Punter and Martin have, to use a cricketing phrase, swung their bats a bit too wildly this time. But will they be given out or even warned, I doubt - given that the umpires (the Australian Board, Cricket Australia, who are going to investigate this incident) are very vocal supporters of all Australians and all their unsporting acts, specially when such acts are against the subcontinental teams - Darrell Hair is a prime example.
I saw the footage over television yesterday. Of how Ricky Ponting "beckoned" Sharad Pawar to hand over the Champions Trophy to him. And how, immediately thereafter, Damien Martin virtually shoved Pawar off the dias, so that the Aussies may be photographed with the trophy. Very rude behaviour and an ugly incident, to say the least, irrespective of whether it was Sharad Pawar or a completely unknown, insignificant person. Though, if one has to go purely by his stature as the BCCI Chief, Central Minister of the Government of India, and a leading, very senior & well-respected politician of the world's largest democracy, and the reverence that he should command for his sheer age, the Aussies have shown great disrespect not just to him, but to all Indians.
Pawar, in his maganimity, has dismissed this as an unnecessary debate, and as an incident which is not noteworthy given the youth of the Australian team and their excitement at winning the trophy for the first time. He has dismissed this as a unintentional mistake, at the most. I am no fan of Pawar's or his ideologies, but I am not willing to let this pass by as an accident. I do feel that these twin acts, even if unintentional, were definitely uncalled for, and extremely disgraceful.
Aussies cannot be pardoned for being so arrogant due to the excitement of winning the trophy. They are, after all, world champions in cricket, have won too many tournaments to count, and are the first team to hold both the World Cup and the Champions Trophy at the same time. This is definitely not their first win, where they can be excused for behaving like kids, though I have yet to see any kids who behave like this on a dias.
As ambassadors of not just the gentleman's game, but of their country, the Aussies should have behaved the way a champion should - gracefully. Obviously, that is a word that they have never come across in their life. It is a norm, if not a basic courtesy, to give respect to the host, specially when the guest has been treated so very nicely while visiting another country. And it is even more necessary when you are in public view of not just the stadium audience, but the entire world watching you over television, to behave in a manner befitting you. But let me give Ponting & Martin the benefit of doubt; maybe they did behave in a manner befitting them perfectly - rogues will be rogues, as they say.
Irrespective of their upbringing and their ethos, I would like to know from Punter, Martin and Cricket Australia how they would feel if the same treatment were meted out by the Indian Team to Hon. John Winston Howard, the Chief Patron of Cricket Australia, and incidentally also their Prime Minister. But which Indian Cricketer will ever give them tit for tat? Maybe, we do have a business case for Sourav Ganguly's presence in the Indian Team.
Thursday, November 09, 2006
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
Saddam's finished, but is it time to rejoice yet?
To be hanged till death. A very dramatic sentence, indeed. Specially for a head of state. But it was coming, wasn't it?
So, Saddam Hussein is finally done in. Any surprises there - none I guess. After Bush had decided that he had to bring the Indisciplined Arab to his knees for defying America, this was bound to happen sooner or later.
When Bush went to the Congress to convince them that the war against Iraq was necessary, he talked about Saddam working day and night at developing Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). And that America would be under constant threat from the despot, should it not take immediate action to curb the same. The annihilation of the Butcher of Baghdad became the most pressing thought for the mighty President of the USA. Even more important than finding Osama bin Laden, who is singularly responsible for causing more bloodshed & panic in America in a single day than both the World Wars put together.
Why was it so important, one may wonder, to go after Saddam. Because Bush, along with his best ally Musharraf, has been so very unable to even figure out whether OBL is dead or alive (wasn't that the phrase that Bush used before he began carpet-bombing Afghanistan to get the man), forget locate him and bring him to justice. With public confidence in him plummeting by the day, Bush needed a saving grace, and so Saddam became the fall guy.
The fact remains that despite whatever atrocities that Saddam would have done against so many Iraqi denizens, he was nowhere close to developing WMDs. The only WMDs that the American soldiers could locate and destroy in Iraq were the common Women & Men, and the Descendants of Saddam. And they went on a systematic demolition drive of the same, till they finally found the man himself, holed up in an underground bunker, and began his retribution.
So, one despot is done in. So much better for the world, and I can probably eat my dinner more peacefully today. But what about the Big Brother attitude of America in imparting justice? They may go on claiming that the trial and judgment was a fair one, meted out by Iraqi Courts with absolutely no consideration to America's stake in the entire state of affair. But is it really so, or is it most certainly "Justice of the Victor", which for centuries bygone means awarding death penalty to the vanquished? I personally don't think this is a good precedent, and goes on to make the world a better place.
Yes, if Saddam is at fault for mistreating his citizens, he should be punished. But the whole agenda for the war by America was destruction of WMDs. So, what gives US the moral high ground to persecute him in the first place for other sins? And why do US soldiers continue to show complete disrespect for prisoners of war and the common Iraqi citizens? Wouldn't that be a sore wound that the Iraqis will have for years to come, despite having being rid of Saddam? And will they respect America for what it has done for them, or will they and the Arab & the Islamic world become even more suspicious and spiteful of America? I have no answers now, but I do believe that with this deed, America has only ended up alienating the foes, and it does need to do a lot to bring the world together.
So, Saddam Hussein is finally done in. Any surprises there - none I guess. After Bush had decided that he had to bring the Indisciplined Arab to his knees for defying America, this was bound to happen sooner or later.
When Bush went to the Congress to convince them that the war against Iraq was necessary, he talked about Saddam working day and night at developing Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). And that America would be under constant threat from the despot, should it not take immediate action to curb the same. The annihilation of the Butcher of Baghdad became the most pressing thought for the mighty President of the USA. Even more important than finding Osama bin Laden, who is singularly responsible for causing more bloodshed & panic in America in a single day than both the World Wars put together.
Why was it so important, one may wonder, to go after Saddam. Because Bush, along with his best ally Musharraf, has been so very unable to even figure out whether OBL is dead or alive (wasn't that the phrase that Bush used before he began carpet-bombing Afghanistan to get the man), forget locate him and bring him to justice. With public confidence in him plummeting by the day, Bush needed a saving grace, and so Saddam became the fall guy.
The fact remains that despite whatever atrocities that Saddam would have done against so many Iraqi denizens, he was nowhere close to developing WMDs. The only WMDs that the American soldiers could locate and destroy in Iraq were the common Women & Men, and the Descendants of Saddam. And they went on a systematic demolition drive of the same, till they finally found the man himself, holed up in an underground bunker, and began his retribution.
So, one despot is done in. So much better for the world, and I can probably eat my dinner more peacefully today. But what about the Big Brother attitude of America in imparting justice? They may go on claiming that the trial and judgment was a fair one, meted out by Iraqi Courts with absolutely no consideration to America's stake in the entire state of affair. But is it really so, or is it most certainly "Justice of the Victor", which for centuries bygone means awarding death penalty to the vanquished? I personally don't think this is a good precedent, and goes on to make the world a better place.
Yes, if Saddam is at fault for mistreating his citizens, he should be punished. But the whole agenda for the war by America was destruction of WMDs. So, what gives US the moral high ground to persecute him in the first place for other sins? And why do US soldiers continue to show complete disrespect for prisoners of war and the common Iraqi citizens? Wouldn't that be a sore wound that the Iraqis will have for years to come, despite having being rid of Saddam? And will they respect America for what it has done for them, or will they and the Arab & the Islamic world become even more suspicious and spiteful of America? I have no answers now, but I do believe that with this deed, America has only ended up alienating the foes, and it does need to do a lot to bring the world together.
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Daughters are God's gifts
Today, 14th August 2006, has heralded a new chapter in my life. My wife and I have been blessed with a baby girl. Already the proud parents of a 6-year old boy, this new bundle of joy is an absolute delight, and she completes our family.
What is the difference between being a son's father and a daughter's father? Not much, I must admit. Except that a son is so very exciting, and a daughter is so very precious. Her first lazy glance at my face, as she sleepily opened her eyes for the first time, was enough to swell my heart with joy and pride.
My wife Anshu, who has suffered through very high blood pressure for the past two weeks that really scared us, finally gave birth to our daughter at the Holy Spirit Hospital, Mumbai at 8:59 a.m. About an hour and a half later, the little one was brought to the room - to be with her family. Anshu took some time coming, and was still reeling under the strain and pain of a C-section delivery till late evening. But hey, nobody's complaining; she's given birth to an angel, and a nice and healthy one at that - she weighed 3.63 kilos at birth, which is pretty decent.
If you want to see unblemished joy, you should see the delight on my son's face on becoming the big brother of a superb sister. Guess even he realizes - daughters are God's gifts!
Thursday, July 13, 2006
Mumbai Bomb Blasts...The City Refuses To Die
Terrorist… what does it take to become one? Is it the cause (like fight for one’s land – right or wrong is debatable) that one believes in? Is it the religious fanaticism (irrespective of it being Islamic, Sikh or Hindu) that pushes one beyond all lines of control? Or, is it the urge to scare the wits out of your enemies and make them cower & bend down in front of your supreme, naked power (as some countries of the world are used to demonstrating)? I guess it can be either, but mostly is a mix of all three, apart from many other things added to make a heady cocktail of anger, passion, spite, etc. that turns a man into a monster.
The cause for a land may be just – as was at the time that Bhagat Singh & his fellow-freedom-fighters decided to bomb the assembly in 1930s. That they did not intend to kill is another story – they intended to scare the British and bring public notice to their cause through newspapers writing about this act. Not much different from what the Lashkar-e-Taiba is busy doing today, except that Bhagat Singh’s fight was against another nation occupying ours by force, and this cannot be termed terrorism. Same is not the case with Kashmir, even though the terrorists may draw parallels here. The debate, though, will continue forever, as one man’s murderer is another man’s martyr.
The cause for religion may also be just – should a particular religion be at risk, as the Jews were during World War II. But does Islam really have to fear? They are, after all, now the largest religion in the world. And do Hindu fanatics have to retort every time like devils whenever a Godhra happens – is our religion at risk in India? With 80% of India’s 100 crore+ population being Hindus, not yet, I may say. Christianity appears tolerant today, but the world knows how their missionaries spread their religion by the sword for centuries. No; religion can never be the right excuse to kill millions.
The cause for crushing an enemy may also be just – but should it be left to armies to fight it out or should innocent civilians be subjected to whims of nations? And is the bombing of citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, howsoever noble it may have been to end the WW II, an act of war or an act of terror? Are Israel and Palestine right in what they are doing to each other’s denizens for decades? And is Pakistan right in being a sponsor of terror across our border? No, it is not – as no nation can ever be. Simple rule – even if your neighbour beats you black or blue, and then also grabs your house, you just cannot kill his wife or brothers or children to get it back, can you?
Terrorism, in all forms, is nothing but the wild expression of frustrated feelings of a set of humans (can we still call them that, or is ‘creatures’ a more appropriate word), who have their own agenda that is completely different from the world. And the only way they can make themselves heard or noticed, and remain powerful & dreaded (though they would like to call it ‘respected’), is by making a song and dance of it every time they can. The song of suffering and the dance of death.
This brings me to Mumbai, which was once again hit by terrorists yesterday. 7 blasts – inside of half an hour – in the railway network that carries teeming millions – at peak hour traffic – designed to deliver maximum impact – and to bring the city down to its knees – worked like clockwork. To my memory, only 9/11 NY, and 12/03/93 Mumbai were more horrific. The sheer panic that I saw on the faces of people yesterday was more horrifying than whatever I have ever witnessed.
What I saw was people running for their lives like I have never seen before. Office-going ladies crying like lost schoolgirls on the roadside, men in their 30s and 40s looking zombie-scared and clinging onto whatever transport they could get a hold of, old men & women pleading with everyone who would care to listen to help them reach their homes – the memories of the so many terrified faces I saw while trying to get back home yesterday will haunt me for a long time to come.
What I also saw were a lot of good Samaritans trying everything they could to help out – they were very, very few, but they were there – handing out water, biscuits, stopping private vehicles and requesting them to take some passengers with them. The city had suffered a great blow, but the city is resilient and was trying to stay alive & kicking. Today, at least for now, it has got back to its feet. And while the impact of yesterday’s terrorist attack on it is huge and loss of life suffered incomparable, the normal citizen on the road is ready to show the terrorists that they have largely been unsuccessful in trying to disrupt life. Makes me say, “Salaam Mumbai!”.
The cause for a land may be just – as was at the time that Bhagat Singh & his fellow-freedom-fighters decided to bomb the assembly in 1930s. That they did not intend to kill is another story – they intended to scare the British and bring public notice to their cause through newspapers writing about this act. Not much different from what the Lashkar-e-Taiba is busy doing today, except that Bhagat Singh’s fight was against another nation occupying ours by force, and this cannot be termed terrorism. Same is not the case with Kashmir, even though the terrorists may draw parallels here. The debate, though, will continue forever, as one man’s murderer is another man’s martyr.
The cause for religion may also be just – should a particular religion be at risk, as the Jews were during World War II. But does Islam really have to fear? They are, after all, now the largest religion in the world. And do Hindu fanatics have to retort every time like devils whenever a Godhra happens – is our religion at risk in India? With 80% of India’s 100 crore+ population being Hindus, not yet, I may say. Christianity appears tolerant today, but the world knows how their missionaries spread their religion by the sword for centuries. No; religion can never be the right excuse to kill millions.
The cause for crushing an enemy may also be just – but should it be left to armies to fight it out or should innocent civilians be subjected to whims of nations? And is the bombing of citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, howsoever noble it may have been to end the WW II, an act of war or an act of terror? Are Israel and Palestine right in what they are doing to each other’s denizens for decades? And is Pakistan right in being a sponsor of terror across our border? No, it is not – as no nation can ever be. Simple rule – even if your neighbour beats you black or blue, and then also grabs your house, you just cannot kill his wife or brothers or children to get it back, can you?
Terrorism, in all forms, is nothing but the wild expression of frustrated feelings of a set of humans (can we still call them that, or is ‘creatures’ a more appropriate word), who have their own agenda that is completely different from the world. And the only way they can make themselves heard or noticed, and remain powerful & dreaded (though they would like to call it ‘respected’), is by making a song and dance of it every time they can. The song of suffering and the dance of death.
This brings me to Mumbai, which was once again hit by terrorists yesterday. 7 blasts – inside of half an hour – in the railway network that carries teeming millions – at peak hour traffic – designed to deliver maximum impact – and to bring the city down to its knees – worked like clockwork. To my memory, only 9/11 NY, and 12/03/93 Mumbai were more horrific. The sheer panic that I saw on the faces of people yesterday was more horrifying than whatever I have ever witnessed.
What I saw was people running for their lives like I have never seen before. Office-going ladies crying like lost schoolgirls on the roadside, men in their 30s and 40s looking zombie-scared and clinging onto whatever transport they could get a hold of, old men & women pleading with everyone who would care to listen to help them reach their homes – the memories of the so many terrified faces I saw while trying to get back home yesterday will haunt me for a long time to come.
What I also saw were a lot of good Samaritans trying everything they could to help out – they were very, very few, but they were there – handing out water, biscuits, stopping private vehicles and requesting them to take some passengers with them. The city had suffered a great blow, but the city is resilient and was trying to stay alive & kicking. Today, at least for now, it has got back to its feet. And while the impact of yesterday’s terrorist attack on it is huge and loss of life suffered incomparable, the normal citizen on the road is ready to show the terrorists that they have largely been unsuccessful in trying to disrupt life. Makes me say, “Salaam Mumbai!”.
Tuesday, July 11, 2006
Zidane's header costs France the World Cup
Italy has won the FIFA World Cup 2006. But that is not the big news for me.
What is intriguing me, and I am sure the rest of the world, is what in the world was Zinedine doing when he head-butted Materazzi. Surely, he knew the cameras, the line refrees (if not the pitch refree), and billions across the globe would see what he did. Why did he have to resort to such a shameful thing in his swansong match?
Was it the last hurrah he was seeking, and the frustration of seeing the game entering extra time, which could go against his side? Or, was it some provocation hurled at him which finally snapped something inside him? Whatever be the reason, the act is unpardonable. Not that he has not done this before – he’s been actively involved in similar incidents twice in crucial matches.
In 1998, the only year when France has won the world cup, Zidane fouled the Saudi Arabian captain by plodding on his foot in the first round. Of course, Zizou claimed it was accidental but the refree thought otherwise, and he was red-carded. The cameras proved the refree was correct. It later also did emerge that the Saudi captain had verbally provoked Zidane (who is of Algerian ancestry) with racist remarks into the act. Maybe the same happened yesterday too. But that does not condone his sin.
Another time, Zidane was sent off in a Champions League match in 2000. Zidane aimed a headbutt at an opposing team member after both players collided & fell over in the 29th minute. He was given marching orders immediately, and his depleted side lost the match. History does repeat itself!
Clearly, Zidane does not learn from his mistakes and continues to be ruled by his own beliefs (right or wrong), irrespective of consequences to himself or his team – resulting in a hero becoming a villain of the first order. This kind of attitude appears in all people who think they are the greatest, can do no wrong, and above the law. Incidentally, it is also the same wild streak that is seen in master-criminals, who are basically geniuses gone wrong for the presence of one mischievous gene in them.
It’s not that Zidane is the only sportsman to face slurs on the field. Cricketers are known for sledging and can be pretty nasty in terms of their racist, religious, sexual and national attacks on opposing players. Notwithstanding this, and post a few verbal attacks hurled back, the game continues more or less peacefully – despite the fact that both the batsmen and the fielders have more ammunition with them (in the form of bats, balls and wickets) in one match, than the entire soccer world cup put together.
One would have liked to see Zidane lift up the cup, or to even see him going gracefully into retirement as the captain of the team that were runners-up in soccer’s biggest arena. The soccer-crazy world would have loved to have that as the fondest memory of this cup. However, that was not to be – all for the senseless temper of one second that killed a lifetime of good work. Zizou’s headbutt and his shameful exit, for me, will be the lasting memory of this world cup.
What is intriguing me, and I am sure the rest of the world, is what in the world was Zinedine doing when he head-butted Materazzi. Surely, he knew the cameras, the line refrees (if not the pitch refree), and billions across the globe would see what he did. Why did he have to resort to such a shameful thing in his swansong match?
Was it the last hurrah he was seeking, and the frustration of seeing the game entering extra time, which could go against his side? Or, was it some provocation hurled at him which finally snapped something inside him? Whatever be the reason, the act is unpardonable. Not that he has not done this before – he’s been actively involved in similar incidents twice in crucial matches.
In 1998, the only year when France has won the world cup, Zidane fouled the Saudi Arabian captain by plodding on his foot in the first round. Of course, Zizou claimed it was accidental but the refree thought otherwise, and he was red-carded. The cameras proved the refree was correct. It later also did emerge that the Saudi captain had verbally provoked Zidane (who is of Algerian ancestry) with racist remarks into the act. Maybe the same happened yesterday too. But that does not condone his sin.
Another time, Zidane was sent off in a Champions League match in 2000. Zidane aimed a headbutt at an opposing team member after both players collided & fell over in the 29th minute. He was given marching orders immediately, and his depleted side lost the match. History does repeat itself!
Clearly, Zidane does not learn from his mistakes and continues to be ruled by his own beliefs (right or wrong), irrespective of consequences to himself or his team – resulting in a hero becoming a villain of the first order. This kind of attitude appears in all people who think they are the greatest, can do no wrong, and above the law. Incidentally, it is also the same wild streak that is seen in master-criminals, who are basically geniuses gone wrong for the presence of one mischievous gene in them.
It’s not that Zidane is the only sportsman to face slurs on the field. Cricketers are known for sledging and can be pretty nasty in terms of their racist, religious, sexual and national attacks on opposing players. Notwithstanding this, and post a few verbal attacks hurled back, the game continues more or less peacefully – despite the fact that both the batsmen and the fielders have more ammunition with them (in the form of bats, balls and wickets) in one match, than the entire soccer world cup put together.
One would have liked to see Zidane lift up the cup, or to even see him going gracefully into retirement as the captain of the team that were runners-up in soccer’s biggest arena. The soccer-crazy world would have loved to have that as the fondest memory of this cup. However, that was not to be – all for the senseless temper of one second that killed a lifetime of good work. Zizou’s headbutt and his shameful exit, for me, will be the lasting memory of this world cup.
Sunday, July 09, 2006
Football… the final frontier is here!
Tomorrow, the world is going to witness the FIFA World Cup 2006 final clash between 2 nations that are totally opposite of each other in how they have fared historically in the World Cup.
Italy, on one hand, have reached the finals 5 times (second only to Brazil’s 7 & Germany’s 7) – this is their 6th appearance. They have won it thrice – in 1934 against Czechoslovakia by 2-1, 1938 against Hungary by 4-2, & 1982 against Germany by 3-1. The 2 times they have lost it has been to Brazil on both occasions – in 1970 by 4-1 and in 1994 by 3-2. Incidentally, all of their 3 wins came in Europe – Italy, France & Spain respectively – and they were against European teams. And both their losses came in the Americas – in Mexico & USA – against an American team.
France, on the other hand, has managed to reach the finals only once – in 1998 – which they won beating Brazil 3-0. That the tournament was in France and they were playing in front of home crowd would have given some wings to their ambitions, and the victory margin is a clear indicator of how motivated they would have been to beat a team like Brazil, who were the defending champions. Can the French win again and maintain a 100% record of reaching the finals and winning, one needs to wait & see.
A thing to notice is that amongst 18 World Cup finals (including the current year) featuring 2 sides each, there are a maximum possible 36 teams that could have played the finals. Amongst Italy, Brazil & Germany, they now have 20 appearances – more than 50%!!! Now, that does place Italy in the premium league, doesn’t it? Records clearly suggest that Italy is much more likely to take home the trophy as compared to France.
Nonetheless, the French are not going to be pushovers; the way they kept Brazil at bay in the quarter-finals tells you a thing or two about their current form. Also, Zidane has not returned from his retirement just for nothing. Though at 34, he is pretty old to play football, his legs have appeared to be the freshest in the tournament so far. Also, very few can dispute the fact that he is probably the best footballer of his generation in the world. And he is an inspiring leader, to say the least – his team’s commitment to him demonstrates this in no uncertain terms. They would die (and kill) to give him the best farewell a footballer can get – the world cup.
However, the beautiful game is very unpredictable – specially in this season. Who would have thought that none from Brazil, Argentina, England & Netherlands would reach the final 4 stage? Who would have thought that so many games would go to extra time and penalties? Who would have thought that not a single match would witness a hat-trick (this has never happened before)? And it is the very unpredictability of the game that makes it so beautiful.
So, who will win? Don’t we all love underdogs and would love to see France win? But don’t we also want to see the more deserving side, Italy, emerge glorious? I will not hazard a guess on the outcome of the final. Because, while I love my pizzas, I also cherish my wine.
Italy, on one hand, have reached the finals 5 times (second only to Brazil’s 7 & Germany’s 7) – this is their 6th appearance. They have won it thrice – in 1934 against Czechoslovakia by 2-1, 1938 against Hungary by 4-2, & 1982 against Germany by 3-1. The 2 times they have lost it has been to Brazil on both occasions – in 1970 by 4-1 and in 1994 by 3-2. Incidentally, all of their 3 wins came in Europe – Italy, France & Spain respectively – and they were against European teams. And both their losses came in the Americas – in Mexico & USA – against an American team.
France, on the other hand, has managed to reach the finals only once – in 1998 – which they won beating Brazil 3-0. That the tournament was in France and they were playing in front of home crowd would have given some wings to their ambitions, and the victory margin is a clear indicator of how motivated they would have been to beat a team like Brazil, who were the defending champions. Can the French win again and maintain a 100% record of reaching the finals and winning, one needs to wait & see.
A thing to notice is that amongst 18 World Cup finals (including the current year) featuring 2 sides each, there are a maximum possible 36 teams that could have played the finals. Amongst Italy, Brazil & Germany, they now have 20 appearances – more than 50%!!! Now, that does place Italy in the premium league, doesn’t it? Records clearly suggest that Italy is much more likely to take home the trophy as compared to France.
Nonetheless, the French are not going to be pushovers; the way they kept Brazil at bay in the quarter-finals tells you a thing or two about their current form. Also, Zidane has not returned from his retirement just for nothing. Though at 34, he is pretty old to play football, his legs have appeared to be the freshest in the tournament so far. Also, very few can dispute the fact that he is probably the best footballer of his generation in the world. And he is an inspiring leader, to say the least – his team’s commitment to him demonstrates this in no uncertain terms. They would die (and kill) to give him the best farewell a footballer can get – the world cup.
However, the beautiful game is very unpredictable – specially in this season. Who would have thought that none from Brazil, Argentina, England & Netherlands would reach the final 4 stage? Who would have thought that so many games would go to extra time and penalties? Who would have thought that not a single match would witness a hat-trick (this has never happened before)? And it is the very unpredictability of the game that makes it so beautiful.
So, who will win? Don’t we all love underdogs and would love to see France win? But don’t we also want to see the more deserving side, Italy, emerge glorious? I will not hazard a guess on the outcome of the final. Because, while I love my pizzas, I also cherish my wine.
Tuesday, July 04, 2006
Indians finally beat Windies to taste success abroad
The first non-Indian cricketers to sing the Kingfisher Beer song “Ula la la la, vey o” (I hope this is correct – I have no intention of getting Vaughan try to correct me) were the West Indians. In fact, Kingfisher was the official sponsor of the West Indian cricket team almost half a decade back, and this Indian sponsorship gave some decent funding to the impoverished game that every man, woman and child loves in the Caribbean. Today, I am sure, almost everybody in the West Indies would be despising all things Indian, notwithstanding the fact that 4 of their playing 11 in the last test (Ganga, Chanderpaul, Sarwan, Ramdin) are of Indian origin. In fact, together they scored almost 2/3rd of the total runs scored by West Indies in either innings (67/103 in the first and 142/219 in the second); yet could not save their team from the blushes.
India, on the other hand, have finally shaken off the ghost of not being able to win a series outside the sub-continent (I don’t think winning the series against a totally depleted and demoralized Zimbabwe in Zimbabwe last September should count as being able to win outside). The last time when India actually won a series of consequence outside was when Kapil’s Devils demolished England 2-0 in 1986. Who would have thought that it would take a good 20-years to repeat the feat? However, if you just go a little back in history, you would realize that India had taken 15 long years to register their 1986 series win abroad – the last time it happened before that was in 1971 in England again. Though, then the Indian team was fresh with having beaten the mighty, mighty West Indians in their backyard just a few months ago.
The question that arises is that “Is India capable of continuing to win abroad?” On paper, very much so. When you win despite not playing Irfan, and with Sehwag, Kaif and Yuvraj being in terribly low form, it tells you that things are auguring well. We did play the series pretty well and should have won at least 2 if not 3 of the tests, had the rain gods not intervened to favour West Indies. However, one must not miss the fine point that the Indians got pretty “Indian” wickets in West Indies, and their task was made that much easier. They cannot expect the same every time and elsewhere. Also, the very fact that England went home from India with their chests held high a few months ago, despite not having their top league players in the team, tells you a thing or so about the Indian state of affairs in tests.
Victories tend to make you heady, specially when they come after such a long gap and such toil. It is time indeed to be drunk in the joys of reaching a long-cherished goal; yet one must not forget that the journey has just begun. We cannot be complacent from here onwards. Dravid and his team would be well advised not to let this go to their heads, and should ideally see this as almost a gift given the nature of the pitch given to them. Yes, the series is won, but because the opponent inflicted self-injury.
While record books will show that we are victors, the team should not assume the same and think of themselves as good as Kapil’s Devils; not yet at least – maybe in the future, they will prove themselves to be even better. Dravid has infused a sense of responsibility & pride in this team by leading from the front with his own knocks in the past few months, and by his demeanour on & off the field. He must surely be feeling happy today. However, he would also be the first one to realize how close they have come to winning and then squandered it – in ODIs specially – due to lack of killer instinct. His work is not over; it has just begun.
I, despite sounding very boorish & critical in this monologue, am one proud Indian today. But I can’t get myself to sing, “And I’ve, had the time of my life…”.
India, on the other hand, have finally shaken off the ghost of not being able to win a series outside the sub-continent (I don’t think winning the series against a totally depleted and demoralized Zimbabwe in Zimbabwe last September should count as being able to win outside). The last time when India actually won a series of consequence outside was when Kapil’s Devils demolished England 2-0 in 1986. Who would have thought that it would take a good 20-years to repeat the feat? However, if you just go a little back in history, you would realize that India had taken 15 long years to register their 1986 series win abroad – the last time it happened before that was in 1971 in England again. Though, then the Indian team was fresh with having beaten the mighty, mighty West Indians in their backyard just a few months ago.
The question that arises is that “Is India capable of continuing to win abroad?” On paper, very much so. When you win despite not playing Irfan, and with Sehwag, Kaif and Yuvraj being in terribly low form, it tells you that things are auguring well. We did play the series pretty well and should have won at least 2 if not 3 of the tests, had the rain gods not intervened to favour West Indies. However, one must not miss the fine point that the Indians got pretty “Indian” wickets in West Indies, and their task was made that much easier. They cannot expect the same every time and elsewhere. Also, the very fact that England went home from India with their chests held high a few months ago, despite not having their top league players in the team, tells you a thing or so about the Indian state of affairs in tests.
Victories tend to make you heady, specially when they come after such a long gap and such toil. It is time indeed to be drunk in the joys of reaching a long-cherished goal; yet one must not forget that the journey has just begun. We cannot be complacent from here onwards. Dravid and his team would be well advised not to let this go to their heads, and should ideally see this as almost a gift given the nature of the pitch given to them. Yes, the series is won, but because the opponent inflicted self-injury.
While record books will show that we are victors, the team should not assume the same and think of themselves as good as Kapil’s Devils; not yet at least – maybe in the future, they will prove themselves to be even better. Dravid has infused a sense of responsibility & pride in this team by leading from the front with his own knocks in the past few months, and by his demeanour on & off the field. He must surely be feeling happy today. However, he would also be the first one to realize how close they have come to winning and then squandered it – in ODIs specially – due to lack of killer instinct. His work is not over; it has just begun.
I, despite sounding very boorish & critical in this monologue, am one proud Indian today. But I can’t get myself to sing, “And I’ve, had the time of my life…”.
Friday, June 23, 2006
Isn’t history continuous?
“Isn’t history continuous? Incidents don’t happen in a vacuum, but cause ripples spreading out, interacting with other ripples, changing their courses and, in turn, themselves being changed, and changing the course of anything coming in their contact. Nothing can escape their impact.”
This is a thought that I had written almost 15 years ago, when I was in my final year at college. Today, I reflect upon the same.
The context, when this was originally written, was to write to a girl whom I wished to befriend. The idea behind the thought was to tell her that when two souls come in close contact with each other, it is a foregone conclusion that they will interact (negatively or positively is immaterial), and be influenced by each other. And even if they choose to go separate ways, history tends to bring people together once again. The continuum of history is such that things don’t just happen by design or choice, but empirically, we know that many incidents happen unknowingly and unwittingly. You must be wondering, what am I trying to insinuate? Let me elaborate.
When I made a decision to move to Mumbai (from Delhi) in January last year, neither my best friend, Varun, nor I had an idea that he would make a similar move within the same calendar. But then this happened; though this could not be sheer chance, a lot of it was by design on Varun’s part – he actively began looking at offers from Mumbai (which he may have been rejecting till my move), and finally we both are again together. But that is not the point of my writing this.
A very surprising circumstance happened this month, which makes me write this essay. A school-time friend, Reena Puri (nee Singla), moved to Mumbai. In the last 18 years, we would not have met or talked on more than 3-4 occasions (not much by any stretch of imagination). And for the last 6 years, she was based in Dubai. It would be pretty safe to say that we had lost touch forever, with no hope or effort of meeting again.
Never in our wildest dreams would we have imagined that we would all (Reena, Varun & I) be living in the same city (which is different from our original abode) 18 years from last we were colleagues. What’s more, she looked at various homes at Lokhandwala, Kalina, Santa Cruz, and finalized deals at each of these places that didn’t go through at the very last moment, finally to take up residence barely 3 kms. from my place. And that’s not the end of it all – her kids have got admission to the same school (Podar CBSE) as my son, and take the same school bus everyday! Now, doesn’t that sound like a rerun of our own lives?
All this made me suddenly remember the almost-forgotten lines that I had written long ago. And the thought came blinding back to me – isn’t history continuous?
This is a thought that I had written almost 15 years ago, when I was in my final year at college. Today, I reflect upon the same.
The context, when this was originally written, was to write to a girl whom I wished to befriend. The idea behind the thought was to tell her that when two souls come in close contact with each other, it is a foregone conclusion that they will interact (negatively or positively is immaterial), and be influenced by each other. And even if they choose to go separate ways, history tends to bring people together once again. The continuum of history is such that things don’t just happen by design or choice, but empirically, we know that many incidents happen unknowingly and unwittingly. You must be wondering, what am I trying to insinuate? Let me elaborate.
When I made a decision to move to Mumbai (from Delhi) in January last year, neither my best friend, Varun, nor I had an idea that he would make a similar move within the same calendar. But then this happened; though this could not be sheer chance, a lot of it was by design on Varun’s part – he actively began looking at offers from Mumbai (which he may have been rejecting till my move), and finally we both are again together. But that is not the point of my writing this.
A very surprising circumstance happened this month, which makes me write this essay. A school-time friend, Reena Puri (nee Singla), moved to Mumbai. In the last 18 years, we would not have met or talked on more than 3-4 occasions (not much by any stretch of imagination). And for the last 6 years, she was based in Dubai. It would be pretty safe to say that we had lost touch forever, with no hope or effort of meeting again.
Never in our wildest dreams would we have imagined that we would all (Reena, Varun & I) be living in the same city (which is different from our original abode) 18 years from last we were colleagues. What’s more, she looked at various homes at Lokhandwala, Kalina, Santa Cruz, and finalized deals at each of these places that didn’t go through at the very last moment, finally to take up residence barely 3 kms. from my place. And that’s not the end of it all – her kids have got admission to the same school (Podar CBSE) as my son, and take the same school bus everyday! Now, doesn’t that sound like a rerun of our own lives?
All this made me suddenly remember the almost-forgotten lines that I had written long ago. And the thought came blinding back to me – isn’t history continuous?
Sunday, June 18, 2006
Kings or Gangsters
A random thought just drifted into my mind… something that I’ve been toying for almost two decades, and have debated till kingdom come with many people… never losing the debate, by the way. I write on that today – “Kings or Gangsters”.
“Blue blood in their veins… that’s what royalty is made of.”
Really? Then, in my opinion, the colour of blood running inside the biggest gangsters in the world must also be myriad shades of blue!
Surprised? Let me take you down history lane to explain this rather bizarre thought.
What made Kings? Where did they come from originally? And when I say originally, I mean how did the very first king come about thousands of years ago? What would make people follow them blindly, and be ready to kill for them and to be killed for them? What wins such loyalty?
There are only two things in this world that bring such devotion. One, is the love of family and the very dearest of friends, who will do anything for someone they love so much. Two, is the position of power that binds people together – they may love each other or loathe each other, but the power of being in control and of gaining hugely by such an alliance – is what earns such allegiance.
It is my hunch that the first kings came about the same time civilization was coming into existence. The very necessity of the people to fulfill their basic needs – food, shelter, protection from wild animals – made them form groups. These groups needed a leader – like all groups – who could envision the dangers they faced, come up with solutions for the same, and guide them in times of need. This task would have invariably been entrusted to the wisest (or the most cunning) and the bravest (or the toughest) person in the group. The cleverest person became the holy man (who could talk to God and foresee everything), and the cruelest man became the king (the most powerful protector & provider). Together, they formed rules for the group to follow and bade them to obey them by fear of the Almighty or by power of the muscle.
Soon, these groups had a need to go farther than where they were born, to seek out new places for food and shelter. In doing so, they came into contact with other groups, who were pretty obviously hostile to theirs. Conflict of territory arose (much like it arises in wild beasts), and they had to fight and kill each other. If the leader was killed in the battle, the next most powerful living man would take the mantle. If the leader survived, he would be eulogized by the surviving few. These leaders were the rulers of the entire land now. And as they grew their territories and their population, they became bigger and slowly formed their kingdoms and became kings. To keep the large flock together, these kings needed a common belief (or fear), and an instant solution came in the form of spreading the word of God. I am not an atheist, this merely is an attempt to understand how man first learnt about his Creator and how he came to fear His wrath so much. One can clearly see why so much affinity existed between the King and the High Priest of yester-years. I think this is the only plausible explanation, and you can correct me if you have a different thought on the same.
So, the first kings were nothing but largely feared gangsters. Their sons automatically inherited their legacy, and may or may not have been as cruel. But they were also driven to expand (or protect) their territories, and so they stepped out of their comfort zones. You may call them bravehearts; I prefer to call them ganglords. What, for example, made millions of people leave their homes in Macedonia and trek all the way to India to win lands for Alexander the Great? And why did Alexander need to win over the world by killing so many people – I am sure the right religious teachings would not have permitted him to do so; and he was not threatened by anybody & fighting in defence. It was the lust of demonstrating himself as the most powerful man in the world (propelled by wrong religious backing) that drove him and his troops so far.
Isn’t this the very thing that we see around us today? How different are the kings from present day gangsters or terrorists, who follow the same route to riches? And how different are they from the heads of various nations (the present day kings) that wish to subjugate other states by sheer demonstration of their wild, merciless power?
“Blue blood in their veins… that’s what royalty is made of.”
Really? Then, in my opinion, the colour of blood running inside the biggest gangsters in the world must also be myriad shades of blue!
Surprised? Let me take you down history lane to explain this rather bizarre thought.
What made Kings? Where did they come from originally? And when I say originally, I mean how did the very first king come about thousands of years ago? What would make people follow them blindly, and be ready to kill for them and to be killed for them? What wins such loyalty?
There are only two things in this world that bring such devotion. One, is the love of family and the very dearest of friends, who will do anything for someone they love so much. Two, is the position of power that binds people together – they may love each other or loathe each other, but the power of being in control and of gaining hugely by such an alliance – is what earns such allegiance.
It is my hunch that the first kings came about the same time civilization was coming into existence. The very necessity of the people to fulfill their basic needs – food, shelter, protection from wild animals – made them form groups. These groups needed a leader – like all groups – who could envision the dangers they faced, come up with solutions for the same, and guide them in times of need. This task would have invariably been entrusted to the wisest (or the most cunning) and the bravest (or the toughest) person in the group. The cleverest person became the holy man (who could talk to God and foresee everything), and the cruelest man became the king (the most powerful protector & provider). Together, they formed rules for the group to follow and bade them to obey them by fear of the Almighty or by power of the muscle.
Soon, these groups had a need to go farther than where they were born, to seek out new places for food and shelter. In doing so, they came into contact with other groups, who were pretty obviously hostile to theirs. Conflict of territory arose (much like it arises in wild beasts), and they had to fight and kill each other. If the leader was killed in the battle, the next most powerful living man would take the mantle. If the leader survived, he would be eulogized by the surviving few. These leaders were the rulers of the entire land now. And as they grew their territories and their population, they became bigger and slowly formed their kingdoms and became kings. To keep the large flock together, these kings needed a common belief (or fear), and an instant solution came in the form of spreading the word of God. I am not an atheist, this merely is an attempt to understand how man first learnt about his Creator and how he came to fear His wrath so much. One can clearly see why so much affinity existed between the King and the High Priest of yester-years. I think this is the only plausible explanation, and you can correct me if you have a different thought on the same.
So, the first kings were nothing but largely feared gangsters. Their sons automatically inherited their legacy, and may or may not have been as cruel. But they were also driven to expand (or protect) their territories, and so they stepped out of their comfort zones. You may call them bravehearts; I prefer to call them ganglords. What, for example, made millions of people leave their homes in Macedonia and trek all the way to India to win lands for Alexander the Great? And why did Alexander need to win over the world by killing so many people – I am sure the right religious teachings would not have permitted him to do so; and he was not threatened by anybody & fighting in defence. It was the lust of demonstrating himself as the most powerful man in the world (propelled by wrong religious backing) that drove him and his troops so far.
Isn’t this the very thing that we see around us today? How different are the kings from present day gangsters or terrorists, who follow the same route to riches? And how different are they from the heads of various nations (the present day kings) that wish to subjugate other states by sheer demonstration of their wild, merciless power?
Wednesday, May 24, 2006
This seat is reserved... and not for you
Reservations in education & jobs. Haven’t we all heard of this a decade and a half ago, and protested against the same vehemently? And isn’t this the very same issue that cost Rajiv Gandhi & the Congress the election in 1989? So, why is the Congress going ahead with this now? To understand this, one has to dwell into the past.
If memory serves me right, when Rajiv Gandhi was presented with the option of implementing the Mandal Commission report while still in office, his stance was that this would lead to dividing the country on the lines of caste, and he was totally opposed to the idea. He felt that after 40+ years of independence, India needed to look ahead and start becoming a power to contend with in the world. And this would not happen if we allowed undeserving candidates protection in securing education & jobs at the cost of bright youngsters who were more worthy of leading India into the 21st century. Truly, he did not understand the politics of the land (being a service class person himself till 1984, when he was suddenly forced to enter the political arena), and paid dearly by leading Congress to a historical poll rout. While the politics of Mandal & Kamandal led to the mass erosion of the Congress base of working classes and the underprivileged, Rajiv still refused to agree to reservations and did not use them in the polls of 1991 too. Sadly, the one man in politics who refused to play the communal card was assassinated, and since then the small regional parties (SP, BSP, JDU, et al), have continued to rule the roost by pandering to the emotions of the teeming masses who want a government job, but don’t want to work for the nation’s progress.
Coming back to the question, why is the Congress playing the same card that Rajiv opposed? And specially so given the fact that his wife, Sonia, is the supreme leader of not just the party, but the government itself, albeit without carrying any portfolio. My guess is as good as yours, and I feel that the Congress has realized that while in Rome (no pun intended with it being Italy’s capital), do as the Romans do.
I have been a supporter of most of Congress’ policies since BJP distanced itself from me post their mute-spectatorial support of Mandal, and moreso their stance on Swadeshi in ‘90s (though they are the ones who truly opened the economy after coming to power), but today I feel betrayed. Ignoring Rajiv’s vision, the Congress today is trying to implement the reservations not for the downtrodden but for its own good, demoralizing the bright youth of today, who are competing with global corporations and creating a name for India. Irony is, that it is only the doctors (and those too who already are admitted into their courses with a secure future), who are taking on the might of the government, with very little support from the engineering & the management students.
So, again, why does the Congress feel the need to do so? With it slowly but surely losing its mass base in UP, Bihar, MP, Rajasthan & Gujarat, which constitute almost half (if not more) of the Parliamentary seats, and with regional parties & BJP playing having with caste & religion, it does seem to have no option. It still calls itself a secular party and so cannot say things like we are committed to the development of the oppressed poor classes ala SP or BSP or JDU. That would make sure that the educated urbane would move away from them. Howsoever small in numbers they may be in the electoral battle, they constitute the enlightened few in this country, who are opinion makers. And every party that calls itself a national party needs them. The RJD or CPI/CPM in my mind are still regional players who find fervour in select states only, and hence they continue to play the game of masses versus classes. And they would love to distance themselves from the Congress the day they could cobble up a majority minus the BJP. Jayalalitha and Mamta Bannerjee, amongst many others, are known to change quickly like the ocean’s tides, and they would happily ally with anyone who would bring them to power. Which is why the Congress is forced to build a strong base for itself in the masses who vote. I, for one, am dead against it, and can only hope and pray that good sense prevails on everyone and it is the country’s progress which is considered ahead of every other consideration. For, a fast-growing nation creates opportunities, jobs, wealth and recognition for many, many more than a nation that likes to appease everyone and fail to please anyone.
If memory serves me right, when Rajiv Gandhi was presented with the option of implementing the Mandal Commission report while still in office, his stance was that this would lead to dividing the country on the lines of caste, and he was totally opposed to the idea. He felt that after 40+ years of independence, India needed to look ahead and start becoming a power to contend with in the world. And this would not happen if we allowed undeserving candidates protection in securing education & jobs at the cost of bright youngsters who were more worthy of leading India into the 21st century. Truly, he did not understand the politics of the land (being a service class person himself till 1984, when he was suddenly forced to enter the political arena), and paid dearly by leading Congress to a historical poll rout. While the politics of Mandal & Kamandal led to the mass erosion of the Congress base of working classes and the underprivileged, Rajiv still refused to agree to reservations and did not use them in the polls of 1991 too. Sadly, the one man in politics who refused to play the communal card was assassinated, and since then the small regional parties (SP, BSP, JDU, et al), have continued to rule the roost by pandering to the emotions of the teeming masses who want a government job, but don’t want to work for the nation’s progress.
Coming back to the question, why is the Congress playing the same card that Rajiv opposed? And specially so given the fact that his wife, Sonia, is the supreme leader of not just the party, but the government itself, albeit without carrying any portfolio. My guess is as good as yours, and I feel that the Congress has realized that while in Rome (no pun intended with it being Italy’s capital), do as the Romans do.
I have been a supporter of most of Congress’ policies since BJP distanced itself from me post their mute-spectatorial support of Mandal, and moreso their stance on Swadeshi in ‘90s (though they are the ones who truly opened the economy after coming to power), but today I feel betrayed. Ignoring Rajiv’s vision, the Congress today is trying to implement the reservations not for the downtrodden but for its own good, demoralizing the bright youth of today, who are competing with global corporations and creating a name for India. Irony is, that it is only the doctors (and those too who already are admitted into their courses with a secure future), who are taking on the might of the government, with very little support from the engineering & the management students.
So, again, why does the Congress feel the need to do so? With it slowly but surely losing its mass base in UP, Bihar, MP, Rajasthan & Gujarat, which constitute almost half (if not more) of the Parliamentary seats, and with regional parties & BJP playing having with caste & religion, it does seem to have no option. It still calls itself a secular party and so cannot say things like we are committed to the development of the oppressed poor classes ala SP or BSP or JDU. That would make sure that the educated urbane would move away from them. Howsoever small in numbers they may be in the electoral battle, they constitute the enlightened few in this country, who are opinion makers. And every party that calls itself a national party needs them. The RJD or CPI/CPM in my mind are still regional players who find fervour in select states only, and hence they continue to play the game of masses versus classes. And they would love to distance themselves from the Congress the day they could cobble up a majority minus the BJP. Jayalalitha and Mamta Bannerjee, amongst many others, are known to change quickly like the ocean’s tides, and they would happily ally with anyone who would bring them to power. Which is why the Congress is forced to build a strong base for itself in the masses who vote. I, for one, am dead against it, and can only hope and pray that good sense prevails on everyone and it is the country’s progress which is considered ahead of every other consideration. For, a fast-growing nation creates opportunities, jobs, wealth and recognition for many, many more than a nation that likes to appease everyone and fail to please anyone.
Tuesday, May 23, 2006
India - 16 going on 17... but unable to reach 18
Okay! Records are meant to be broken. And also, a record is a milestone that has a certain limit at that point of time – though this limit can be extended to whatever limits by the record breaker. However, the limit does exist and it is never infinite.
Who would have thought a decade and a half ago that the 100-meter dash can be run in under 10 seconds? Carl Lewis certainly did not, but he did it nonetheless. And today, we have sprinters who are clocking 9.77 seconds (almost 2.5% under the so-thought limit). Or, who would have thought that 434 runs could be scored in 50-overs in cricket? Australia did it notwithstanding it being a superlative effort. Only to realize a mere 4 hours later, that South Africa were also more than up to the task.
That brings me to my current context. Would you have ever imagined that India would equal the world record of 16 back-to-back successful run chases (yes, chases!!!)? That too against teams like Sri Lanka, Pakistan and England? And then break the record with a 17th consecutive win against West Indies, to create the new world record.
Indians traditionally were always poor chasers, and this new-found confidence in chasing is because of the fresh enthusiasm seen all around the team in the form of newcomers who carry no past baggage of losses while chasing a total. They are the go-getters and they are ready for the kill. Not to forget the captain, who more than lives up to his nickname “The Wall”, who is ever-willing to take on a challenge and come out victorious. This is the same guy who cricketing pundits said had no place in one-dayers because of his traditional and woefully slow batting. Who would have thought that the same genius would today be just 500-odd runs away from the magical 10K runs figure in one day cricket? And who would have thought he would be leading the team (let alone be just a part of it) with most successful chases in history? After all, he started playing in the era where India almost always lost while chasing? And he was blamed manyatime for the same due to his slow batting. But here we are, with a new world record. And this man is leading from the front like no one else before. And the team is rising to new heights with every fresh outing.
This brings me to the second point that I want to discuss today. Why did India lose their 18th chase? And that too when the target was extremely achievable – 199 to get in 50 overs is not stiff by any standards – South Africa got more than double of that, and that too against the world’s no. 1 team. So, why did India’s record run come to an end? Well, there are no simple answers here. I saw the match, and have only one thing to say – Brian Lara marshalled his limited bowling resources extremely well. The wicket did not have much for the bowlers, and against Indian line-up, the bowlers wouldn’t have been much worth. But Lara ensured that he was giving the ball to the right bowlers at the right time, who created sufficient pressure by good line & length and forced the Indians to throw their wickets. That is precisely what happened in my view.
One man – Yuvraj – played a brilliant knock in my view, till the very last ball that he got out on. Having taken the team to that level (India needed 11 off the last over, mind you, with only 1 wicket to spare) where they needed just 2 runs off the last 3 deliveries, he should have got it. Bravo, who was bowling the last over, was having one of the worst days of his life till that very last ball. But the excruciating circumstances took their toll on Yuvraj, and just one reckless fling of the bat threw it all away.
Well, that’s history now, and West India has derailed the Indian bandwagon. But there should be no remorse. Like I said, there is no record that is limitless. And Indians have genuinely created a huge record that is going to be difficult to surpass. However, no record can survive eternity – so it is bound to broken. In my view, currently there are 3 teams that are up to it – Australia, South Africa and India itself. So, let’s see if it can be bettered; and let’s see who gets it!
Who would have thought a decade and a half ago that the 100-meter dash can be run in under 10 seconds? Carl Lewis certainly did not, but he did it nonetheless. And today, we have sprinters who are clocking 9.77 seconds (almost 2.5% under the so-thought limit). Or, who would have thought that 434 runs could be scored in 50-overs in cricket? Australia did it notwithstanding it being a superlative effort. Only to realize a mere 4 hours later, that South Africa were also more than up to the task.
That brings me to my current context. Would you have ever imagined that India would equal the world record of 16 back-to-back successful run chases (yes, chases!!!)? That too against teams like Sri Lanka, Pakistan and England? And then break the record with a 17th consecutive win against West Indies, to create the new world record.
Indians traditionally were always poor chasers, and this new-found confidence in chasing is because of the fresh enthusiasm seen all around the team in the form of newcomers who carry no past baggage of losses while chasing a total. They are the go-getters and they are ready for the kill. Not to forget the captain, who more than lives up to his nickname “The Wall”, who is ever-willing to take on a challenge and come out victorious. This is the same guy who cricketing pundits said had no place in one-dayers because of his traditional and woefully slow batting. Who would have thought that the same genius would today be just 500-odd runs away from the magical 10K runs figure in one day cricket? And who would have thought he would be leading the team (let alone be just a part of it) with most successful chases in history? After all, he started playing in the era where India almost always lost while chasing? And he was blamed manyatime for the same due to his slow batting. But here we are, with a new world record. And this man is leading from the front like no one else before. And the team is rising to new heights with every fresh outing.
This brings me to the second point that I want to discuss today. Why did India lose their 18th chase? And that too when the target was extremely achievable – 199 to get in 50 overs is not stiff by any standards – South Africa got more than double of that, and that too against the world’s no. 1 team. So, why did India’s record run come to an end? Well, there are no simple answers here. I saw the match, and have only one thing to say – Brian Lara marshalled his limited bowling resources extremely well. The wicket did not have much for the bowlers, and against Indian line-up, the bowlers wouldn’t have been much worth. But Lara ensured that he was giving the ball to the right bowlers at the right time, who created sufficient pressure by good line & length and forced the Indians to throw their wickets. That is precisely what happened in my view.
One man – Yuvraj – played a brilliant knock in my view, till the very last ball that he got out on. Having taken the team to that level (India needed 11 off the last over, mind you, with only 1 wicket to spare) where they needed just 2 runs off the last 3 deliveries, he should have got it. Bravo, who was bowling the last over, was having one of the worst days of his life till that very last ball. But the excruciating circumstances took their toll on Yuvraj, and just one reckless fling of the bat threw it all away.
Well, that’s history now, and West India has derailed the Indian bandwagon. But there should be no remorse. Like I said, there is no record that is limitless. And Indians have genuinely created a huge record that is going to be difficult to surpass. However, no record can survive eternity – so it is bound to broken. In my view, currently there are 3 teams that are up to it – Australia, South Africa and India itself. So, let’s see if it can be bettered; and let’s see who gets it!
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
Is a deer's life dearer than a human's?
Many Indians want to go hunting someday, like the erstwhile Maharajahs & the English rulers of Hindustan. Killing big game, after all, has long been deemed as one of the most macho things to do. So, Salman was not being very different when he gallantly went out to the jungle. And the villagers who caught him in the act, I am quite certain, would have many boastful “shikaar” stories to tell about their ancestors and themselves; and probably a trophy or two hidden away, if not displayed in a pride of position place in their homes. So, was Salman wrong, or was he simply in the wrong place at the wrong time?
My take on this is simple. One, he had no business hunting & killing a protected wild animal. Two, he was foolish enough to actually be caught in the act. And three, he was naiive & arrogant enough to assume that this issue will die a natural death, without bothering him. The wildlife lobby is fairly strong the world over, and no human (unless you are Veerappan or a heavy-weight politician) can get away once caught. So, Salman is paying for his sin of arrogance, more than anything else.
That also brings up two points in the issue. Point no. 1: Why do snake-charmers, bear handlers, etc. go scot-free after giving so much pain to these protected animals and eventually killing every single animal they handle with absolute cruelty? What is the SPCA or the WWF or the Judiciary doing to them? Have you ever heard of an arrest (forget conviction) in such a case? Point no. 2: Once the crime is proven, is the punishment being meted out justifiable? I mean when a snake kills a human, do we find & kill the snake? Of even when a stray dog bites a kid on the street (who contacts rabies & eventually dies), is the dog brought to justice? So the questions facing us are, is human crime greater than animal crime? And is animal life more precious than human life? Maneka Gandhi, I am sure, would have us believe so. But for some reason, I fail to see the logic every single time.
Also, in a country when a person murders a human being in full view of a hundred renowned, well respected people (Jessica Lal case), he goes without punishment. And when a man kills a deer which is seen (or is it assumed to be seen) by less than a dozen illiterate, unknown villagers, he is given 5 years!!!
I have no love for Salman – I’m not his fan. But I have love for all my human brethren, and can’t see such gross injustice being done in the name of law. Salman is being punished because the courts are assuming that he is a proclaimed offender (beating co-stars, running over people sleeping on pavements in his vehicle, et al don’t go down too well with the judges). And if any of you remembers the “17 oranges” story that we read in class 10th, an example has to be made to the masses that this will not be tolerated. And who better than a celebrity to be sacrificed at the alter – giving out a clear message that nobody is above the law. Sadly, the same is not true when it comes to Manu Sharma, who is given the benefit of doubt, because eye witnesses have back-tracked due to threats to their lives, which the court is well aware of. Perhaps, Salman should not have been arrogant in assuming that because he is a star nobody would touch him; he should have demonstrated his star power & money-muscle to the villagers to ensure that they claim that no deer was ever killed in the first place, forget Salman killing one.
May the deer’s soul rest in peace. I am sure Jessica’s won’t after this kind of injustice.
My take on this is simple. One, he had no business hunting & killing a protected wild animal. Two, he was foolish enough to actually be caught in the act. And three, he was naiive & arrogant enough to assume that this issue will die a natural death, without bothering him. The wildlife lobby is fairly strong the world over, and no human (unless you are Veerappan or a heavy-weight politician) can get away once caught. So, Salman is paying for his sin of arrogance, more than anything else.
That also brings up two points in the issue. Point no. 1: Why do snake-charmers, bear handlers, etc. go scot-free after giving so much pain to these protected animals and eventually killing every single animal they handle with absolute cruelty? What is the SPCA or the WWF or the Judiciary doing to them? Have you ever heard of an arrest (forget conviction) in such a case? Point no. 2: Once the crime is proven, is the punishment being meted out justifiable? I mean when a snake kills a human, do we find & kill the snake? Of even when a stray dog bites a kid on the street (who contacts rabies & eventually dies), is the dog brought to justice? So the questions facing us are, is human crime greater than animal crime? And is animal life more precious than human life? Maneka Gandhi, I am sure, would have us believe so. But for some reason, I fail to see the logic every single time.
Also, in a country when a person murders a human being in full view of a hundred renowned, well respected people (Jessica Lal case), he goes without punishment. And when a man kills a deer which is seen (or is it assumed to be seen) by less than a dozen illiterate, unknown villagers, he is given 5 years!!!
I have no love for Salman – I’m not his fan. But I have love for all my human brethren, and can’t see such gross injustice being done in the name of law. Salman is being punished because the courts are assuming that he is a proclaimed offender (beating co-stars, running over people sleeping on pavements in his vehicle, et al don’t go down too well with the judges). And if any of you remembers the “17 oranges” story that we read in class 10th, an example has to be made to the masses that this will not be tolerated. And who better than a celebrity to be sacrificed at the alter – giving out a clear message that nobody is above the law. Sadly, the same is not true when it comes to Manu Sharma, who is given the benefit of doubt, because eye witnesses have back-tracked due to threats to their lives, which the court is well aware of. Perhaps, Salman should not have been arrogant in assuming that because he is a star nobody would touch him; he should have demonstrated his star power & money-muscle to the villagers to ensure that they claim that no deer was ever killed in the first place, forget Salman killing one.
May the deer’s soul rest in peace. I am sure Jessica’s won’t after this kind of injustice.
Aussies feel Bangla heat
Bangladesh, yes Bangladesh, have taken a 158-run lead against Australia in the ensuing test match. And had Gilchrist not played the innings of his lifetime to score 144 runs in a team total of 269 in reply to Bangladesh’s 427, Australia would have been forced to follow-on (though if I were Bangladesh captain, I would play my second inning without enforcing follow-on, and make Australia play the fourth inning on a deteriorating pitch).
And to top that, Bangladesh scored 355 runs on the first day itself in 88 overs at an average of over 4, against a bowling attacking comprising Lee, Gillespie and none other than Shane Warne! And then Australia really struggled to come close to that total at a batting average of under 3. Five batsmen failed to reach double figures against a pretty-mediocre bowling attack. Not a pretty situation for Australia after having recently lost an ODI to the minnows. Where is the world’s greatest cricket team going? And where is the world’s worst cricket team going???
That also brings me to Shane Warne, the world’s most successful bowler ever, and still going strong. Time & again one has been reading articles from various Australians and Shane himself of how most of Murali’s wickets have come against weak teams including many of them against Bangladesh, and how Shane’s tally is not increasing at the same rate because of Australia not playing against such teams. Shane bowled 20 overs going wicketless against the same Bangladeshi’s in the first inning. Not to say that the wicket had nothing for the spinners. His other spinner team-mate Stuart MacGill took 8 of the 10 to fall in the first. Even in the second inning, thus far, Shane has not been able to scalp a single stump, from the 5 fallen so far, and he has again bowled 20% of the overs (8 out of 40 bowled so far) like the first inning. I don’t know whether it is Shane’s bad luck or MacGill’s good luck!!! The only non-suprising element here has been that Warne has never been successful against the Asian cricketers, and Bangladesh seem to be no different from India, Pakistan or Sri Lanka for him. Now at least, somebody should tell him to shut up about Murali. Not that I am a big supporter of the Sri Lankan, but then I’m not a great supporter of Shane either.
At stumps today, Bangladesh lead with 288 runs with 5 wickets to spare. Unless they score another 100-odd to reach close to 400, I don’t think Australia should find it really, really difficult to beat them. But considering the first inning, even 288 should give the Bangladeshi’s an easy win. But where the match seems headed, one will come to know only tomorrow – on the way Bangladesh bat and on the way Australia bat thereafter.
Should be an interesting match to witness. More from the academic perspective than from the cricketing perspective. And more interesting would be seeing how Australia salvage their image hereafter.
And to top that, Bangladesh scored 355 runs on the first day itself in 88 overs at an average of over 4, against a bowling attacking comprising Lee, Gillespie and none other than Shane Warne! And then Australia really struggled to come close to that total at a batting average of under 3. Five batsmen failed to reach double figures against a pretty-mediocre bowling attack. Not a pretty situation for Australia after having recently lost an ODI to the minnows. Where is the world’s greatest cricket team going? And where is the world’s worst cricket team going???
That also brings me to Shane Warne, the world’s most successful bowler ever, and still going strong. Time & again one has been reading articles from various Australians and Shane himself of how most of Murali’s wickets have come against weak teams including many of them against Bangladesh, and how Shane’s tally is not increasing at the same rate because of Australia not playing against such teams. Shane bowled 20 overs going wicketless against the same Bangladeshi’s in the first inning. Not to say that the wicket had nothing for the spinners. His other spinner team-mate Stuart MacGill took 8 of the 10 to fall in the first. Even in the second inning, thus far, Shane has not been able to scalp a single stump, from the 5 fallen so far, and he has again bowled 20% of the overs (8 out of 40 bowled so far) like the first inning. I don’t know whether it is Shane’s bad luck or MacGill’s good luck!!! The only non-suprising element here has been that Warne has never been successful against the Asian cricketers, and Bangladesh seem to be no different from India, Pakistan or Sri Lanka for him. Now at least, somebody should tell him to shut up about Murali. Not that I am a big supporter of the Sri Lankan, but then I’m not a great supporter of Shane either.
At stumps today, Bangladesh lead with 288 runs with 5 wickets to spare. Unless they score another 100-odd to reach close to 400, I don’t think Australia should find it really, really difficult to beat them. But considering the first inning, even 288 should give the Bangladeshi’s an easy win. But where the match seems headed, one will come to know only tomorrow – on the way Bangladesh bat and on the way Australia bat thereafter.
Should be an interesting match to witness. More from the academic perspective than from the cricketing perspective. And more interesting would be seeing how Australia salvage their image hereafter.
Tuesday, March 21, 2006
A God is disgraced...
It is extremely sad to see a God being disgraced. That is what happened at Wankhede this Sunday. And while I outrightly condemn the incident, in more ways than one, Sachin had it coming to him sooner than later. The fact that this happened in his hometown is in fact much better than it happening elsewhere in the country, specially Kolkata – had it happened there, then the entire Maharashtra would have risen in a whiplash effect to fight for their son, who has given so much to this country to cheer about. Also, it is indeed gratifying that it happened in India rather than elsewhere, or the shame & the fury of the nation to protect the prodigy would have been immense. Yet, it is a poor sight to see an idol being immersed.
Sachin, the man, the maestro, the messiah of cricket, is finally reduced to being a normal human being. Why, I ask, is he not able to perform to normal levels (forget supernatural)? And why, I ask, is he treated any differently from our erstwhile captain and still is kept in the team? Just because he is worshipped like God? Yes, I am sure you will say – after all, he “IS” God. But this God is not answering the prayers of his worshippers, and is slowly but surely turning them into atheists. Why does nobody have the courage to say that Sachin is not in his prime now, and needs to go gracefully – more at a time when people ask, “Why Sachin”, than “Why not Sachin”? A dangerous territory to tread into, but I guess somebody needs to speak fearlessly. And so, I ask this question.
Why does Greg not say the same thing that he said for Ganguly – being a part of the team is important for Sachin’s image & his finances? Is it true – as an advertising & marketing professional, let me say, it is indeed true. With his current form, he is unlikely to get any new endorsements, and once he goes away, the only ones hankering for him are likely to be the insurance/retirement fund companies. Yes, the magic of Sachin is fading and the advertising industry is quick to realize this – as I am sure Sachin has also starting figuring out. Though, he has, by all means, already made his mega-millions and may not have any need for more moolah. But who does not want to be idol-worshipped? And that’s where the human nature starts showing in Sachin.
When any player gets selected to play for his country, his first thought is to make a huge impact and win matches for his nation. All his energies go towards that. Records are just milestones that happen in course of play, and should not influence performance or selection beyond a level. However, the day performance starts dipping, the player realizes he has to improve or exit. Why should Sachin (who even I hold in the highest esteem) continue to play for the team, if he is genuinely not able to deliver? Shouldn’t he step aside and make way to others who are willing and able to play for the best interests of the team? Having played more tests for India than any other player, having scored more centuries than any other man in the world, I think Sachin has already a lot of records at his feet, and it is time for him to say goodbye. Two records will elude him in doing this – the maximum runs scored in tests (that is currently with Lara) and the maximum tests played for any country (which Steve Waugh holds). But in trying to reach for them, will he be doing his Godly-image any good?
Sachin, the man, the maestro, the messiah of cricket, is finally reduced to being a normal human being. Why, I ask, is he not able to perform to normal levels (forget supernatural)? And why, I ask, is he treated any differently from our erstwhile captain and still is kept in the team? Just because he is worshipped like God? Yes, I am sure you will say – after all, he “IS” God. But this God is not answering the prayers of his worshippers, and is slowly but surely turning them into atheists. Why does nobody have the courage to say that Sachin is not in his prime now, and needs to go gracefully – more at a time when people ask, “Why Sachin”, than “Why not Sachin”? A dangerous territory to tread into, but I guess somebody needs to speak fearlessly. And so, I ask this question.
Why does Greg not say the same thing that he said for Ganguly – being a part of the team is important for Sachin’s image & his finances? Is it true – as an advertising & marketing professional, let me say, it is indeed true. With his current form, he is unlikely to get any new endorsements, and once he goes away, the only ones hankering for him are likely to be the insurance/retirement fund companies. Yes, the magic of Sachin is fading and the advertising industry is quick to realize this – as I am sure Sachin has also starting figuring out. Though, he has, by all means, already made his mega-millions and may not have any need for more moolah. But who does not want to be idol-worshipped? And that’s where the human nature starts showing in Sachin.
When any player gets selected to play for his country, his first thought is to make a huge impact and win matches for his nation. All his energies go towards that. Records are just milestones that happen in course of play, and should not influence performance or selection beyond a level. However, the day performance starts dipping, the player realizes he has to improve or exit. Why should Sachin (who even I hold in the highest esteem) continue to play for the team, if he is genuinely not able to deliver? Shouldn’t he step aside and make way to others who are willing and able to play for the best interests of the team? Having played more tests for India than any other player, having scored more centuries than any other man in the world, I think Sachin has already a lot of records at his feet, and it is time for him to say goodbye. Two records will elude him in doing this – the maximum runs scored in tests (that is currently with Lara) and the maximum tests played for any country (which Steve Waugh holds). But in trying to reach for them, will he be doing his Godly-image any good?
Tuesday, March 14, 2006
The Lions get the Kangaroos in an unbelievable chase
The word impossible, as Napoleon Bonaparte said, is found in the dictionary of fools. And South Africa more than proved this Sunday that if anybody considered them fools, the thinker was living in fool’s paradise.
Wow! What a match? Though I missed all the live action as I did not remember that this match was on. It was only my best friend Varun’s ecstatic phone call after the match got over, that informed me that I had missed the mother of all battles in one-day cricket. If only the call had come after the first inning got over!
What can be said about such a contest? Unbelievable… in my opinion, only that word is apt. The final frontier has been breached (I can’t even imagine that this would be repeated at least in our lifetime) and history has been truly written this Sunday… and in very bold letters.
And that too when the world and his mother believed that Australia were on the way to win the series; South Africa did not have it in them to win any final contests.
Chokers! South Africans? Yes, yes.
Lion-hearted winners! Australians? Yes, yes.
No sir, I tell you not. The True Lions are the ones who reside in Africa, and despite the greatest leap they had taken barely four hours ago, finally the Aussies were reduced to being just kangaroos who must be hopping around in pain.
When India were chasing around 160 runs in 20 overs in the last ODI in Pakistan, nearly everybody believed that it was a mammoth task, and an average of 8 could not be sustained for so long. India did it nonetheless. But who would have thought that South Africa would chase almost 9 runs for 50 overs straight? And that too against Australia! I’m sure that you didn’t. I’m even more certain that none of the gamblers did, and everybody would have put his money on the Aussies after they notched up 434. And the bookies must now be laughing all the way to the bank.
C’mon Aussie, c’mon. What happened? Left speechless? Let me tell you what to say – my favourite phrase of Indian commentators – cricket is a game of glorious uncertainties! Though the one certainty that shall always be there is about the uncertain nature of cricket itself. I eat my words of last week, and happily so.
The one big winner of this match was South Africa. But mark my words – Australia lost the match, but they can definitely not be labeled losers. Not after you create a world record, howsoever short-lived. And as far as I am concerned, the biggest winner of this contest was the game of cricket.
Varun, I am sure, will recall the tales of this match to his grandchildren very, very fondly. I can almost hear him speak non-stop & as excitedly as ever.
Reminds me of a song that I heard a decade ago… I love this Game! I really love this Game!
Wow! What a match? Though I missed all the live action as I did not remember that this match was on. It was only my best friend Varun’s ecstatic phone call after the match got over, that informed me that I had missed the mother of all battles in one-day cricket. If only the call had come after the first inning got over!
What can be said about such a contest? Unbelievable… in my opinion, only that word is apt. The final frontier has been breached (I can’t even imagine that this would be repeated at least in our lifetime) and history has been truly written this Sunday… and in very bold letters.
And that too when the world and his mother believed that Australia were on the way to win the series; South Africa did not have it in them to win any final contests.
Chokers! South Africans? Yes, yes.
Lion-hearted winners! Australians? Yes, yes.
No sir, I tell you not. The True Lions are the ones who reside in Africa, and despite the greatest leap they had taken barely four hours ago, finally the Aussies were reduced to being just kangaroos who must be hopping around in pain.
When India were chasing around 160 runs in 20 overs in the last ODI in Pakistan, nearly everybody believed that it was a mammoth task, and an average of 8 could not be sustained for so long. India did it nonetheless. But who would have thought that South Africa would chase almost 9 runs for 50 overs straight? And that too against Australia! I’m sure that you didn’t. I’m even more certain that none of the gamblers did, and everybody would have put his money on the Aussies after they notched up 434. And the bookies must now be laughing all the way to the bank.
C’mon Aussie, c’mon. What happened? Left speechless? Let me tell you what to say – my favourite phrase of Indian commentators – cricket is a game of glorious uncertainties! Though the one certainty that shall always be there is about the uncertain nature of cricket itself. I eat my words of last week, and happily so.
The one big winner of this match was South Africa. But mark my words – Australia lost the match, but they can definitely not be labeled losers. Not after you create a world record, howsoever short-lived. And as far as I am concerned, the biggest winner of this contest was the game of cricket.
Varun, I am sure, will recall the tales of this match to his grandchildren very, very fondly. I can almost hear him speak non-stop & as excitedly as ever.
Reminds me of a song that I heard a decade ago… I love this Game! I really love this Game!
Saturday, March 04, 2006
Indian Curry delights England
What a beginning to the England tour of India! They lose their very astute captain Vaughan, and their vice captain Trescothick – both leading batsmen, well respected the world over for their devastating skill with the willow – even before the first ball is bowled in this series. And let’s not forget Simon Jones, England’s sultan of swing. So, what are we left with – a hastily cobbled up team including 3 debutantes, who have absolutely no wind of how the breeze blows in India. The only saving grace is that Flintoff – the man who loves his cricket as much as his country – is still well and is handed over the baton in the absence of Vaughan. And he still has a few good, though injured, warriors in the form of Pieterson & Collingwood. But can England beat India in India? Even if they had a full bench? And now, with a completely depleted team? What a hypothetical question, I tell you! Can the Sun rise from the West? Can the Earth stop to spin? I guess you got the answer.
So, when the two teams began the series to battle it out for the 2nd rating in the test teams rating, it was pretty much a foregone conclusion that the Indians would cream the English, and then even juice out the pulp. Any tea-stall runner would have told you this. I am sure the betting sites were doing zero business – who would bet on England? But that would have been till yesterday. Cricket, as they say, is a game of glorious uncertainties. I believe that’s a phrase that Indian commentators use mostly to cover up for their team’s goof-ups. But then, I could be wrong; and you too have a right to difference of opinion. However, facts speak for themselves.
Any spinner born the west side of the Nile can never even dream to make a dream debut against the Asians, and more specially the Indians. I am sure that a particular Sikh gentleman by the name of Monty Panesar only hoped to make a touristy visit to the land of his ancestors, when he was picked for this tour of India. To be given the ball in the very first match against a full-strength Indian side in their full stride would only mean that England was hoping to quickly make sure that this Indian-origin person would quickly go back to playing county cricket only. Right? Wrong!
If I ever played cricked for another country as a bowler, my biggest dream would be to bowl to Sachin Tendulkar and get his wicket. And to get that as my first International wicket – well, Guru Nanak Devji had to be really prasann with his putra to give him the divinity to do so. Sri Vahe Guruji da Khalsa; Sri Vahe Guruji di Fateh. Well, Monty bowled Full, and that’s exactly what happened – the Full Monty of Indian cricket is there to see for all. Should I say, Raj Karega Khalsa?
Who would have thought that this spinner would trouble the Indians the most, and take 2 prized wickets! I am not taking anything away from Hoggard here. To bowl on a dustbowl and get 6 wickets – that’s a feat that any pacer would be immensely proud of. And England have India on the mat thoroughly with a lead of 70 runs in the first inning. My God! Wasn’t it supposed to be the other way round? Where did we go wrong? Or is it more appropriate to ask, where did England go right?
All I can think of is that probably we got too complacent after Pakistan, and over-confident by the fact that England seemed like babes in the woods. But this Indian team has learnt its lessons fast and done course corrections faster. Hope that they would live up to the reputation & faith they’ve built over these past few months. Otherwise, Mr. Chappell will have to do some more work on this team, rather than lazily write columns in foreign newspapers about the worthiness of certain players, who he believes are bad news for this emerging Indian side. Or alternatively, he may just add a few more names to that column. Did I hear someone say Endulkar?
So, when the two teams began the series to battle it out for the 2nd rating in the test teams rating, it was pretty much a foregone conclusion that the Indians would cream the English, and then even juice out the pulp. Any tea-stall runner would have told you this. I am sure the betting sites were doing zero business – who would bet on England? But that would have been till yesterday. Cricket, as they say, is a game of glorious uncertainties. I believe that’s a phrase that Indian commentators use mostly to cover up for their team’s goof-ups. But then, I could be wrong; and you too have a right to difference of opinion. However, facts speak for themselves.
Any spinner born the west side of the Nile can never even dream to make a dream debut against the Asians, and more specially the Indians. I am sure that a particular Sikh gentleman by the name of Monty Panesar only hoped to make a touristy visit to the land of his ancestors, when he was picked for this tour of India. To be given the ball in the very first match against a full-strength Indian side in their full stride would only mean that England was hoping to quickly make sure that this Indian-origin person would quickly go back to playing county cricket only. Right? Wrong!
If I ever played cricked for another country as a bowler, my biggest dream would be to bowl to Sachin Tendulkar and get his wicket. And to get that as my first International wicket – well, Guru Nanak Devji had to be really prasann with his putra to give him the divinity to do so. Sri Vahe Guruji da Khalsa; Sri Vahe Guruji di Fateh. Well, Monty bowled Full, and that’s exactly what happened – the Full Monty of Indian cricket is there to see for all. Should I say, Raj Karega Khalsa?
Who would have thought that this spinner would trouble the Indians the most, and take 2 prized wickets! I am not taking anything away from Hoggard here. To bowl on a dustbowl and get 6 wickets – that’s a feat that any pacer would be immensely proud of. And England have India on the mat thoroughly with a lead of 70 runs in the first inning. My God! Wasn’t it supposed to be the other way round? Where did we go wrong? Or is it more appropriate to ask, where did England go right?
All I can think of is that probably we got too complacent after Pakistan, and over-confident by the fact that England seemed like babes in the woods. But this Indian team has learnt its lessons fast and done course corrections faster. Hope that they would live up to the reputation & faith they’ve built over these past few months. Otherwise, Mr. Chappell will have to do some more work on this team, rather than lazily write columns in foreign newspapers about the worthiness of certain players, who he believes are bad news for this emerging Indian side. Or alternatively, he may just add a few more names to that column. Did I hear someone say Endulkar?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)