What’s with Chappel? This is the second time he has talked about a player and his monetary needs. First it was the One-who-must-not-be-named (not Voldemort), when he insinuated that captaincy was required to maintain the player’s finances. Now he says, while expressing desire that Tendulkar will return and play a crucial role (emphasis mine): “"Knowing when to stop is a much more difficult decision for the modern player. When the money was not there, it was much easier to move on. But Sachin won't need anyone to tell him when to go. He still has a role, especially as a mentor. Over the past few months he has been very helpful that way."

Meaning what? That money will drag Tendulkar back into the game, if not anything else? In the past, he has put more heart into his performances than the entire team combined. To suggest that Sachin would cling on to the game for money is preposterous. Even if he didn’t mean it the way it sounded, Chappel would do well to construct his statements carefully in the future. He seems to be treading on thin ice everytime he opens his mouth nowadays.

Michael Hussey is concerned about the young listeners picking up some bad words during a match, listening to the fielders, er.., chatting to the batsmen. This came about after Tony Greig was flabbergasted by the sledging of the Australians.

It is nice to see Hussey’s concern for the young audience. But what would have made it more endearing is if he had said – “Young ones would hear, let’s not talk this way”. Rather than, “We talk this way, let not the young ones hear.”

Exchanges between players are welcome if they are witty and generate a few laughs. Cricket will be poorer if not for such classics as those between Viv Richards and Greg Thomas (Somerset vs Glamorgan – Richards is beaten one ball and Thomas pipes up: "It's red, round and weighs about five ounces”; Richards smacks the next ball out of the ground and replies: “You know what it looks like. Now go find it”.)

But such wit has long become an archived attribute of the game, and what remains is such trash as would make Captain Long John Silver turn beet red. Bowlers like Walsh and Marshall threatened batsmen with their bowling; fielders like Rhodes and Greame Pollock with their accuracy and electric fielding; batsmen like Bradman and Hammond subdued the opposition only with their willows – none of them used their mouths.

The players would do well to consider that they can be competitive even without foul-mouthing the opponents, and that such an approach would be beneficial to all concerned – including the young children enamored of the sport.

The selection process of the Indian team in the past has resembled a Sherlock Holmes mystery, with the audience aware of what is happening but damned if it knew why. Resembled, that is, but for the denouement where Holmes lights his pipe (or picks up his Stradivarius) and starts explaining things patiently to Dr.Watson. Unfortunately, that denouement, which is supposed to be the press conference where the team is announced, sheds as much light on the selection as a candle does on a cricket ground.

In the past few months, however, things have changed, with the selectors being more transparent in their reasoning and explanation of decisions taken; the reasons may not meet everyone's approval, of course; but at least, the explanations were forthcoming. Which is why it is difficult to understand where they are going with this selection. Gambhir has been dropped, apparently because he is not scoring runs and been "given a fair chance". But Sehwag and Kaif have been retained! I am not against this, I think that these guys should be given an extended run just because they have the ability to make up for the lost time. But so does Gambhir, going by what I have seen of him.

Gambhir has, since his return, been at least as consistent as Sehwag if not more. Going by the current form (alone), if Sehwag is retained, it makes sense not to drop Gambhir too. But apparently I am missing something here, for the selectors are done giving Gambhir a chance.

Close to its heels comes the decision to bring in Robin Uthapa ahead of Ganguly. Even if one concedes that Gambhir, not as talented as Sehwag, does not deserve a longer run (which in itself is a contradiction of ideas), where is the logic in the steadfast refusal to bring Ganguly back even though it is clear that the team needs an opener desperately, at least till Tendulkar is fit again? More's comments "we don't want to disturb the winning combination" is a pathetic attempt to conceal what he actually wants, but does not dare, to say.

Looks like we are back to the candlelight times.

Prithvi rightly calls the Faridabad incident, where fans including valid ticket holders were lathi-charged by police, a disgrace. But it is not so much a disgrace as our attitude towards such actions.

This is not the first time fans have been beaten and chased from a venue, and this certainly will not be the last time. The BCCI is just extending the politician mentality – I need your votes but I don’t care if the devil takes you – by concentrating on piling up the money for God knows what, and not giving two hoots about trivial things like spectator comfort and experience.

So what do we, the spectators, do? Turn up in huge numbers, match after match, and wait in line to be beaten to death. While all the seats are filled up by people who know officials in BCCI and who know people who know officials in BCCI.

The only way to counter such brazen attitude is a boycott of such venues by the cricket fans. Watch all the matches on TV, I say. After all, television is much cheaper, more comfortable, and no police would come to your house to cane you – yet. There is nothing like an empty stadium to egg the authorities on to create a better atmosphere for the fans.

P.S. I just saw his followup on this incident. I hope the kid makes a speedy recovery. I'm sure the BCCI or the HCA won't do anything about it, not even render as much as an apology. They got their money for that match, didn't they? 

With India leading the series 1-0, Dean Jones and Srinath have this conversation before the second ODI:

Dean Jones: "England must win this game here?"
Srinath: "Yes, probably that will even out the series."

“Probably”? I am curious what else could have happened if England had won. Thank God for the mute button.

Tuesday, March 28, 2006

A startling discovery in the Indian dressing room has revealed the secret behind their forgettable performances in the recent test matches, particularly the third test against England. Their test whites were found to be tampered with, the fabric infused with an electronic device that made them vulnerable to loss and repel wins. The device would emit thought waves that gives the wearer a hopeless outlook of the situation that results in depression and incorrect shot selection.

A source close to the Indian team, on condition of anonymity, said, "This has been a shocking discovery. We were obviously puzzled over the discrepancy of results between the test and one-dayers. Since everything else was the same, including the players, one of our staff had the brainwave of going through the players' clothes. Under the pretext of checking for stains and dirt, a crack team combed the clothes worn by the players. We were amazed to find some micro-bio-electronics (MBE) embedded in the uniforms." He, however, refused to elaborate on the mechanism of the device.

On being questioned whether the ODI clothes were also affected, he said they were not, "as is evident in the most recent win where the team defended a modest total with a gritty display of bowling and excellent fielding. We have ascertained that their ODI clothes haven't been tampered. From now on, we will post guards near the players' belongings to make sure that this doesn't happen again."

The leader of the investigation team, a unit of RAW, was impressed with the intricate design of the device. "This is certainly foreign. We don't see such components in India", he said. Investigation is underway to determine if the English camp is involved in this, since the abbreviation on the components, MBE, also stands for "Member of the Order of British Empire."

The England team has refused this allegation and has stated categorically that it had nothing to do with "this devious but magnificent plan." Some prominent members of the Barmy Army have been taken into custody for questioning. The Indian coach and captain were not available for comment, since they were busy celebrating their win against England in the first ODI.

So, is Sehwag fit enough to play or no? This article says he is, but also mentions that we will know for sure only Monday.

Why is the fitness of a player being taken so lightly? We have seen this type of touch-and-go approach from the BCCI too many times for comfort. We don’t know whether a player is fit or not till the day he is playing. Why take chances? Why not rest him for a game to make sure his recovery is complete? Whatever his current form is, Sehwag is too precious a player to lose though such negligence. With the World Cup an year away, we can’t afford to take chances.

I think it was Stephen Leacock who wrote that sports and patriotism don't mix - that two teams representing their nations playing against each other is just another kind of war. I fully subscribe to this view. Therefore, I believe that our loss against England is not a national calamity that people need to lose their sleep over, nor is it so embarrassing that we need to hang our heads in shame. That said, the way our batting line-up folded in the last test does merit censure.

Forget patriotism. As a consumer who pays to watch cricket, I have every right to expect that my team puts up at least a decent performance to justify my money. So, I believe the Mumbai crowd was in its rights to jeer at under-performers. Compared to the reaction of the fans during the World Cup, when they besieged the homes of the cricketers, this was bouquets.

But what I don't understand is why only in cricket? If people are ready to express their disapproval for a cricketer in no uncertain terms, why do they show apathy to everything else in their life? It is as if they don't mind being trod over by politicians, being given sub-standard service in all departments - often no service at all, being sent from pillar to post to complete even a simple task in their daily lives. But a guy doesn't put bat to ball, and they go 'Shame on you!'?

We don't surround the shop of a merchant who sells adulterated items. We don't picket in front the offices of elected officials if they renege on their promises. We don't take to task corrupt officers of law enforcement. We don't object to having our purse emptied for every task from getting a birth certificate to taking a body out of the hospital. We don't... well, simply put, we just don't care. About anything. Except when a Tendulkar doesn't score, or when a Dravid loses a test.

If only we had our priorities right...

When England arrived in India, much of the talk centered on what would be the margin of the result in favour of India, not whether the result will actually be in its favour - that much seemed a foregone conclusion. This margin became wider as more English players were rendered hors de combat. Now we know better.

Having accepted the captaincy, or rather given it under unenviable conditions, it would have been very easy for Flintoff to oblige the proposed scoreline and plead not guilty. No one would have blamed him either. With two of their best batsmen - captain included - and a frontline bowler being non-starters, it was incredible that England fielded a fully fit playing eleven at all. To lead it and not only not lose 3-0, but also to pull one back when another bowler drops out...

It is true that India fought tooth and nail. But that it had to fight at all is largely due to the spirit shown by the English team, and the one man in particular. He probably missed a few tricks on occasions - like letting the Indian batsmen make a comeback in a couple of innings - but hey, give him a break; he almost topped the charts in both bowling and batting. Collingwood played one more innings and managed nine more runs, and Hoggard bested him by two wickets. Even as a member of the team, these achievements are nothing short of magnificent. Add to it he captained a team hastily put together, it becomes inspirational.

It is in this light we have to view Dravid's performance in this series. A total of 309 runs in 6 innings at an average of 61.8, while no mean achievement, falls short of his counterpart's spoils. It is probably unfair to Dravid, since he can't perform with the ball. But he could field, and with his fielding set the standard for his team to follow. That he didn't does not speak in his favour.

In his formative years, Dravid was a good batsman. Ever trying to improve, he has become a great batsman, and more recently, his exploits in the slips have made him a great all-rounder. Which is why it is sad that his 100th test, instead of being a pleasant experience like Ricky Ponting's, would go down as a forgettable affair. Had he only held on to the chances he missed! Had he only finished with a fine knock in the last innings! I know it is foolhardy to expect him to rescue the team every time like an American superhero saving a damsel in distress. But then, it is only of great men do we demand great things. Dravid could have placed himself beyond reproach by erecting yet another monument of his skills. Had he done so, he certainly would have been Captain Courageous. But as of now, he comes only second-best in this encounter. It is Flintoff who emerges with his reputation intact, nay, greatly enhanced even.

After snooping around various blogs and posting comments in them, I have taken the next brave step of creating my own blog. I hope to keep this filled as often as I can. Topics? The title says it all.

Thanks for stopping by. Drop in again soon and see if you like what you read.