The World Cup Returns Home

April 2^nd 2011, Mumbai – a piece of Indian cricketing history that will be cherished for years to come. Many of us have heard our parents talk about the 1983 World Cup triumph where Kapil Dev’s Dare Devils emerged from nowhere to stake their claims to be World Champions. It is a moment that has been talked about on every occasion and many of us wondered whether we can witness such a moment again. Now, finally, my generation has a World Cup memory of our own to boot about and the Men in Blue pulled off a fantastic victory in Mumbai to etch their names permanently in history.

India started off as the pre-tournament favourites but their reputation often preceded them wherever they went. We knew that we were among the top-3 in the tournament but winning was a different ball game – it was a habit that we had not yet acquired. Under Ganguly and now Dhoni, the Men in Blue were emerging out of their shadows but a World Cup victory – surely, you must be joking, we can’t do that but then sometimes, just sometimes dreams also find their way upto God’s conspiratorial schemes.

The Indian batting was the strongest of the lot but we also added the rider ‘on paper’ in hushed terms just as investment products carried a warning at the bottom of the document. In the group stages, we had beaten the minnows handsomely but struggled against England and South Africa. The England match got the fans and experts livid at our thread bare bowling resources – Zaheer was mean and lean but the remaining forty overs were almost like prayers to the Lord to rescue us. HE heard us and we just about survived a Strauss onslaught and came out battered but still undefeated but the South Africa match was a harsh reminder of what was in store for us.

The match against the Proteas was billed as the competition between the best batting and bowling teams in the tournament. Viru, Gambhir and Sachin battered the South African bowling attack and a 350 was in sight until the batsmen committed hara-kiri at the altar of the latest cricketing strategy calling ‘batting powerplay’ (batting powerplays seemed to be more like millstones around the neck of batting captains). The batsmen stumbled but bowlers and fielders dished out strong performance till the ultimate over from Nehra where 13 runs were conceded with ease. The shoulders drooped again, the critics drew their daggers out, the experts smirked at our capabilities while the whimsical Indian cricket fan started writing elegies and expecting the worst. The team then beat the ragtag Windies team which seemed just a shade better than the minnows but still a victory was still a victory.

The Quarter finals finally arrived after weeks of surprisingly robust 50 over games which drew crowds in decent numbers. For the first time in more than two decades, India was tipped to be the favourites to beat the Aussies. The Aussies looked like aging patriarchs playing from memory; with no McGrath, Warne, Hayden or Gilchrist, the team was at cross roads, almost akin to their predecessors in the early 80s. The experts said that this was the best time to beat them, they had no great match practice and looked jaded against the Pakis.

At Ahmedabad, there was drama of course when the great man Ponting worked his way to a fantastic century finally getting out to a reverse sweep (a shot which nobody had probably ever seen Ponting play); the champ was down but not yet out and he had preserved his fighting spirit for the tough games. The Indian batsmen started well, wobbled a bit, almost made heavy weather of the chase but thanks to Yuvaraj and Raina, they pulled off a tense but convincing victory. The cricketing Gods had finally said good bye to the once most powerful cricketing team on the planet and the World Cup awaited a new prince to be crowned.

The semi-final against Pakistan was arguably the most hyped spectacle in recent media history and office goers were glad to give their regular jobs a miss to be a part of history (?). It wasn’t a great cricketing match by any standards but if the team needed to play the toughest, most stressful match before the finals, this was it. Dhoni surprised everyone by replacing Ashwin with Nehra on a pitch that did not do much for seamers but Nehra pulled off a fantastic performance. Sachin played a rather forgettable blemished innings but still took home the Man of the Match. The batting almost collapsed till Raina played another small cameo to give the team a fighting total. The Pak team started well but they played into the pressure and were outclassed; the golden oldies Misbah and Younis strangely seemed to be playing in a game which had no bearing with the current one. Despite the odd flourish here and there, it was a comfortable win and India’s WC record of no losses against Pak remained intact.

The final opponents were the wonderful Sri Lankans led by the aristocratic, Oscar Wilde quoting captain, Kumar Sangakkara. The team had an excellent opening pair, an untested middle order and had the 3 feared Ms in their bowling lineup – Malinga, Murali and Mendis. Strangely, Mendis was rested for the finals and there were 3-4 new blokes all thrust into the finals of the World Cup. They were expected to play South Africa for a slot in the final but thanks to the Protean tendency for suicide, they had an easier outing into the final. It was an all Asian final and touted to be the closing finale for two legends of the game to bow out in glory.

The Men in Blue were striking all the right notes – the bowling was peaking when it mattered and the batsmen were doing well, though not necessarily doing full justice to their reputation. Yuvaraj’s excellent overall performance had strengthened the team immensely; Sachin was among the leading run getters of the WC and Zaheer Khan led the bowling figures. The fielding was a class apart from its normal abysmal standards and the presence of Kohli, Raina and Yuvaraj were saving close to 20 runs in every game.

The finals took off on a cautionary note with a dream first spell by Zak and a decent enough one by Sreesanth (another gambit by Dhoni). The Indian bowlers played all the right notes and a total within 250 seemed in sight until some swashbuckling hitting in the end overs of Zak took SL to an imposing total of 274 – a total never before chased in a World Cup final. Mahela Jayawardene played a silken, cultured, crafty knock full of touches and nudges, with no hint of any form of violence against the leather – it was a knock that was possibly destined to take the Lankans to the trophy except ofcourse it turned out to be unfortunately a piece of cricketing trivia as the only team to have lost despite scoring a century in the WC finals.

When Malinga polished the two stalwart Indian openers, the nation let out a collective gasp; had the Men in Blue flattered to deceive again? But two young men decided to attempt to change the script – young Gambhir and Kohli (he was born in the post-83 era) stuck to the crease, played with a cause and took the attack to the opposition but with no attempts at flamboyance. The fairy tale ended when Dilshan pulled off an excellent catch to dismiss Kohli and in walked the captain Dhoni (to everyone’s surprise). The captain was in no great form but he wanted to make a point to both himself and the world and he decided to take the attack to the opposition – a bold move which eventually won him laurels and us the game. They played Murali and Malinga with due respect, went after the others and the ploy worked – eventually, when Gambhir got out for a fighting 97, we were standing at the threshold of a famous victory. The batting powerplays and Malinga came to play but today they were ordained to win and they cruised at the end with Dhoni finishing off the match with a memorable six over long off.  

28 years is a long wait and the triumph is sweet and almost surreal. Ganguly had initiated the transformation but could not take it through to the final stage; Dhoni was the man destined to do the honours. He took risks, stuck to his instincts against all conventional logic and when the big moment arrived, he took the battle to the opposition. Even when the battle was won, he almost looked confused, unsure how to react and remained at the background in a rather understated way but few would doubt that he is the best ever Indian captain (a job arguably more demanding than the one Manmohan Singh has). My memories of Gary Kirsten at the crease were of a boring, unattractive work machine but the soft, unassuming coach returns to his family definitely a contented and a much admired man in India.  

The Men in Blue played for the nation and the Little Master – the man whom my generation has been privileged to watch right from his teens to where he is now. Virat Kohli expressed this sentiment beautifully when he said – Sachin has carried the burden of the nation for 21 years. It's time we carried him on our shoulders.

Thank you Sachin, Dhoni, Gary and the Men in Blue – the images well remain etched in our memories for a really long, long time. On a more sober note, two weeks back , Dhoni's boys were pilloried for being chokers and now they are National heroes. Such is life and its glorious uncertainties - when the going in on your side, the nation is rooting for you but when you are down in the dumps, they want to smell your blood. I'm sure Dhoni understands this feeling just too well...

FIFA World Cup 2010 - A Perspective

After 116 minutes of struggle, the underachievers, Spain, finally got the better of the other perpetual underachiever, Netherlands, to be crowned World Champions. The match was not a top draw one and until the latter part of the second half, no team seemed competent to break through the other’s defence. In a foul marred scrappy match (did the Dutch create a world record for the most carded team in a game?), Spain just managed to pip the Dutch to the post and win glory.

It was a commendable Dutch performance in terms of strategy, especially the strong defence (specifically Van Bommel and Mathijsen) but it wasn’t a pretty sight to see them ambush the Spaniards and reducing the game to a slugfest (can De Jong’s kungfu kick into Xabi qualify as anything else other than thuggish?). Their plan was to get up close and personal and they held out till the very end till the weight of the all those cards finally stopped them. The Oranjes would reckon that Arjen Robben should have put across the two simple chances and taken them to the trophy in normal time but the Spaniards too missed out on many opportunities until Iniesta finally managed to breach the Dutch goal. Spain was the better team but it was a pretty close fight (literally).

We deserved a better final after the wonderful Group Stage matches and even more entertaining 3rd place play-off but I am glad Spain won. If the Dutch had triumphed, it would have been bad for the game because there is no place for the way they approached the match.

Mahesh: I disagree this time around with the phrase that the best team won. On paper Spain (and Argentina) was one of the better teams, but per world cup showing, the best team was Germany, Nederland, and Uruguay.

A look at the top teams:

Spain

Pradeep: The La Furia Roja stepped into South Africa as the hot favourite and went all the way to the podium, in a spirited display of educated technical football. They started on a wrong footing stumbling to Switzerland and were patchy at times (as in the Paraguay match) but did well to grind most of their opponents and win through their superior ball possession skills. For all practical purposes, La Roja is the Barcelona team, sans Messi and their success in the last couple of years mirrors the success that Barcelona has been enjoying. The Spaniards, with their pressing strategy, played with immense patience ensuring that in all the games their ball possession was superior to their opponent. The semi-final with Germany was a lesson in clinical football where the Germans were outclassed by a classy team. The team is well balanced with the most creative midfield (Iniesta, Xavi and Xabi) in modern football and a strong defence (Puyol, Piquet and Sergio Ramas). They did not score too many goals but their phenomenal ball possession meant that the opposition was always defending, with very few chances to gain control of the match as Germany realised. Of course, it is unusual for a World Cup winner to score to just 7 goals (despite high levels of ball possession); for all the creativity displayed in the midfield, they just do not seem to have a great finisher (which Messi does for Barcelona). They may have been a tad lucky at times but then surely, Dame Luck needed to smile a bit to crown the best team in the World Cup.

Mahesh: They were lucky. Out of the 10 players starting the game 9 are from Real Madrid or Barcelona ( Torres plays for Liverpool and CapDe Villa plays for some Spanish team:Valencia or Sevilla. not too sure). Even better was the semi-finals and finals where Torres was benched and Pedro brought in (another Barcelona product). Swiss actually played in a very efficient and organised way, thus beating Spain. It became such an embarrassment that Spain was just playing possession game for the rest of the tournament. I would have loved to see them play some attacking football. Again just my views, but Spain did not deserve to win the cup this time ard..

Outstanding Players: Xavi, Villa and Iniesta.

Germany

Pradeep: They came, they saw, they conquered but sadly only the hearts of the people and not the Cup. The German team, under Joachim Low, played eye-catching entertaining football (in continuation with Klinsmann’s attacking style started in FIFA 2006) and taught Latin America a lesson or two in Joga Bonito. In almost all the games, they managed to score early and hold on to their lead till the mid of second half and then slaughtered the tired opposition by their relentless attacking. The young, multi-ethnic team won many fans for their open and counter attacking football (Socrates called them the true successors to the legendary 1970 Brazilian team) but were stopped by the tactical efficiency of the Spaniards. The free flow of the Germans was literally choked by the spectacular Spanish midfield and lost the battle comprehensively (even though the score line of 1-0 may suggest otherwise). Give the ball to the Germans and they are all over the place and so the Spaniards just cut off their oxygen (did the Germans actually have 51% possession of the ball!!!) and got them to play in closed tactical manoeuvres which starved them. The young brigade of Muller, Oezil, Khedira were finds while the old warhorses- Schweinsteiger (not exactly old at 26!!!), Klose and Podolski- gave excellent support. The young team has raised high hopes and FIFA 2014 could see the team at their peak.

Mahesh: German teams have always been bull ones and they just push and shove around the park and I hate them. Surprisingly this time around they played some scintillating football. May be the new generation. but it was fun to watch them play, although I still hate them as they defeated England and Argentina ( the two teams that I cheer for). More than Mueller's absence,Joachim Low let them down in the semis with poor strategy. He very well knew how the Spanish are going to play and instead of starting with Trochowski (who is more defensive), he should have started with another striker Gomez, to really supplement Klose.. Reverting back to the 4-4-2 variation rather than having a 4-3-2-1 variation. This would have strengthened their midfield and cut the Spanish passing. Else they should have done a 4-5-1 variation which Swiss did effectively to nullify Spain.. Low actually put them in a no man's land.

Argentina

Pradeep: Right from the beginning, the football was only about Maradona and Messi and remained the same way till the end. They attacked well in the league stage against smaller opponents and though Messi did not score, he was the main playmaker. Their initial games raised a few hopes of Latino magic but it was always going to be a tall order for an Argentinian team that struggled in the qualifiers and just about sneaked through in the play-offs. In the Q/F, they were however whipped by the Germans and played the price for a defence that never existed. Messi received practically no support with the exception of Tavez who was running across all over the pitch; they seemed such a rusty outfit against the well-oiled German machine and were simply dismantled by their opponents. Maradona is no great strategist and he simply relied on the players to just go out and deliver (being a genius makes it difficult to understand trivialities like team strategies) but the team were nowhere near the class of the previous WC team which had the likes of Crespo, Messi, Saviola, Veron and most importantly, Riquelme (who refused to play under Maradona and retired). There was over dependence on Messi to deliver but the Argentinan midfield was no Barcelona and simply gave way to Schwenstiger and his boys who controlled the area with absolutely no difficulty whatsoever. The defence was always the pain area and while it was ok to play that way in the league games this way, better opponents would have hit them in this area.

Mahesh: My team is Argentina.. Simple logic and everyone has been pointing this out to the Diego Maradona (greatest ever player) that he cannot play Central Defenders on the Full back positions.. One of the teams were going to rip them apart and it turned out to be Germany... Lesson learnt for Diego as he has an extended four year term now..

Brazil

The current Brazilian team may not possess the same elan of their illustrious predecessors but Jogo Bonito has been conspicuously missing since the late 80s anyway. Dunga’s boys were joint favourites with Spain; they played pragmatically and had a similar approach as the Spanish in controlling the ball (strategy not implementation, mind you) but were outwitted by the Dutch in a game that were theirs to win (atleast till the Dutch struck their first goal). The dominating game in the first half was suddenly lost and they seemed to suddenly mentally disintegrate and hand the match over to Netherlands. A slight defence lapse with some bad luck thrown in (Sneijder’s goal) and suddenly, the team looked lost for ideas. Kaka struggled throughout and Robinho seemed the only player capable of pulling off a goal; though the defence was strong, the midfield did not create much of an impression. Surprisingly, one of the most talented teams in the world did not seem to have enough bench strength in the WC to make things happen and they were waiting for the opponents to make mistakes than create chances.

Netherlands

Pradeep: Holland has always been the delicate underperformer whose style endured them to the public but victory always eluded them. Successive teams always faced comparison with the ‘Total Football’ of Cryuff and Neeskens but this Oranje team was not the most brilliant team from Holland or even in the World Cup. And yet the Dutch produced some of the positive football that has brought them this far in South Africa. They played as a team brushing aside the constant rumours of inner team conflicts relying on a hard, straight; physical game. In most games, the Dutch sparkled in the second half with the likes of Arjen Robben, Sneijder and Kuyt emerging as the key men, along with Van Bommel as a key defensive cog. Their play in the final may not have earned them too many admirers but it was effective and they managed to control the Spanish Armada and almost took the game away from them. In the semis, they stunned Brazil with a strong counter attack and forced them to lose their cool and the match, unlike the Spaniards. Robben would rue his missed chances in the final but with eight yellow cards, 14 shots to Spain's 21, 28 fouls to their 19 and 37% possession, Spain was the better team.

Mahesh: My teams of the tournament. They were brilliant in all the games and had the energy, willingness and patience to win the finals. Wonderfully, controlled Spain during the game. People would say that getting an Yellow card is bad, but depends on the foul. Except for Robben, I would say all the cards that they received were good ones. Unfortunately, they tried one too many and Heitinga got sent off... Remember Spain only scored after he was sent off.. Robben should have won the game, but somehow he missed it.. they were brave.. Lets see in Euro 2012...

England

Well it is a pity that Rooney did not play well.. I was surprised to see that Rooney was playing in a non-committed fashion. He never went for the 50-50 balls, rather than playing he was okay to make the defender clear the ball and the most surprising thing was he was not effective with one on one marking. I have literally watched all his games for United last season and this is very unlike him..Without him England was no where near to their best.

Uruguay

Cheaters, deceivers, etc.. whatever u want to call them,  they played some good team football.. Spain was the only other team who played as a team... Unlucky to progress but Nederland's were too much for them..

A few observations:

1. The Golden Boot should be given to Paul, the Octopus. By the time we had come to the semis, it looked like the punters had more faith in the German octopus than the actual performers. Rumours abound that Paul would be adopted by Spain and rechristened-Pablo.

2. The Vuvuzela was supposed to be the African equivalent of the Mexican wave but all it was to drown the voices of everything around. It was irritating that you could not get to hear the commentators on TV and everytime you increased the volume, the buzzing just increased.

3. The Jabulani (the Zulu word means ‘to celebrate’) ball manufactured by Adidas was criticized by everyone with Fabiano calling it “supernatural” but the Germans who have already adopted the ball for their domestic league had no complaints and kept slamming the ball into the nets. Incidentally, it seems the ball has an Indian connection - the bladder at the core of the Jabulani is made by Enkay Rubber in a factory in Gurgaon, using latex sourced from Kerala (this is not Manorama news!!)

4. The referees played spoil sport and allowed players to dive with impunity (Arjen Robben needs a special mention for his skills) and whipped up cards for no specific reasons other than itchy hands. FIFA’s reluctance may have costed England and Mexico dear (personally, I think England was anyway 2nd best to Germans on the day but why give the cry babies a chance to complain), especially with the whole world watching live on TV. They can learn a techno trick or two from cricket and tennis.

5. The stars were non-starters and were prominent on the papers than the field. Superstars like Ronaldo, Rooney, Kaka and Torres were sadly in another Time Zone and only served as liabilities for the team. Messi may not have scored but he played a role in almost all Argentina’s attempts.

6. The free kick was a non-starter. No one other than Forlan was able to pull off a free kick with any conviction (Jabulani????) and it made sense to indulge in passing than clearing the goal with fancy attempts but it still did not deter teams from attempting it.

7. The gap between the bigger and the smaller teams in increasingly reducing. The Asian Bloc gave a credible performance while Slovakia, Ghana, Uruguay and Chile provided unexpected excitement. France and Italy were knocked out remorselessly without even the pretense of a fight while England limped to the pre-quarters where Germany showed them their place (albeit with FIFA’s help).

My Tournament Favourites

Team: Germany
Player(s): Iniesta, Xavi (Spain) and Diego Forlan (Uruguay)
Future Prospect: Thomas Muller (Germany)
Game: Germany 4-1 England (Pre-Quarter-finals)
Goal: David Villa (Spain v Honduras), Diego Forlan (Uruguay v Netherlands/Semi final)

It's King Vishy Again

On May 11^th at about 10 pm IST, when Veselin Topalov shook hands with Viswanathan Anand at the end of Game-12 of the World Chess Championship on May 11th, the Indian Chess King successfully defended his Crown, a feat beautifully compared by Amit Verma in a nice little article to a guy taking a Maruti 800 into a Formula 1 race and winning the championship. It was tougher than his previous three wins and the effort showed as the grand finale swung through various tumultuous rounds of tension before the more patient man among the two finally won his way through.

Most of India was glued to the TV set watching Dhoni’s boys, oblivious of the match being played but then Chess has never been much of a media favourite, though the sport is much more popular now when compared to its status years back when Anand played Alexey Dreev in Madras, in his first major stab at the Championship.

Anand was the slight pre-match favourite, but there was never much to choose between the two men. At 40, he was the aging champion against the relatively younger and tough talking Topalov, who had a one point lead over Anand in Classical Chess.

The pre-game interviews had the Bulgarians ranting against Anand on many an occasion - for being too old (just 5 yrs older than Topalov, of course), too conservative and trying to trick the organisers by pretending he was in Sofia and attempting to postpone the games by his lousy travel plans. He was also riled for not doing enough to ensure that the Championship was held in India, instead of Bulgaria; Topalov has repeatedly maintained that for him "home" is a disadvantage because of the expectations. In Topalov’s words:

The prize fund in our match is 2 million Euro - about 3 million US $ - but if Anand would have made even a minor attempt, it could easily go over 5 million. India is a vast market and Anand is very popular in his homeland. But the World Champion preferred that someone else does all the work and even play the victim. 'Well, you see, I prefer not to play in Bulgaria, but there are no other options.' We were prepared to play in India half the games or even the whole match, but Anand didn't make even the slightest effort to arrange anything about this.

The significance of a venue now is debatable, unlike in the Cold War era, when the Russian-American geo-political rivalries also manifested themselves on chess boards. As mentioned in an earlier post, it was not because Anand did not lift his finger that the match did not come to India. The match was held in Bulgaria (even though the Bulgaria bid is only 13 crore) because the AICF could not get any sponsor; Vishy wanted the match to be held in India but with practically no interest shown by India, the bid was won by Bulgaria. N Srinivasan was busy taking care of Chennai Super Kings to worry about a small event like the World Chess Championship, featuring a local hero.

Bad Boy Topalov, true to form, decided to push the ante even before the play started. In 2005, a rule was framed banning conversation between players to curb the practice of competitors' offering each other draws in drawn-out games. But the rule has been rarely invoked, but Topalov insisted that he would not speak to India’s Viswanathan Anand, invoking this rule. Topalov also stuck to what is known as the Sofia rule in chess where if you need a draw you have to go to the chief arbiter and not offer it to your opponent. Anand had dismissed Topalov's rule saying, "A world championship should be played with world championship rules" but had no option and later on admitted in an interview later that it felt odd to be approached by the arbiter to accept a draw.

The starting date had been the subject of a week of argument after Anand became stranded at Frankfurt airport due to the Eyjafjallajökull volcanic ash cloud over Europe and requested a three-day delay. The volcanic eruption in Iceland disrupted Team Anand's travel schedule but somehow brought the team which was scattered all over, together at Frankfurt before they embarked on an adventurous journey from Frankfurt to Sofia in a hired bus travelling for 2000 kms, across five countries in 40 hours. In the end, the match was delayed by a single day with Topalov playing White in the first game.

But then Topalov has always found it tough to be a gentleman in a sport, which has had a fair share of odd balls. He had earlier raised a tantrum in the 2006 Fide World Chess Championship against Vladimir Kramnik, accusing his Russian opponent of visiting his personal loo too often during play (it was popularly called the Toiletgate). The Russian rejected a compromise of a shared lavatory, accused the organisers of bias, and even forfeited a game before finally winning the game in tie-break.

After all this, when the game started, it took off on a dramatic note with Anand forgetting his opening preparation and being duly demolished by an attacking Topalov. Anand bounced back immediately with a win and what followed were a set of closely fought games, which increasingly exhausted the players. With Topalov invoking the Sofia rule, draws were not easy (something that Anand was not used to since he believes in quick draws in dead positions) and seemed that Topalov had an upper hand in most of the exchanges. Anand had a few more chances but the pressure was enormous and the play suggested that Toplaov had the momentum with him as he tied down Anand with his fighting abilities.

Then came the decisive and dramatic final game against the run of play which might have been won and lost by Topalov’s aggression and maybe superstition! Topalov admitted after Tuesday's loss that he had avoided a repetition draw on move 26 because he was afraid of going to the rapid tie breaks. Partly because Anand is one of the great rapid players of all time, but also because the tiebreakers were to be played on Thursday the 13^th. And the 13^th was the same day that he had lost his rapid tiebreakers against Kramnik in 2006.

Vishy is known for his rapid chess playing abilities and so it was a bit surprising to see him lag behind Topalov in every match in terms of the time. But then chess circles also know Topalov as somebody who plays fast to trick his opponent – part of his psychological warfare. It involved a bit of bluffing and taking the fight to the enemy camp and a lot of strategizing.

In an interview with The Hindu, Anand admits being surprised by Topalov’s strategy - One of the things we assumed was, he always likes moving around in matches. This means, he'll play an opening for a couple of games and then move on to the next one. His match strategy in the past was never to stand his ground. Kind of hit-and-run strategy. So, whether consciously or sub-consciously, we had made this assumption the basis of our preparation. But he stood his ground. He did not switch his openings.

Followers of the sport may recollect the 1995 PCA World Chess Championship Final between Anand and Kasparov in New York, to understand the impact of psychological warfare in the sport. After eight successive draws, Anand had drawn first blood but Kasparov struck back with extreme ferocity. Game-10 showed Kasparov at his fiery best tactically as well as psychologically – so you saw him glaring hard at Anand, slamming doors, walking swiftly and creating an terrifying aura around him. Anand lost the match and the finals and Kasparov declared after the match that Anand had been well prepared for the chess, but not sufficiently prepared psychologically.

Much water has flown under the bridge since then and the young man is now a much mature player, who has learnt to handle the pressure of performing at the top for close to 10-15 years now. Topalov had his strategy cut out and definitely put across a brilliant effort in ensuring that the Championship was a well-fought see-saw battle and what eventually separated the King from the Vanquished was his aggressive and blustering indiscretions, as he tried to force a win. Topalov may go back ruing his move but his success has been largely brought about his ability to take risks and play aggressively and there are times when the gambit just fails and it happened finally in the most crucial match of the final.

In a sport where odd balls are the norm rather than the exception, Anand is a living proof that nice guys can finish first and he is the game’s best World Champion ambassador. Can we take a break from analyzing the antics of Dhoni's over-hyped team and celebrate the success of a true champion atleast now?

P.S. The next challenger to Anand in 2011 will be one among the following players – Veselin Topalov, Gata Kamsky, Levon Aronian, Boris Gelfand, Magnus Carlsen, Vladimir Kramnik, an organizer nominee and the runner-up of the Fide Grand Prix. The 19 year old World No.1, Magnus Carlsen (earlier trained by Kasparov), is already tipped to be a future World Champion and it would be interesting to see the Crown Prince battling the King in future - a position that Anand may have found himself when squaring off with Kasparov!!!

Let the Sleeping Watchdogs Lie

The One Man Army has finally been shown the door. After years of flaunting his power in the erstwhile halo corridors of the Indian cricket establishment, the Big Boys decided that it is time to stop the circus and let the Wise Old Men step in. So, outgoes showman Lalit Modi and incomes Amin, backed by a coterie of unsuspecting BCCI honchos, who slept when Indian cricket burnt. Nothing has changed; the main conman has been shown the door while the architects of the circus, watch amusedly at how they have effectively brought in IPL under their control.

Lalit Modi had made enough foes in the last few years as he strode over the map of IPL, brandishing his powers as a third world dictator, forgetting that what goes round comes around. Three years ago Jagmohan Dalmiya was hounded out from the BCCI over charges of corruption and embezzlement. Among his detractors, Modi was the shrillest, announcing on one occasion that Dalmiya would be sent to jail. Modi has now been dumped even more unceremoniously, and the charges against him are far more severe. Among other things he has been accused of fixing the auctions; of creating slush funds; manipulating broadcast deals and many more things.

The media is gleeful and there are obituaries about the man who sometime back was a knight in the shining armour – a man who changed the face of Indian cricket and hailed as a champion of the big brand called IPL. The moment Modi is axed, the Government says that there is nothing to probe against Sharad Pawar and Praful Patel and the focus would primarily be on Modi only – everyone wants a Fall Guy, and we have one, actually two – an ex-Foreign Minister, who was driven out.

BCCI honcho Shashikant Manohar says:

Now most of the contracts have been entered into without the consent of the governing council and they’ve been brought to the governing council after the contract was signed.

Ok, Picture this now - One man sits in the IPL office, conducts auctions, draws contracts, awards it to his people and makes money. After all the hard work of corruption is done, the papers are brought to the IPL Governing Council (Governing what????) and the Wise Men sign over the dotted lines of the contract, without batting an eye lid. Smart guys, they now that Collective Responsibility is not applicable in BCCI Constitution and in case anything goes wrong, all they have to do is point fingers.

You have 3 cricketers in the council, who are rubber stamps and have absolutely no idea what is happening – maybe they are simply naïve; after all you can’t call Gavaskar, Shastri and Pataudi corrupt or incompetent? The very idea of bringing them into such a Council would be to bring about a greater legitimacy to the its workings and provide a certain amount of checks and balances to such a system. But if it did not even read the contract or debate it, what the heck did this glorified council do - Make money by doling out contracts to Modi's kith and kin???

But then we must not forget that it is a nice little cosy club out there. BCCI Secretary N Srinivasan owns Chennai Super Kings, Gavaskar and Shastri have commentary contracts with BCCI and the IPL, the chairman of the national selection committee Srikanth is a brand ambassador for CSK. And this is what is publicly known. Practically, everyone has a close political association – If Congress has Rajiv Shukla, BJP has Arun Jaitley and you have the invisible hands of Sharad Pawar controlling many more stakes. Last week, Times Now has reported that in the previous season, BCCI awarded 5 million to the semi-finalists. Cool, right!!! Srinivasan transfers money from BCCI’s coffers to his and we call it ‘conflict of interest’ – whose interest??

Now, BCCI is a chameleon which keeps switching between being a public body and a private body as and when it wants. When a demand is put forth to bring in more accountability and bring BCCI under the ambit of Tight to Information, it suddenly becomes a private body, which cannot be questioned but when the same body asks for tax waiver or the right to control cricket in India, it becomes a public body working in the interests of Indian fans!!! In reality, BCCI is a registered society under an obscure law in Tamil Nadu and has de-facto control over cricket in India, without any legislation or form of accountability. It receives enormous benefits and concessions from Governments, buys land at throw away prices and gets tax exemptions for selling national interest. 

You must commend the role of media in this IPL Show. They praise Lalit Modi, go overboard in selling the IPL Brand, sitting mum over the so-called “conflicts of interest” and instances of corruption for so many years and suddenly, there is that smug WE TOLD YOU grin. There are stories of how Modi literally controlled Rajasthan, fixed deals and created a crony capitalistic regime in IPL – but why was the media silent all this while? Many of these facts exist in public domain but not a single query was raised so far on all this. The media was seduced by the big money, parties and prime time entertainment and the watchdog just slept through this spectacle till the tweet war between Tharoor and Modi shook things up.

Watch how Arnab Goswami (my pick of the worst of the English journalist showmen) grimaces and questions the legitimacy of all the deals done in IPL, casually dropping in a match fixing query and being so indignantly self-righteous. It is ridiculous that after shamelessly, blindly and unquestionably backing Modi and the IPL, media men start the demonizing act so fast without a qualm for journalistic impropriety (something only reserved for Shashi Tharoor, it would seem).

The Times of India, which is the first to cover every event on the planet, reports today that the BCCI claims that there is no conflict of interest in N Srinivasan’s ownership of CSK because he had informed the then BCCI president, Sharad Pawar about it. How convenient!!! Don’t you even to ask them how silly and ridiculous such a claim is!!! Our press friends paint the town red accusing Modi of running a parallel administration in Rajasthan, with the help of Vasundhararaje, but when the same man is at the helm of IPL, they do not see the same avarice, the same conceit and the same schmuck around him.

When franchisees were putting in an absurd amount of money without any clear indicators of great returns in the future, why was the media silent? If the IPL contract says that franchisee holdings must not be disclosed, isn’t there a reason to suspect that something is amiss here? Bangalore is suffering from massive power cuts but as the city reels under the shocking power situation, the Chinnaswamy stadium is flood-lit so that IPL matches can be held using subsidized power. The Government gets a pittance to provide security to the players and even has the gall to waive off the entertainment tax (though in the same breath, it argues that farmers cannot be waived loans entirely). So, there are two sets of rules for two different sets of people and the watchdogs do not give a damn!!!

Suddenly, no one wants to talk about Shashi Tharoor and Sunanda Pushkar – a couple of convenient news items who have been dropped now, since there are no more leaks available about them. In Shashi Tharoor’s case, there was a potential case of misappropriate behaviour and maybe even corruption, but most of it remained accusations which were never substantiated. The mere fact that there is a woman does not automatically translate into sleaze, sex and drugs – a story so fondly carried home by the media. Since his resignation, there is practically no news about the two and after Amin took over, the channels have also gone silent – they have a new story now about Madhuri Gupta spying scandal and the old story is no longer appealing.

So, Congress has the moral high ground by choosing to throw out a minister on the basis of suspicion while Raja, the charge sheeted (not tweet accused, mind you) minister, stays on because he has enough backing. BJP hollers on Tharoor but remains mum when greater evidence is brought to the fore against NCP ministers and their people. When the political establishment has its hand in practically every pie of the sports administration, is it inevitable that the sport starts stinking? Stories of match fixing may not be true but they gain credence primarily because people lose faith in the way the game is run – so every match is fixed and every cricketer is a two-timer.

Personally, I give two hoots for IPL and do not care what happens to it but the future of cricket in India is now sub-twined with it. If the administration were to cut down on the frills and the mindless vaudeville and concentrate on the game, it has a future - forget the national level cricketers, atleast the others get a chance to play and make a future for themselves. But the brand needs credibility and the need is to have a professionally managed body for cricket, which is transparent and run with a high degree of accountability. When the match fixing scandal broke out, it gave the BCCI an opportunity to clean its stables but after a few peripheral changes, nothing ever changed.

Modi has been cut to size by the Grand Old Men of the Game and how does it help the sport? All that has happened is that one layer has been peeled off and another layer has been carefully pasted across, without altering anything at all. There will be a small talk of transparency and public interests but after some time, it will disguise itself in a new avatar and be served to us again in all its nauseating glory– after all, the show must go on!!!

P.S. Incidentally, N Srinivasan also heads AICF - All India Chess Federation - and since his takeover, the federation has practically been inactive. The Anand-Topalov World Championship Match is currently being held in Bulgaria (even though the Bulgaria bid is only 13 crore) because the AICF could not get any sponsor. Vishy wanted the match to be held in India but with practically no interest shown by India, the bid was won by Bulgaria. Clearly, the Chess World Championship is not worth the money for the CSK boss. 


Image Courtesy - http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?265180

The Case of the Missing Pakistanis

Diplomacy is a tough nut to crack, especially when the issue is an Indo-Pak issue. It takes a small snub (even imaginary) for the so called peace between India and Pakistan to shred. Every “window of opportunity” opens both ways – either into chaos or peace and inevitably, it is the chaos that makes it mark when it comes to our grand relationship with our neighbours. Lalit Modi, Vice-President of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) runs this cash cow called IPL, which incidentally also indulges in cricket as a major past time and is now single-handedly responsible for hijacking India-Pakistan relations!!!

The IPL-3 issue that is being treated as a setback to Indo-Pak diplomacy is at best a business decision where the franchisees who put in the money decided to hedge their bets, play safe and not risk bringing in Pakistani cricketers. Sure, they could have been more taut and diplomatic and put up an honest face saying that looking at the state of affairs in the sub-continent, they were not too keen on promoting Aman ki Aasha here. Isn’t this a rational decision where investors with limited money put in the money, keeping in mind the maximization of their returns?

But then cricket in India’s been a simple game – it is a kind of diplomatic chessboard where every guy has a word on how to play one’s moves. The Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) claims that the move was a deliberate snub by India and that the Modi must apologize for hurting the sentiments of thousands of Pakistanis. The way I see it, the IPL and India have made fun of us and our country by treating us this way," Afridi said. 'I am very disappointed,' said all-rounder Abdul Razzaq. 'This is a conspiracy to malign us... It was their plan.' Pakistan Sports Minister Jhakhrani told Indian Sports Minister M.S. Gill that it was 'utterly disappointing that not a single Pakistani was auctioned for the cash lucrative IPL'.

The Government also decided to put in feeble comments on how eager they were all to watch the Pakistani players and how Modi and Co had missed this window of opportunity. Rediff reports - Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is believed to be extremely upset -- some say even livid -- over the manner in which Indian Premier League boss Lalit Modi has ensured that Pakistan players are kept out of the latest edition of the Twenty20 extravaganza. The Indian PM actually spoke, without asking for madam’s instructions!!!! Wish he explained what window of opportunity is it that has been squandered? Maybe it’s time we had a few cricketers to handle our foreign affairs – would be so much easier to shut down terrorist camps and bring about peace.

Union Minister for Youth and Sports M.S. Gill said I trust, that the IPL corporate owners of cricket, have also taken a small lesson, from all this. Everyone must realize, that sports are the bedrock, of people-to-people contact, which we need to promote, with our neighbours. Can someone remind him to try and resolve the sad state of affairs facing hockey in India, with the impending World Cup in February, instead of promoting world peace? Women’s hockey is in a worse situation and the Commonwealth is around the corner but we have left it to the Gods to complete the work on time.

Earlier, Home Minister P Chidambaram had also chided the IPL franchisees, saying the franchisees had done a "disservice" to the game by ignoring the Pakistani players. Chidambaram said the cricket lovers were disappointed by the franchisees' behaviour and felt the entire controversy was avoidable. Of course, if there are any untoward events that would happen, don’t expect the government to gear up to handle the situation? SRK (trying to sound more intelligent than Aamir) chipped in that saying it is sad that Pakistani players were not picked for the event but also adds that such a climate needs to be created for Pakistani players to play (since such a climate does not exist, why the so-called feeling of humiliation at not inviting them?)

The Home Ministry says that there has been a greater outbreak of hostilities lately and the chances of terrorist activities have grown multi-fold in the recent past? Under such circumstances, if some terrorist activity were to happen, what would be the reactions of Indians and Pakistanis here? Can the government promise that Pakistani players would be safe here under any circumstances and protect them (and even Aussies now) from the madness of Shiv Sainiks, who know that they can make the ugliest of remarks and exhibit violence against anyone Bal Thackeray points at and get away with it because the spineless government cannot stop these buffoons?

Skipping an IPL is a snub to Pakistani cricket and has damaged it, says sources. So, if a handful of players make millions, would Pakistani cricket actually be better off? The Pakistani players ignored at the auction were justified in feeling humiliated because they were obviously not judged on merit. But they could have also handled it quietly and taken the moral higher ground but then that’s clearly asking too much from them. By taking measures like cancellation of the visit to India by parliamentarians and the election commissioner and making calls to boycott all sports events scheduled to be held in India, they have merely aggravated the issue.

The IPL is just an investment for the parties who have put crores into it and want to play it safe? How different is it if a private entity decides to start a company in India and decides to play safe and cut all risks. If there were to be a situation like a 26/11 again, will the franchises be able to play the Pakistanis in India (After all, the same Pakistan Governemnt banned its players from playing in IPL-2 stating the same reason)? So, the franchises took a practical call that having Pakistani players in their sides could lead to potential problems. But judging by reactions, the franchises have in one stroke hurt Indo-Pak relations, insulted cricket fans worldwide, embarrassed the country and even brought India and Pakistan to a potential war (What the Mumbai terror attacks could not achieve — an Indo-Pak war — this fresh row could well do that – yes, Pradeep Magazine actually wrote that in The Hindustan Times!!!)

Cricket has, unfortunately, this wonderful responsibility to bring world peace and people still dream that it will bring people together. I must confess that I harboured such thoughts at the height of the Agra Summit hype but as time passes, I have stopped allowing myself to indulge in such inane fantasies. The IPL is a commercial enterprise run by a group of savvy businessmen who can see the fiscal potential of the game; attributing larger virtues of brotherhood is simply foolhardy.

A Perfect 20

The 20-20 World Cup is over and against all odds, India actually pulled off an amazing victory. The triumph was well deserved and we beat all the teams in the competition to emerge victorious. This is something that Dhoni and the boys can be clearly proud of; after all, 20-20 or 50-50, a World Cup is a World Cup.

There have been many cynics of this format (me included). My father used to call it the Gilli Danda version of cricket and we both cursed the administrators for coming up with another slam bang idea. But far from being a slogger's game, the game has actually shown bowlers in better light.

After all, victories were pulled off by teams due to the bowling prowess of Umar Gul, R P Singh, Clarke and the rest, dispelling all the notions of this being a Batsman's game. Even, somebody like Afridi did so much more with the ball than the bat!!!!

There is no doubt that cricket won more than anything else. Spectator patience is low and producing a result in three hours is definitely a great USP for the format. The game is not very different from the regular ODI format, except for the free hit rule, possibly.

Nor are the boundaries any shorter, as it was assumed it might be before the tournament began. The only thing that has actually changed is the ability to take risk, which increases dramatically in this version.

The 20-20 version has seen the most accurate bowling in recent times and yorkers being bowled regularly (Recollect the number of batsmen bowled in the tournament). It requires greater accuracy from the bowlers and many of them have shown the ability to deliver.

The overall strategy has not changed much; the Indian strategy remained keeping wickets within the first 5-6 overs and slogging at the end. The best team still won the tournament and it did not result in any bunny cricket.

Will this affect the other forms of the game? I don't think so. A three hour format is a greater threat to movies than to the one day form. Test cricket has a niche audience and they will not be weaned away by this. One day cricket is exciting and still remains a sponsor's dream, with the large number of advertising spots available.

What this could do is to increase the chances that cricketers get to play the game. How about 3 different sets of teams now? There have been other experiments with the game like double wicket which have faded but 20-20 is clearly to stay, primarily because it does not interfere with the actual fabric of the game.

The one day format when introduced in the early 70s was scoffed at but it has survived all the criticism. Gavaskar may have scored 36* in 60 overs but just before retiring he scored one the fastest hundreds in the World Cup (of 82 balls, a far cry from Afridi's record of 37 balls,of course). Even, the traditionalists can come around if the game provides all the thrills which seems to be the case, as initial evidence shows.

Yes, we have won and the country is celebrating - well almost, except for the hockey team. The BCCI can provide $3 million to the cricketers but should the state generously award these cricketers from the money we pay in taxes. With the funds there in the game and outside it, does it actually have to splurge it on cricketers?

No wonder the hockey team is upset to receive this form of state sponsored neglect. Also upset are the people who were stuck in the traffic jam on Thursday because the team was dancing its way to glory!!!

One thought on the finals - Shoaib Malik's comments during the awards ceremony was in bad taste. I don't believe he actually said - Sorry to all Pakistanis and Muslims in the world for losing the match. I did not realise even the current Pakistani generation is so short-sighted, considering the team as a representative of Muslims worldwide.

So what should Irfan Pathan have said when he won the Man of the Match - I am thankful to all Indian Muslims for supporting me??? That one second, I felt so glad that we remain Indians at heart and that victory for Dhoni is not a Hindu victory, whatever Malik may think...

We have a tough Australian series coming up and I hope the audience and the media support them just as they did now. It does not take much of an effort for a fickle audience to change its feelings; Dhoni would do well to recollect that his house was stoned and effigy was burnt when we crashed out the 50-50 World Cup.....

Dump the crazy Indian Fan

Picture courtesy: http://www.melvindurai.com/images/Cricket.jpg

Sport is a very complex animal; it arouses extreme emotions/passions among people which when uncontrolled, can be difficult to handle. Who better than the Indian cricket team can confirm the extent to which this works? From being world beaters and tigers to paper tigers happens all so fast that it requires a realty good psychologist to convince our cricketers to stay cool without worrying too much.

What do we (in India ) do if we win tournaments- we build temples, worship our heroes and when we lose, we demolish houses, burn effigies, stage protests and do what not. Theoretically, all sport is supposed to create a sense of cameraderie among people who play and cherish the higher values of the game but modern sport has consigned all such thoughts to the dustbin. The only thing that matters is winning and we celebrate the victor, irrespective of the means involved.

India lost to Bangladesh fair and square and there’s no doubt who was the better team on that particular day. But do we actually love the game or it’s just India winning that matters? Our love for the game is so much that Ranji trophy and other domestic matches are played amidst empty stands without any involvement by the fans. Cricket has evolved from a sport to a form of entertainment where 22 persons sweat it out and the rest of the world watches. But modern cricket (from an Indian fan’s perspective) has very less to do with cricketing ability; it’s only about winning.

Despite the presence of a few superstars, the Indian cricket team cannot claim to be at the top of the cricketing pyramid but that does not stop the media and the public from looking at us as world beaters. Every tournament is an acid test and as we go through the familiar grind of “snatching a loss from the jaws of victory”, there are thousands of experts who analyze and explain what went wrong and what should have been done. We may not be as bad as the ICC one day rankings show us to be (No. 6) but I really can’t look at India as among the better teams in the tournament. But what the heck? After all the SWOT analysis done, we expect the team to pull off a victory because we want to feel good about ourselves, we want to stand up and tell the world that we are also somebody and the mantle firm rests on the shoulders of Dravid and Co. to perform this miracle.

As a nation, why are we obsessed with this game so much? Despite our eminent economic progress in the world especially in the recent past, we are still looking for a symbol that portrays our growth. Cricket plays that role and considering our rather dismal standing in other sports, there’s no competition from any other discipline by miles. The 2 C’s – cricket and cinema – are two larger than life obsessions that the Indian public cherishes. But cricket merely as a game is losing its appeal, therefore, the need to reinvent it as an entertainment jamboree. Sony is playing this role currently by broadcasting the Caribbean tamasha – incidentally also covering the matches – using the poor Charu Sharma and ‘Noodle’ Mandira as the front end for this. Never mind that there are thousands of us (millions may not want to) who are waiting to press the mute button or change the channel the moment the focus shifts to the two of them.

But even then, the obsession is not with the game despite whatever the media may want us to believe. How can we justify the vandalisation of Kaif’s and Dhoni’s house? If you call that love for the game, then you don’t understand what love is. Cricket has become another tool of nationalism and so if 12 guys come back with a trophy, billions of us go to sleep forgetting all our work because all we care for is that we have won. Where is the fun left in the sport then? I admire Sachin not merely for the thousands of runs he has scored but for his ability to handle the stress of millions of ‘fans’ who do not understand the meaning of silly terms like ‘sport’ and ‘fun‘.

India bowing out of the World Cup is now surely a catastrophe. Just think of the money that is at stake – sources say it’s close to Rs 4000 crore. The West Indies Cricket Board, Sony and advertisers all wait in abated breadth for India to beat Sri Lanka . Not to forget the grotesque world of punters, underworld bookies and nationalist fans all out there hoping for an Indian victory. Was Woolmer a victim of the betting and underworld syndicate? We do not know but we have allowed the cricketing world to become another Greek arena where gladiators need to perform or perish. Just imagine the pressure that the Indian team faces with all these thoughts being drilled into them incessantly by a media, that is constantly waiting to fill the cauldron of expectations with generous dollops of hysteria.

A friendly opinion raised suggested that all good things come in packages and that even though their houses may have been vandalized; they still make a lot of money doing nothing. They get fabulous flats from the Sahara folks, play less and spend most of their time modeling. If only they practiced more, they can surely do better. So, what is the mindless Indian cricket fan? An administrator of justice or a crusader of socialism, who decides what each person deserves to be paid? I know it hurts to see the Coke ad depicting the team as tigers, especially after we crumble to Bangladesh but can we hold their income against them? Do we grudge these players their earnings and feel that they need be treated as human beings? Incidentally, the advertising income made by the players is also based on performance and it does not come cheap with zero performance.

Another opinion hinted at greater accountability saying that the taxpayer’s money is being wasted by the team. Excuse me; the BCCI is not a government body or a limited company that is surviving on public funds. It is a legitimate private entity that raises its own money and the public has no role in it. Yes, the team represents the nation and there needs an accountability. It calls for public outrage when sports betting and match fixing takes over the game but using vandalisation as a tool when the performance or efficiency goes down is really a way over the top attitude.

We want our team to be tough, fight it out and be positive but are we any better? Sitting as couch potatoes in front of TV sets, decorating oneself in blue flannels and war paint is our contribution to the game. Every time there is a discussion, standard sarcastic remarks are made but never anything positive. Difficult to expect the team to be positive without us changing our general outlook.

What would happen if India continues to win this way? Nothing, the expectations continue to spiral and the game becomes no longer something that can be enjoyed by purists like me. I know we live in a very cynical world and all thoughts of treating sports as a form of fun is purely utopian but I’d still like to imagine that we can enjoy it that way in a more unadulterated fashion. Even at the risk of using a cliche, I agree with George Orwell when he says that all sport is “..war minus shooting”.

Just as I’m about to finish this post, I come to know that we have lost to the Lankans and are almost out of the tournament. Welcome to Round 2 of chest beating and team bashing!!! Come back with the trophy or stay in Caribbean , says a poster. Poor Chappell and Dravid would be scared of the prospect of returning to India . This would, effectively, close the Chappell’s stint at the helm of affairs while we may as well be seeing the last World Cup performances of the Holy Indian trio of Sachin, Saurav and Rahul and our old warhouse Kumble. They would have wanted to exit the stage in style but then the world can be a great leveller at times.

Anyway, I am putting my money on New Zealand to lift the trophy - the world needs a new winner...

This article was written just before the India - SL decider match in the World Cup.

In the era of Cricket Jockeys

My earliest memories of watching cricket on television are of Australia lifting the World Cup in 1987 and a young strapping lad called Sachin hammering veteran leg spinner Abdul Qadir across the park in Pakistan in 1989. We had messers Dr Narottam Puri and Anupam Gulati as the commentators in those days – with their dull, dry flaccid bored to death voices, almost straight out of an Adoor Gopalakrishnan movie. And then, you had the likes of Sushil Doshi in Hindi with melodramatic moments of commentary like "Tendulkar ne tenduye ki tarah lapka". Commentary was incidental to the game; the action was only out in the middle.

The 1992 World Cup changed things a lot, for a viewer, as we saw Richie Benaud , Bill Lawry and members of their ilk crooning into the microphones and creating a niche for themselves. We were exposed to pyjama cricket and Channel 9’s innovations which made us realize that there was more to the game than the 22 players and 2 umpires on the ground. Dull presentations in the studios were replaced by interesting pre and post-match analysis with weather forecasts, predictions, viewer polls and pitch reports. The usage of stump cameras, coloured clothing, third umpires etc. and statistical measures (though Mohandas Menon continues to be the most reliable source) made the game more popular and helped in creating cricket experts amongst common people.

The 1996 World Cup witnessed a lot of ex-cricketers crowding the commentary box, especially with a plethora of channels waiting to pick up some ‘expert’ or the other. In many ways, the Wills World Cup was a broadcasting blockbuster and the BCCI was never the same again. Media rights and advertising now held greater premium and the game and the players finally started prospering economically even though there was no substantial increase in the playing strength across the world.

Commentators also became celebrities and so you had new guys jumping on to the band wagon. Remember the unsavoury Shaz and Waz show on ESPN-Star, which featured two middle aged commentators, flirting with babes, selected through SMS polls. Navjot Singh Siddhu became a pop star mouthing inane thoughts and testing the elasticity of the English language until one fine day, he crossed the barrier and was quietly shown the door, much to our relief. There were misfits like Kapil Dev, Saba Karim and others who made their exits from commentary panels fast enough but still did enough to remain in the studios.

With Zee and “Deewana Bana Dey” Sony Max entering cricket broadcast, we now have television anchors masquerading as sports presenters and reducing it to another form of Bollywood tamasha. But it was the 2003 World Cup, I think, that saw entertainment entering the game forcefully in the form of Ms.Mandira Bedi who has done more than the Tarun Tahilianis and Ritu Beris in spreading fashion consciousness through her infamous “noodle straps”. She earned a lot of ridicule with her strappy presence but then the marketing guys were happy that she managed to swing in non-fans of the game also. Some smart MBA’s idea of attracting women to the game but with 22 men sweating it out on the field, Mandira and Ruby Bhatia would be poor choices, surely.

Circa 2006, witness Mandira Bedi squirming and shrieking while referring to Abhishek Bachchan and Charu Sharma (whose fast receding hairline has gained more footage than his comments), blushing referring to Ash. Of course, she's been a bit more circumspect in her dressing sense this time(Sadly, for many of us).With luminaries like Boycott and Barry Richards taking a back seat in these events, it has become a free for all for these jockeys who have been mercilessly dumping us their humble pearls of wisdom. The horror undergone by the transition from watching Harsha Bhogle and John Dykes to Mandira Bedi and Rohit Roy cannot be matched by even readers of The Hindu forced to read the Deccan Chronicle. And then you have tarot reading, actors talking about their movies and you wonder what's going on? Where is the post-match analysis that ESPN-Star brought to the game??

The simple pleasure of watching the game, the replays and listening to the comments of commentators is now a luxury in the hands of these channels. With ads available at every possible break, it’s become a case of watching the game in the midst of all the ads. The last ball or first ball disappears from the screen and the channel makes a few lakhs. The advertiser is happy, the channel is happy while the viewer remains the passive spectator who has no say. Treating sports as yet another Bollywood masala saga may be tempting to channels but forgetting the legions of serious cricket fans and subjecting them to all this trash is quite unbecoming.

The marriage of Bollywood and cricket – the 2 most marketable products in India- is a great idea per-se but it must be treaded carefully so that it does not spill over into a comic vaudeville which is what it has become now. Cricket can sustain itself without wonderful bimbettes outdoing each other in “exposing” themselves (exposing their knowledge). With off-screen entertainment in the form of Warne’s (s)exploits with his balls, Shoaib’s drug antics and Hair’s tantrums, cricket has all the masala to sustain itself, so does it need the female quotient ( with exceptions like Donna Symonds, of course)?

Any day, give me the likes of Harsha Bhogle, Boycott, Ian Chappell, Sunny Gavaskar, Mark Nicholas, Tony Greig and a few others sitting out there and I am hooked on to the TV – straps or no straps. It's a big Thumbs Down to the Set Max brand of commentary...

Hair, Hair Go Away, Poor Asians want to play!!!

It’s just not cricket. Haven’t we heard this sentiment just too frequently? Every time there’s a new issue in the game, we hear this and realms of print go into expressing a sense of despair at the downward slide of the self-proclaimed gentleman’s game. How long can a game dealing in billions of dollars hold back itself and stick to maintaining this facade of holiness? This time it’s taken a bone headed Aussie’s (who else but an Aussie) hard nosed stance to question the game’s best traditions, once again precipitating cries of doomsday across the rather small world of cricket.

World cricket’s most (in) famous umpire Darrell Hair has always been in the midst of controversies right from when he made his debut in 1992 in Adelaide, in a game marred by controversial LBW decisions. In 1995, he no-balled Muralitharan seven times in three overs for “throwing” which resulted in the Lankan skipper Ranatunga staging a walk-off leading to arguably the most hot blooded series seen in recent times. In 1998, Hair’s autobiography Decision maker: An Umpire’s Story (Don't ask me who read it) was published in which he called Murali’s action diabolical and said that if he had a choice he would call have called Murali many more times for throwing. This embarrassed the ICC and he was dropped from the ICC’s panel of umpires briefly only to be recalled later. There have been a few more instances of Darrellgate but probably nothing weirder than what was witnessed last week in Lords when Hair declared that Pakistan had forfeited the match because of their apparent “refusal” to take to the field on the 4th day post-tea session– the first time ever that a team had forfeited a match in this manner in 129 years of cricket.

It all started after about 55 overs into the English innings on the 4th day of the test match when Hair felt that the ball had been tampered with. He then proceeded to award the English team 5 runs and replace the ball as per Law 42.3. No reason was given to Inzamam as to why this was done. The Pakis continued to play but in the post-tea session, they refused to come on to the field as a symbolic protest, as claimed by them. Later on after about 40 minutes they relented but this time, the two umpires were not willing to play ball. Citing Law 21.3 which deals with match forfeiture, Darrell Hair and Billy Doctrove, declared that Pakistan had forfeited the match and England was the winner. Technically, the umpires were right but then aren’t the rules meant to be played not only in the letter but also the spirit? If the umpires had agreed to continue, this mess could have been averted and the ball tampering issue could have been decided outside the field by the referee. Somewhere, they did not realize that the game has a commitment towards its legions of public across the world. In the midst of the entire din, match referee Mike Procter’s role was forgotten. He went silent throughout the entire debate making me wonder if the job is a mere rubber stamp.

The Pakistan team could have easily emerged unscathed had they not have botched up the situation by not taking the field. The Pakistani captain Inzamam owes moral responsibility for his team’s actions and the trigger happy (atleast Asians think so) ICC would only be too willing to oblige by punishing him under charges of bringing disrepute to the game. 26 cameras in the field did not see anything but our old friend Hair felt that there was something wrong with the ball. Hair seems to have gone by the Pakistani reputation when he decided against them. There has always been an element of mystery associated with reverse swing and the Pakistanis have not always helped their cause in their bowling with the likes of Waqar and Shoaib Akhtar being caught on camera for trying to tamper with the ball. But in this case, they have received extensive support from the playing fraternity and the public except for the Aussie media. The Aussie media and stalwarts like Steve Waugh and Mark Taylor have backed Hair (The Daily Telegraph called him the bravest person in cricket). But then, no one is surprised- Aussies have never made any pretensions of trying to be morally or politically correct.

There have been a few points raised regarding the role of ICC in the entire fiasco. Unlike FIFA, ICC has really no great powers. There are no proper laws created to handle such a situation. It has also been pointed out that Hair and ICC could run into trouble if Pakistan were to take the matter to the court of law. The failure of ICC is also in dealing with such umpires who have been repeatedly seen to needle the cricketers from the sub-continent.

There are quite a few issues which the ICC has to take care after this.

On what basis can the umpire decide that the ball has been tampered?

Is camera/video evidence necessary for this?

Shouldn’t umpires try to explore all possibilities to ensure that the game continues no play is possible and only then abandon the game?

Should the umpires or the Match Referee take decisions on matters like abandoning the match, which are outside the field of play?

Just when the Dean Jones controversy was dying down, another Aussie has brought to focus the other side of the game .There have been accusations of racism against Darrell Hair citing some of his other controversial decisions but personally, I am inclined to give him a slight benefit of doubt. It sometimes becomes an easy stick to beat the Western world with when we raise the bogey of racism. I would like to put his behaviour down to his overzealous, autocratic and dogmatic nature with a scant regard for cultural differences but he has been consistently erratic in this behaviour right throughout his career. He’s rubbed many people the wrong way throughout his career and got away with it but this time I think he’s chanced his luck a bit too far.

In the current situation when the Muslim world’s relations with the West is at an all time low , a crisis such as this could easily escalate into a polarized political situation. The fact that one man’s stubbornness and dogmatism could potentially have such repercussions is unfortunate but then history has always been dictated by the whims and fancies of individuals. Darrell Hair is among the most experienced umpires in world cricket now but he lacks the wisdom and maturity to handle such a situation.

Cricket carries the unfortunate burden of bearing the responsibility of being a "nice game" and every such incident is a reminder to us to stop romanticizing the sport and face the reality that George Orwell had once said about modern sport being–“ …war minus the shooting”.

FIFA World Cup 2006 - Analysis

To those interested in football,this may be an interesting read where I,Mahesh and Chandan have done an analysis of the main countries that participated in 2006 FIFA World Cup.

Italy

Pradeep:They won unexpectedly, against all odds, especially against the backdrop of the betting scandal. Full Credit to Buffon, Cannavaro, Pirlo and their robust defence. The coach should be given a special mention for the tactics used-a strong defensive strategy with stretches of aggression when required (eg. Germany match). Not exactly everyone's dream team with their style of play- defensive and rough but efficient enough (no better example than Matterazi) and probably not the best team here. Cannavaro should have got the Golden Ball.

Mahesh: I am sorry to disagree with you on this. I though Italians were the better team in the world cup. This is proven by the goals conceded by then in the tournament ( Only 2 and that too one was a penalty and one an own goal). Also they have scored some 7-10 goals in all, which shows that the Italians deserved to win the cup. Also Materrazi was not rough. All defenders are rough and they ought to be. With Forwards of Portuguese falling like trees struck by lighting ( without any contact with the defenders), one cannot expect the defenders to be perfect all times. To give u an example Lucio ( Brazilian Defender) did not commit even a single foul until the match against France where when he saw that Brazil were loosing made a very bad tackle and got an Yellow card for that. I think that was the only foul he committed. Hence Materrazi is not to be blamed. And as far as the exchange of words between Zidane and Materrazi, it always happened in Football and is not a new issue. Zidane should have kept his head. Hence I pronounce Italians and Argentines as the best team in this world cup with special appreciation to Ukraine and Spain.

Chandan:The whole of Europe's betting markets had pinned their hopes on Italy. Surprisingly, even in India, total bet on Italy was to the tune of Rs.200 crore. I am not very sure of the the amount, just heard on the TV. But to me, Italian team was far more flamboyant than Germans. Perhaps its the only European team that demonstrates some amount of artistic approach to the game, rather than the normal mechanical approach of European soccer players. After Roberto Baggio's exit, never heard of an Italian player who can change the face of the game...Del Piero was just about okie, given his age...perhaps time to hand his boots...

France

Pradeep: Zizou’s brilliance and renaissance took them to the finals after a rather lousy start. He tarnished his image with that one act of idiocy (despite whatever the justification may be) and that was more depressing. Strong tactical game, ably supported by Ribery, Henry, Thuram and Makele helped them to almost pull off an impossible World Cup triumph. It's an end of an era for French football with most of them probably retiring after this.

Mahesh: France is good when Zidane is good. Let us see what happens now as Zidane, Viera, Makelele, Thuram, Gallas are all on the wrong side of 30's and are going to retire within an year to two.

Chandan : My second favourite team after Argentina...After some magical display on the field during the second half, I thought, France would be declared the worthy champions. To have defetaed Brazil so convincingly, I thought for sure that they have the cup in their hands...but as luck would have it...Azzuris lifted it. And by all means Zidane was much better than that...Sunday's match proves onething that there is a thin line that seperates the good from the great...within few seconds Zidane lost all the greatness...proved he was a mere mortal...

Germany

Pradeep: Klinsmann changed their style of play from German efficiency to flamboyancy and it brought in crowds. A team sans superstars (sans Ballack), played exciting football but were defeated by the Italian fortress. Klose and Podolski were supported well by Ballack, Lahm and Frings but then Klinsmann's inexperience in handling the opposition when he went defensive in the semis cost them a berth in the finals.

Mahesh: Germans were good with the crowd behind them. With Klinsman resigning let us hope they will still be good. Ballack is now plagued by injuries and the fact that he is going to join Chelsea( the second best club in football now after Barcelona), his chances of being the play maker will be put into real test coz of the all star team Chelsea posses ff.( Lampard, Makelele, Gudjohnsen, Drogba, Robben, Gallas, Carvalho, Del Horno, etc, etc etc)

Chandan : I never expected they would play the Semis...

Portugal

Pradeep: Full credit to Scolari for taking Portugal to the semis. A hard-nosed approach to the game where only winning matters was his policy and it did not endear him to the connoisseurs of the game. Ronaldo is their best player but Portugal has a long way to go.

Mahesh:Portugal were a very good team. But they chose not to win any hearts after the world cup with their exceptional Diving. They chose to play diving rather than football. even after repeated criticism they were as they were. This makes a very bad impression on the team.I feel sorry for them. With Scolari going to retire and Ronaldo being booed away in any match they play from now they are going to be a sorrow team for the future. Figo, Pauleta, Nuno Gomesare all going to retire. The only bright spot is Deco, Costinha, Ricardo, Carvalho and Ronaldo.

Chandan : Deserved to get defeated. Am a little to harsh on them, I know....but they simply deserved too. Ronaldo is extremely talented, but he, along with some other team mates need to know that they are playing as a team and not individuals...hardly anyone seems willing to sacrifice their balls for the good of the game and the team. The best of all players are known beacuse of their play making skills and not for their goal scoring skills, barring may be Ronaldo, Batistuta, Romario and a few other players..Players like Maradona, Pele, Suker, Platini, Cryuff, Zidane...there have been so many times that they would have fancied their own chances...

On the move I heard that Louis Figo was also in the team! Where?

Argentina

Pradeep: Probably the best team in the championship but they did not deliver their best when it mattered. Coach Pekerman had all the weapons but choose to hide them in the closet instead of using them. In the QF against Germany , he rested Riquelme, Crespo in the 2nd half and did not play Saviola and Messi (the team's best strikers) and was duly rewarded with a knockout punch by Germany . The defensive approach probably cost them the trophy which was sad considering they scored 2 outstanding goals â the remarkable 24 pass goal by Cambiossa (against Serbia-Montenegro) and the brilliant left foot goal by Rodriguez (against Mexico). They are a very young and talented side and would probably play many of the same guys in the next World Cup.

Mahesh: Argentina have always been the best side in a world cup whenever they play ( Except 2002). They are going to go places and being a very young squad is going o help them I think I will forgive Pekerman for his mistakes and hopes that he strings the team together and lead Argentina to lead to glory in 2010. I am on Argentina for 2010.

Chandan : My all time favourite team...Argentina seems to be heavily inspired by the European football style. Till the times of Maradona, Ortega, Batistuta, football was still an art form...but the current team somehow prefers the 'European Mechanical' approach to the game. Do whatever you do best. If I am putting it correctly, even the way the penalties were taken by the Argentina players some 12-16 year back were different than the way they are taken now...

Oh Maradona!!! Where art thou my lord?

Brazil

Pradeep: The media made them demi-gods and they played in a way which was a disgrace to the Samba style. Ronaldinho and Kaka were disappointments; Roberto Carlos, Juninho, Cafu were over the hill in terms of age and Ronaldo, well, weâll say he broke the record and leave it to that..A set of great footballers played and partied but never really remembered that there was a World Cup going on and they were rightly shown the door by a resilient France . Hopefully, they will introspect and come back with a bang the next time. World Football needs Brazil .

Mahesh: Like France Brazil were deeply dependent on Ronaldinho. If he performs then Brazil will be glorious again. Brazil have an able replacement in Adriano for Ronaldo. I predict a Quarterfinal for Brazil in 2010 unless an outstanding player develops into he four years who can lead Brazil to glory. Every world cup have produced an outstanding player for Brazil who has become the talisman for the next world cup. Unfortunately there happened to be none in this world cup. I hope good for them.

Chandan : I do not know Pradeep if you have noted,Ronaldinho has some serios issues with Ronaldo. He would put the ball to Ronaldo only when he had no one else to pass the ball...One thing is certain too much of ego on the ground. I wonder how does the team manager manages the team. The only find of the team was Robinho (the young lad who really put his heart and soul...I hope I have got his name correctly)

England

Pradeep: The media did the best they can to hype them up and they came down crashing. Sven’s tactics were roundly criticized and their defensive game did not bring cheer even to the die-hard English fan. They struggled their way to the quarters and the only time they entertained was when Rooney was sent off against Portugal for blowing his fuse. Owen was injured in a freak accident; Gerrard and Lampard struggled throughout and the poor lad Rooney could not handle it all alone. Sven’s finally gone having burnt English pockets with his exorbitant pay and never tiring libido.

Mahesh: Hope to see Rooney to cool his head and play along well. With Beckham almost certain not to play in Steve Mclaren's Side from August, we will get to see a lot of Aaron Lennon and Shaun Wright Philips ( another talent not included in England squad). Also with Owen Hargreaves doing good it will be a stiff competition to Lampard and Gerard. I though Gerard was the outstanding player in the England squad even though he was not near to his performances. Incidentally this was the first match that England lost with Peter Crouch playing in the team. Crouch is going to be real good. With Owen's career almost as good as gone it will be Crouch and Walcott who will be coming up. I give them a semi-final in 2010 world cup and a final in Euro 2008. But if Rooney plays well with Lampard and Gerard then only GOD can stop them from winning.

Chandan : One moment of brilliance...the Beckham goal....Utterly dissapointing perfromance by the Gerrards..the Lampards and the Rooneys (again a selfish player like Cristiano Ronaldo)...Poor guy Owen, after Beckham the only sensible member of the side...or so it seemed

**Crouch should have been born in the Shakespearean era, and acted the motley fool in those plays.

Arun replies:
Thanks for improving my knowledge on Football... It was nice to read, but you guys missed another important team... JAPAN Yes though they did not perform well in the league matches, but the samurai blues definitely require some analysis.. As far i know there are some young talent like Nakamura, Oguru, Tanamada, who if performs well can take the team to higher level... But with the star studded Nakata announcing hi retirement at an age of 29, is definitely a major setback for the Japanese team. I would definitely expect the samurai blue to reach the semi final in 2010... Not an expert in analyzing, but these are the information I see on Japanese TV..