of a certain Sachin Tendulkar. This is not going to be a post on how great he is, or how humble he is, or his genius or even what a model human being he is. Neither is this about how the Don compared ST to himself.

One talks about his failure in the second innings’, one talks about his failure to perform under pressure, one talks about him not winning enough matches for India. One also talks about looking at mirrors.

To answer all those ‘ones’ I don’t intend to reinvent the wheel. So borrowing the well written dialogue, I rest my case.

With apologies (and gratitude) to Mr Quentin Tarantino.

Posted by Rahul.

October 14, 2007 - About 4 months ago - This was Andrew Symonds.

The feeling has come from the carry-on that surrounded India’s Twenty20 World Cup win. When we got here, it was just everywhere.

Our blokes thought it was over the top. Some of the things their players have been given and the way they are treated, it’s like they are rock stars and princes.

The Indian government gave them a heap of money. Yuvraj Singh got a Porsche. Blokes are getting houses and blocks of land.

…

Two days before our first game, the Indian players didn’t train because their guys were shooting commercials.

It’s been irritating because it’s been in our face. We see them on television every day.

…

PLAYING over here is so hostile. This is my fifth time here and the key is you can’t let the language barrier and the conditions get on top of you. The day-to-day stuff can wear you down and cricket can suddenly become a chore.

A few weeks before that, his views on Twenty20 :

It’s a frustrating game because you can be beaten by the lesser sides and they have to be good for a shorter period of time to beat you.

At least in one-day cricket you get the chance to work your way back into the game if you get into trouble, the same as in Test cricket over a much longer period

There is a little bit of the whore in all of us, gentlemen. What is your price?”
Kerry Packer’s words to the Australian Cricket Board in 1976 rang in my memory bank again yesterday.

And a few other words did too. Like - Lucky Bastard !

But then one needs to think and put this in perspective. One thing that the markets have taught me is this. They may be a lot of things - irrational , over-exuberant, over the top and even absurd - but they are never wrong. Because they exist and money guides them there. It may not be things you like, but the market is the one that shapes the reality that we must adjust to.

And yesterday, the new vision that is the Indian Premier League took a big step towards becoming a reality that we must soon accept. Clearly though, thats no easy task. For like is the case with accepting any new paradigm, there are two schools of thought. One that is willing to give it a chance (often because there are things in it in their favour) and the other bunch that crucify themselves between regret of the past and fear of the future.

The first lot is easy. It includes the money spinning BCCI, the channels that have bid for telecast rights, the owners of the franchises and most of all the professional sportsmen who will get a far larger pay cheque than they usually do and an access to the still throbbing Indian consumer market. Take the case of Andrew Symonds for instance. A few weeks after the diatribe against the crowds and frenzy in the country and just after the racism charges against Bhajji, he’s been picked as the second most valuable player. The US$1.35 million fee for what is essentially a 44 day tournament (59 matches across 8 teams) is a fantastic reward for a guy who has made some hard choices (England or Australia) and then made his mark. Despite his run-ins with many things Indian, the market has paid a price for his performance (including that man-of-the-series in October). Its probably hardly a coincidence that he’s announced hours after his bid was finalised that he would not tour Pakistan (and hence accept a pro-rata fee) even if Cricket Australia finds the security good enough for the team. For someone whose best attribute outside a cricket field was a rhyme 20 years ago at the Alliance Francaise, the offer is probably poetic justice for a career constructed without shortcuts. An opportunity too good to miss.

There are others as well. The Pathan brothers with $1.40 million between them are secure with Irfan’s rediscovery as an all-rounder of merit helping him with a large purse while Yusuf Pathan, with one international game and $ 475,000 (against $400,000 for Ricky Ponting) probably typifies the power of the brand in India.

From the player point of view, is it lopsided ? Sure it is. Yusuf Pathan being paid a bigger fee than VVS Laxman, and between him and Mohd Kaif (not even a ODI contender at the moment in team India) making the Jaipur franchise US$1.15 million lighter is one of many signs that there were teething problems aplenty with the format of an auction. But from here things enter a transfer market two years down the line. And thats when the prices will find their new and probably progressively more correct levels. Thats just the way it is. What it has done though is that its allowed “market forces” into the game. Its a toe-hold but its probably the most important development of all. Players are graded by their respective boards and were graded as they came up for the auction yesterday, but what followed has been an independent assessment of relative merits that has finally been the arbiter. Whether or not its been correct is immaterial, in my opinion. The fact is that given the format and the availability of the players in question, a price has been decided in an open market. Its a big step forward.

As far as the doubters go - and there are many - the most basic root problem is the format of the game itself. Twenty20 skeptics view it as a major corruption of the game. Call it cricket snobbery if you will or simply a case of a classical musician scorning at a rap artist. Where’s the room for strategy and perseverence, say the Test lovers. Why corrupt chess into a game of snakes and ladders, they scream. But why should you not have entertainment every delivery, claim the T20 believers. Why should the ability to score off every delivery and bowl six different deliveries be prized any less, they ask. Any side of the fence you choose, the fact remains that there is a growing new audience for the game. It includes, but is not limited to, people who like reality shows and are willing to go for a three hour game complete with entertainment and sport. Thats the untapped market that the BCCI targets. If they don’t (fat chance), somebody else will.

As far as corruption of the game goes, thats open to debate. The same doubters probably existed when the ODI was born as well. Of course, it does not naturally follow that one can constantly keep abridging the game using that excuse. But its also true that a number of skills which were considered sacrilege produce of the ODI format are now virtually indispensable in Test sides. With that evolution has come a more result-prone Test arena. The number of high quality Tests, the rate of scoring , the crowds at venues are all higher than they were a couple of decades ago.

The other argument that has been put forward has been about the lack of class in yesterday’s proceedings and the contrast against india’s poverty. Greg Baum even goes far as to call the feeling “bilious”. Really ? As opposed to what though? Kerry Packer’s question to the Australian Cricket Board? And this poverty argument is, to use his words, the “usual, tired” one. Why does everyone turn socialist when India displays wealth ? Can we not pay Ronaldo and Ronaldinho and Barrichello a few million because of the poverty in Brazil. Should we just scrap the NBA and the World Series Baseball since the US of A is running the kind of deficits which are crippling world economies ?

The BCCI are taking the cricketer’s pay packet to the next level. And they are taking local talent and youngsters along. And they have promised the ICC that they will not interfere with the (ill conceived) FTP but will request that the IPL be fitted in. In April and May when it interferes with as little as possible. If possible. In any case, national duty takes precedence and cannot be compromised since no cricketer can participate (till 2 years after retirement) without a clearance from their respective Boards.

Of course, a lot remains to be seen and these are early days as far as the success of the tournament and the format goes. But its a beginning. And deserves support.

Time will tell if its just revolutionary, or evolutionary as well.

At the Hopman Cup , Sania Mirza ran into more trouble. This time it was a lawsuit trigger-happy gent who thought that a 2D photo was reason enough to question her commitment to the nation - this while she was playing for the country just ahead of the Australian Open.

And then, a 3rd-Round-exit-in-straight-sets at the Aussie Open later - she was out. She didnt cause any upset but she was upset. Or so she says. And back after the Open , she’s refused to play at the Bangalore Open and says she would rather not play in India for a while anyway.

Reactions are diverse. But basically any of those worth listening to are saying exactly the same thing - that Sania Mirza needs to buckle up and play.

This is from a dear friend Rahul Namjoshi and are his views on the subject.

What has she done in her life? Number 29? 4^th round of the US open in 2005? So what are we talking about? At the age of 21, the world has recently seen some 6 women Tennis grand slam champions aged below 21. Maybe many more than 5. I can count Steffi, Gabriella, Monica, Martina Hingis, Venus, Serena, Maria.  So can anybody reach the peak post 23? I think not. Are we talking about some great victories in a grand slam? Or are we talking about Tim Henman at the Wimbledon? He never won Wimbledon.  

Are we talking about some great upsets? I believe not. I have never played Tennis in my life. My father-in-law has. He avers about Sania. He actually called me up to say how great a fight she gave Venus in the 3^rd round of the Australian open 2008. She lost in 2 straight sets? So? Whatever the girl says, we don’t expect too many things from her. Do we? Quarter finals is good enough. Are we even thinking of a brighter future? Say winning the US open finals? We are not. We aren’t even thinking of a semi final berth here. And yet, we as Indians, hero worship her. We think she can deliver great things in life because others say so. What is the down side in being a Mirza. If you don’t perform, you are not hauled over the coals like the cricketers, if you do, you will be termed a teen sensation.

The problem here is that everybody says how a step motherly treatment is given to every sport other than cricket. Take a MSD, take a Kaif, remember the vandalism that they suffered in the wake of the World cup. The day they modelled for an advertisement, they were condemned. Every o