Considering the composition of membership on this site, it is not surprising that most of our cricket discussion tends to be subcontinent-centric. We tend to forget that apart from India and Pakistan, there are eight other cricket-playing nations out there – each with its history, challenges and aspirations.
For a change, I decided to take a detour from the India – Pakistan obsession and talk about something, not Indian or Pakistani, but still close to my heart.
It is about the West Indies. At the moment of writing, South Africa is visiting the West Indies and, not entirely unexpectedly, giving them a thrashing. This is not the greatest of South African sides but it does not take much nowadays to topple the once-mighty West Indians over. Soon it will be the turn of the Pakistanis to visit the Caribbean – and I am afraid there are all indications that the result is not likely to be very different.
Having seen the glory of the batting of Lloyd, Richards, Kallicharran, Greenidge and Fredericks and the bowling of Roberts, Holding, Croft, Garner and Marshall, for me personally it is very painful to have to see the state of West Indian cricket now.
So what has gone so horribly wrong ? The obvious one is the dirty politics within the cricket administration. It was never going to be easy - considering the West Indies is a conglomeration of various countries in the Caribbean, each with its own proud identity. Imagine getting India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh under one banner and hoping not to have politics in the administration of this combine.
Full marks then to Sir Frank Worrell, one of the finest, if not the finest, statesman the game has ever produced. He was instrumental in bringing players of various Caribbean countries together, instilling in them a common cause and passion - to play for the West Indies. The results began to show. Whether you were Guyanese Clive Lloyd or Barbadian Gordon Greenidge or Antiguan Viv Richards, you were first and foremost West Indian on the international cricketing stage. To the tune of calypso music in the background, the West Indian players on the field would come together to demolish everything that stood before them.
But that was a different time and ethos. Just as success breeds success and failure failure, the decline of the West Indian powerhouse in the early nineties (after the departure of many prominent players) was perfect breeding ground for regional interests and politics to re-surface.
In the current atmosphere, everything seems to be in turmoil – from team selection, to the coach, to the major dispute about sponsor logo promotion. A superstar like Brian Lara seems to be constantly at the center of controversy – something that is definitely not doing the team cause any good. It does not matter whether this is justified or not – what matters is that the team spirit and motivation seem to be very low. This is hardly the team that Sir Frank Worrell would have envisaged. Once again, West Indian cricket is at odds with itself. Today, the politics in the West Indian cricket administration makes the BCCI look like a saint.
Another reason for the current decline of the West Indian side is, I think, the position of cricket in the Caribbean sports hierarchy. Once cricket held pride of place and talented sportsmen with multiple choices of sports as a profession, would opt proudly for cricket. Those days are long gone by. Even sports such as beach volleyball seem to be gaining in popularity and the influence of American sports and wealth seems to have pushed cricket somewhere into a corner. One can only speculate that cricket's loss has been some other sport's gain.
A third reason is, I believe, the pitches in the West Indies. At one time, they were sporting wickets and were result-oriented. They provided a challenge to batsmen and were often a bowler's delight. Today, the tables have turned - many of the pitches are almost dead pitches, the batsmen flatter themselves while bowlers toil away with scant reward. This cannot be good for the game - as is witnessed in diminishing numbers at the gates. Which means less takings, less interest in the sport, less TV rights - a vicious cycle at its most vicious. I am sure there are many other reasons - it is too simplistic to try to attribute such a shocking decline to just two or three reasons. But let us hope, for the sake of the game and for West Indies cricket, that they can rise from this level. They just have to.
I counted yesterday the track record of the players in this last Test. The eleven players have 130 Test wickets between them, with Chris Gayle having the maximum - a rich 30. The best bowling average was Bravo – an average of over 33. That in itself tells a story of the experience of these bowlers. And bowling on an Antiguan wicket, it is hardly a surprise that the South African openers have both helped themselves to hundreds.
My thoughts go out to the late Malcolm Marshall – one of my favourite cricketers and one of the best bowlers the world has seen in the last thirty years. He must be turning in his grave at the quality of fast bowling being dished out by West Indian bowlers today.
Although there are a lot of concerns about the West Indies hosting its first World Cup, I personally think that if it would help increase interest and money in the game in the region, it would be a fantastic thing to happen. Every other region (England, South Asia, Australasia, South Africa) has had its chance - and the West Indies is the rightful place for the next Cup. If there is renewed passion in the game and , very importantly, more money is poured into West Indian cricket to make it a career of choice (let's face it, in today's commercial environment , it is money that talks) , I think there is a good chance we will see a revival. Probably not in the immediate future, but over the next four or five years.
But then I have always been an optimist.
About Me
- Raja
- If I can just give to the world more than I take from it, I will be a very happy man. For there is no greater joy in life than to give. Motto : Live, Laugh and Love. You can follow me on Twitter too . My handle is @Raja_Sw.
Thursday, March 30, 2006
On India-Pakistan beyond cricket
cAfter the Indian tour to Pakistan last year, I wrote an article “Thank You, Pakistan”. I thanked Pakistan from the bottom of my heart for the very warm hospitality that it had extended to the Indians and was very optimistic about the opportunities the tour had opened for better relations between the two countries.
Before the start of the recent Pakistani tour to India, I re-iterated my feelings about the two countries coming closer to each other and emphasized that the most important measure of the success of the tour would not be the cricket itself but the response that the visiting Pakistanis (both players and other visitors) would get from the Indian public.
So, was the tour successful ? Has this tour helped the two countries to come a step closer towards each other ?
I would like to think so. To be honest, I have not been following this series as closely as I followed the previous one. I have been traveling quite a bit in the last couple of months and have not been able to examine the media coverage, both Indian and Pakistani, enough to give an unchallenged (although based on media reports only) report card on the Indian treatment of its Pakistani guests.
What I do know is that there were a couple of unpleasant incidents – something to do with stone-throwing at the bus carrying the Pakistani players and possibly another such odd incident.
In between, there was also the very significant event of the bus route between Muzaffarabad and Srinagar being opened. Just before it happened, some explosives were discovered on the route – a reminder of the magnitude of the task that lies ahead for both countries as they try to work towards a relationship that many with vested interests will do their utmost to sabotage.
It is a very tenuous relationship – as I mentioned in my “Thank You, Pakistan” article, fifty-five years of mistrust cannot be undone in a couple of months. Both governments are taking baby steps towards each other, aware that in today’s realpolitik and changed global equations, there is probably no other option. Yet both sides are equally cautious to commit to anything that may be seen as ground-yielding, such are the internal compulsions of both states. There are enough rabble-rousers on either side, with considerable clout amongst the masses, to topple or at the very least make uncomfortable any government seen as compromising on its hitherto hard stand on sensitive issues.
In this situation, considering the huge impact the media could make in the bridge-building process, one would look to them to play their part in promoting the common cause. But so far, the media, although it has not been particularly irresponsible, seems to have taken no more than a “wait-and-watch” approach. Perhaps it has been bitten by bitter experiences of the past.
Like I said, a very tenuous relationship – with loads of history.
It is for the politicians of both countries to make those major moves which they hope will open doors for better relations. Moves like cricket matches between the two countries. Moves like bus routes between the two countries. Moves like more trade between the two countries. Moves, which in today’s acronym-addicted world, are now officially referred to as “CBM” or “Confidence Building Measures”.
All of this makes sense to me and I support these moves one hundred percent. But, like I have said before, relationships are not built by governments – they are built by people. And, put it down to my impatience, I do not want to wait for the governments alone to build bridges. We, the people, are quite capable of building bridges on our own – if only we open our minds and hearts to doing so.
It is easier said than done. I understand the sensitivity of the issues involved. And the issues are far more serious than just a game of cricket. The main issue – the central issue – the “K” issue cannot be brushed off the table just because of a goodwill cricket series. The President of Pakistan quite rightly made this very clear.
For my part, I will approach the matter of Indo-Pak relations in the only manner that I can and in the manner that I believe will finally lead to people of both countries coming together.
I will not take stands or argue about history – for this will lead nowhere. It is for the politicians and the historians, on both sides, to attempt to explain and to justify whatever they seek to defend.
The only way I know to bring people together is to relate to them on a human level. Not on a level of state, religion, caste or creed. These help to form aggregations in society but, at the most primal level, everybody, wherever on earth he is born or lives, has the same emotions. Which mother does not grieve on the loss of her child ? Which child’s face does not light up when he or she is showered with love by the child’s parents ?
Is it not therefore much more logical to relate on a level of humanity than any man-made level, such as state ? After all a political boundary is nothing but a man-made demarcation on land – usually with a perfectly well-meaning objective of providing administrative ease but sometimes serving to separate societies rather than bringing them together.
There was this person who once spoke of a world without borders. I consider this a fascinating thought but am not convinced about its practicality. However, when such borders create societal splits, I cannot help wondering about what a world with borders is actually achieving.
These are random thoughts and must not be contextualized to the specifics of the India – Pakistan imbroglio. Border conflicts exist in many parts of the world and, next to religion, are the biggest reason for wars. Ironically, the ones who fight the wars and who have the most to lose are usually the ones on whose land the political lines have been drawn by governments sitting many miles away.
To many who read this, I may be coming across as naïve, wishful and theoretical. Somebody with nothing better to do than to blabber on meaningless matters. After all I have said nothing new here. But if all that I have said is so obvious, why is it so difficult to relate to people on a human level ? Why is it so difficult to accept people for what they are – as human beings first, and not as Indians or Pakistanis first ?
I am not suggesting that Indians or Pakistanis should not retain their national identity. If it gives them a sense of belonging, by all means they should. They should be proud of their country’s achievements and should not feel any embarrassment in wearing their country’s badge on their sleeve if they so wish.
However it would be immensely more valuable for humanity if we just took a step back and understood our core values and responsibilities as humans - and not as Indians or Pakistanis or whatever. We are privileged to be (or so I believe) among the more intelligent of species on this planet – and we would serve our cause better by forging relationships on a humanitarian level first. All forms of dichotomy, usually created and imposed by society (which by the way is also man-made), only come later.
For those, albeit a minority amongst the readers of this piece, to whom this article makes some sort of sense, I extend my friendship – to those who dismiss it as nonsense, I bear no malice. After all, it is just a dump of my thoughts and, as long as it harms nobody, I have no shame whatsoever in expressing my thoughts.
For these are values that I have carried all my life and have never had reason to doubt. I have often been accused of being a dreamer but when a dream is so close to your heart and you so badly want it to happen, I suppose you can be excused a degree of madness in its pursuit.
To me that dream has been one of India – Pakistan friendship. Today, thanks to technology, there is much more opportunity for Indians and Pakistanis to interact with each other. If that interaction helps a better understanding of each other and brings people together, that is a much stronger bond than the governments of both countries will ever be able to create.
That is all I hope from this article.
Before the start of the recent Pakistani tour to India, I re-iterated my feelings about the two countries coming closer to each other and emphasized that the most important measure of the success of the tour would not be the cricket itself but the response that the visiting Pakistanis (both players and other visitors) would get from the Indian public.
So, was the tour successful ? Has this tour helped the two countries to come a step closer towards each other ?
I would like to think so. To be honest, I have not been following this series as closely as I followed the previous one. I have been traveling quite a bit in the last couple of months and have not been able to examine the media coverage, both Indian and Pakistani, enough to give an unchallenged (although based on media reports only) report card on the Indian treatment of its Pakistani guests.
What I do know is that there were a couple of unpleasant incidents – something to do with stone-throwing at the bus carrying the Pakistani players and possibly another such odd incident.
In between, there was also the very significant event of the bus route between Muzaffarabad and Srinagar being opened. Just before it happened, some explosives were discovered on the route – a reminder of the magnitude of the task that lies ahead for both countries as they try to work towards a relationship that many with vested interests will do their utmost to sabotage.
It is a very tenuous relationship – as I mentioned in my “Thank You, Pakistan” article, fifty-five years of mistrust cannot be undone in a couple of months. Both governments are taking baby steps towards each other, aware that in today’s realpolitik and changed global equations, there is probably no other option. Yet both sides are equally cautious to commit to anything that may be seen as ground-yielding, such are the internal compulsions of both states. There are enough rabble-rousers on either side, with considerable clout amongst the masses, to topple or at the very least make uncomfortable any government seen as compromising on its hitherto hard stand on sensitive issues.
In this situation, considering the huge impact the media could make in the bridge-building process, one would look to them to play their part in promoting the common cause. But so far, the media, although it has not been particularly irresponsible, seems to have taken no more than a “wait-and-watch” approach. Perhaps it has been bitten by bitter experiences of the past.
Like I said, a very tenuous relationship – with loads of history.
It is for the politicians of both countries to make those major moves which they hope will open doors for better relations. Moves like cricket matches between the two countries. Moves like bus routes between the two countries. Moves like more trade between the two countries. Moves, which in today’s acronym-addicted world, are now officially referred to as “CBM” or “Confidence Building Measures”.
All of this makes sense to me and I support these moves one hundred percent. But, like I have said before, relationships are not built by governments – they are built by people. And, put it down to my impatience, I do not want to wait for the governments alone to build bridges. We, the people, are quite capable of building bridges on our own – if only we open our minds and hearts to doing so.
It is easier said than done. I understand the sensitivity of the issues involved. And the issues are far more serious than just a game of cricket. The main issue – the central issue – the “K” issue cannot be brushed off the table just because of a goodwill cricket series. The President of Pakistan quite rightly made this very clear.
For my part, I will approach the matter of Indo-Pak relations in the only manner that I can and in the manner that I believe will finally lead to people of both countries coming together.
I will not take stands or argue about history – for this will lead nowhere. It is for the politicians and the historians, on both sides, to attempt to explain and to justify whatever they seek to defend.
The only way I know to bring people together is to relate to them on a human level. Not on a level of state, religion, caste or creed. These help to form aggregations in society but, at the most primal level, everybody, wherever on earth he is born or lives, has the same emotions. Which mother does not grieve on the loss of her child ? Which child’s face does not light up when he or she is showered with love by the child’s parents ?
Is it not therefore much more logical to relate on a level of humanity than any man-made level, such as state ? After all a political boundary is nothing but a man-made demarcation on land – usually with a perfectly well-meaning objective of providing administrative ease but sometimes serving to separate societies rather than bringing them together.
There was this person who once spoke of a world without borders. I consider this a fascinating thought but am not convinced about its practicality. However, when such borders create societal splits, I cannot help wondering about what a world with borders is actually achieving.
These are random thoughts and must not be contextualized to the specifics of the India – Pakistan imbroglio. Border conflicts exist in many parts of the world and, next to religion, are the biggest reason for wars. Ironically, the ones who fight the wars and who have the most to lose are usually the ones on whose land the political lines have been drawn by governments sitting many miles away.
To many who read this, I may be coming across as naïve, wishful and theoretical. Somebody with nothing better to do than to blabber on meaningless matters. After all I have said nothing new here. But if all that I have said is so obvious, why is it so difficult to relate to people on a human level ? Why is it so difficult to accept people for what they are – as human beings first, and not as Indians or Pakistanis first ?
I am not suggesting that Indians or Pakistanis should not retain their national identity. If it gives them a sense of belonging, by all means they should. They should be proud of their country’s achievements and should not feel any embarrassment in wearing their country’s badge on their sleeve if they so wish.
However it would be immensely more valuable for humanity if we just took a step back and understood our core values and responsibilities as humans - and not as Indians or Pakistanis or whatever. We are privileged to be (or so I believe) among the more intelligent of species on this planet – and we would serve our cause better by forging relationships on a humanitarian level first. All forms of dichotomy, usually created and imposed by society (which by the way is also man-made), only come later.
For those, albeit a minority amongst the readers of this piece, to whom this article makes some sort of sense, I extend my friendship – to those who dismiss it as nonsense, I bear no malice. After all, it is just a dump of my thoughts and, as long as it harms nobody, I have no shame whatsoever in expressing my thoughts.
For these are values that I have carried all my life and have never had reason to doubt. I have often been accused of being a dreamer but when a dream is so close to your heart and you so badly want it to happen, I suppose you can be excused a degree of madness in its pursuit.
To me that dream has been one of India – Pakistan friendship. Today, thanks to technology, there is much more opportunity for Indians and Pakistanis to interact with each other. If that interaction helps a better understanding of each other and brings people together, that is a much stronger bond than the governments of both countries will ever be able to create.
That is all I hope from this article.
Sunday, April 03, 2005
From Adelaide to Bangalore
"Twenty-four hours after what was one of Indian cricket's lowest points in the last twenty-four years…" is how I planned to start this article/blog. But then, looking back, I realize, for me at least, this is not entirely true. Yes, Indian cricket hit a major low on the 28th of March 2005 but for those of us Indians to whom defeat to Pakistan is not the worst shame in the cricketing world, it was just another very bad, hugely forgettable day in the office for the Indian cricket team.
Don't get me wrong. It hurt – and it hurt real bad. If India, chasing 383, had gone gamely for the target and been bowled out for 350, Indians would still have been very disappointed, it would still have pained many diehard Indian fans. But there is pain - and there is anguish. The Indian performance yesterday evoked anguish and anger in equal measure to start with – and very soon anger overtook anguish as wave after wave of hostile public sentiment was targeted at the Indian players who would probably wish they could turn the clock back by twenty-four hours and start all over again.
If it was a forgettable day for Indian fans, it is not like they are going to be allowed to forget this day very easily. For years, Sharjah 86 and Chennai 99 were the Pakistani highlights in cricket talk against Indians. Now Bangalore 05 will join them and Indians will wince. Whatever trouble the Indian players on the field have negotiating the Pakistani bowling, their fans off it will have far more trouble fending off the jibes. Hopefully it is all in good taste and there will be a balance in opportunities to have a go at each other. That is what fan clubs are all about.
(For the record, though yesterday's defeat was painful for me, it does not even come close to the emptiness I felt when India, chasing 120 for an away series victory at Bridgetown, Barbados a few years ago, was shot out for 81. That was about as low as it got for me. True Chennai 99 hurt real bad because India had come so close to victory but Bridgetown 97 left me numb for a while).
What now ? Nothing.
There will be a huge hue and cry for a few days, a few heads may roll – or they may not, depending on whether this is indeed required to appease an angry public. There will be a few games played, the BCCI team (at least for now I do not want to call it the Indian team) will win a few, there will be some records created and all will be well again. Public memory is short if anything, and until the next Bangalore, life will be back to normal.
That has been the story of Indian cricket – and nobody should be surprised if the story plays itself out again. The first couple of games in the World Cup 2003 tournament invited tremendous public wrath against Indian players, they immediately put up a better showing and soon they were returning home as heroes for having made it to the final.
For every Bangalore, the Indian players manage to pull off, from time to time, an Adelaide. And the country goes ga-ga over them. So all I can say is, let's wait for the next Adelaide.
The danger with the Adelaides of the world is that you could very easily get carried away in the euphoria of the result. These games very easily lead you to draw misleading conclusions about the quality of the Indian side. After all, beating the Australians on their home soil is something other teams can usually only dream of. If India has actually done it, it must mean that they are a notch above the rest, that they are world-beaters, that they have excellence in all departments of the game.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. If you carefully analyse each of these Adelaides, Multans and Rawalpindis, you will find that, at the root of each of them, are either a few individual performances, or some moments of indiscretion on the part of the opposition, or helpful pitch conditions or some such aspect of the match that gave India the edge. It is rarely sheer hard work or brilliance sustained over the entire duration of the match that resulted in the victory. But, in the euphoria of the moment, we do not want to dampen the mood by analysis.
I do not, for one moment, want to downplay any of these wins. A win is a win and is something to be cherished. But when we ignore the underlying fabric and concentrate only on the silky sheen, we do grave injustice to ourselves because we are under-prepared when the silk is worn out and the ugly fabric stares at us, all exposed. We have to acknowledge the fabric for what it is and, even in "good times", fix it if we want to have a better chance of sustained success.
Fix it ? Easier said than done. In the corporate world, where shareholders elect the Board of Directors and have the right to change them if the results are not to their satisfaction, there is power in the hands of the shareholders (at least in theory). In the cricketing world, where the public neither elect the selection committee nor select the players, they can do little more than wringing their hands or banging their heads against a wall when the players put up a sorry performance. (The more frustrated and adventurous amongst the public may not stop at these hopeless gestures of failure but, tempting as it may be, any more drastic step is something that I would not be at liberty to recommend in this column).
This is where the problem therefore lies, to start with. There is only one team representing India – and therefore just one team on which the aspirations of millions are placed. The public lives and dies with these players' performances – but not for the players themselves, but for what they represent – Team India. This is very important – players come and go, but the public loyalty to Team India is much deeper and stronger than sentiment for any one individual. Each cricketer better get this clearly into his head - he is worshipped because he plays for Team India and brings glory for Team India. The day he stops doing this, he must be replaced for another player who can do the job better. The corporate world is ruthless in its pursuit of success and struggle for survival in a competitive world, there is no reason why the cricketing team representing the country and carrying the hopes of millions should be treated any different. On their part, the public should stop glorifying individual performances over the team cause.
Another point which the cricket establishment would do well to realize is that you can only pick the best from what you have. And if what you have is rotten or average, stop kidding yourself - you will never have a world-beating side. Again we can draw an analogy with the corporate world. The quality of its employees manifests itself in the results of the corporation. Many companies hire the best or ensure they have training programmes or even in-house educational institutes that act as a feed for employee development. There are a few cricket academies in India at the moment but, while they are probably doing creditable work, the tangible output (in terms of value for Team India) has not quite met the requirement. One Srinath or a Prasad, is, I am afraid, not good enough.
A third point to consider is performance-based compensation. I cannot help feeling (and maybe I am out of line here) that, barring a few exceptions, most Indian players are quite content with doing just enough to keep themselves in the squad. They do not seem to have the hunger to go all out to excel. This is possibly because, as long as they are in the squad, their revenue stream is assured and they are anyway well compensated through channels of income other than just their salary from the cricket board. This is a major dampener for the team performance and does great injustice to the fans who expect each player to give his best at all times. In corporate life, usually the terms of employment dictate that the employee shall not engage in any earning activity that may conflict with the interests of the employer or that may interfere with the ability of the employee to perform to the best of his ability.
I know this has been tried by the BCCI and has failed due to the power of the star players involved. But either the BCCI should consider re-inforcing this (and if a player refuses, well, he just cannot represent the BCCI or Team India) or the BCCI should make its player compensations so attractive as to make it worth the player's while to stick with BCCI. This is probably not going to fly (since it involves commercial considerations and market forces) but, instead of concentrating on the process, the BCCI can easily concentrate on the output. If the BCCI raises its performance bar much higher than it is at the moment, players will automatically need to deliver more to be part of Team India and since it is their currency with Team India that makes them attractive for product sponsors, it will automatically require them to push themselves to perform better.
So, if all this is in place, will we see a better performing Team India ? I believe much more is required than just this. All this will help but the fire burning in your stomach that makes you push yourself is something that cannot be educated or trained into an individual – either you have it or you don't.
Till we have our underlying structure in place, we will just bumble and stumble along –with a Bangalore to match every Adelaide, and more positively spoken, with an Adelaide to match every Bangalore.
Until the next Adelaide.
Yours,
Raja Swaminathan
Don't get me wrong. It hurt – and it hurt real bad. If India, chasing 383, had gone gamely for the target and been bowled out for 350, Indians would still have been very disappointed, it would still have pained many diehard Indian fans. But there is pain - and there is anguish. The Indian performance yesterday evoked anguish and anger in equal measure to start with – and very soon anger overtook anguish as wave after wave of hostile public sentiment was targeted at the Indian players who would probably wish they could turn the clock back by twenty-four hours and start all over again.
If it was a forgettable day for Indian fans, it is not like they are going to be allowed to forget this day very easily. For years, Sharjah 86 and Chennai 99 were the Pakistani highlights in cricket talk against Indians. Now Bangalore 05 will join them and Indians will wince. Whatever trouble the Indian players on the field have negotiating the Pakistani bowling, their fans off it will have far more trouble fending off the jibes. Hopefully it is all in good taste and there will be a balance in opportunities to have a go at each other. That is what fan clubs are all about.
(For the record, though yesterday's defeat was painful for me, it does not even come close to the emptiness I felt when India, chasing 120 for an away series victory at Bridgetown, Barbados a few years ago, was shot out for 81. That was about as low as it got for me. True Chennai 99 hurt real bad because India had come so close to victory but Bridgetown 97 left me numb for a while).
What now ? Nothing.
There will be a huge hue and cry for a few days, a few heads may roll – or they may not, depending on whether this is indeed required to appease an angry public. There will be a few games played, the BCCI team (at least for now I do not want to call it the Indian team) will win a few, there will be some records created and all will be well again. Public memory is short if anything, and until the next Bangalore, life will be back to normal.
That has been the story of Indian cricket – and nobody should be surprised if the story plays itself out again. The first couple of games in the World Cup 2003 tournament invited tremendous public wrath against Indian players, they immediately put up a better showing and soon they were returning home as heroes for having made it to the final.
For every Bangalore, the Indian players manage to pull off, from time to time, an Adelaide. And the country goes ga-ga over them. So all I can say is, let's wait for the next Adelaide.
The danger with the Adelaides of the world is that you could very easily get carried away in the euphoria of the result. These games very easily lead you to draw misleading conclusions about the quality of the Indian side. After all, beating the Australians on their home soil is something other teams can usually only dream of. If India has actually done it, it must mean that they are a notch above the rest, that they are world-beaters, that they have excellence in all departments of the game.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. If you carefully analyse each of these Adelaides, Multans and Rawalpindis, you will find that, at the root of each of them, are either a few individual performances, or some moments of indiscretion on the part of the opposition, or helpful pitch conditions or some such aspect of the match that gave India the edge. It is rarely sheer hard work or brilliance sustained over the entire duration of the match that resulted in the victory. But, in the euphoria of the moment, we do not want to dampen the mood by analysis.
I do not, for one moment, want to downplay any of these wins. A win is a win and is something to be cherished. But when we ignore the underlying fabric and concentrate only on the silky sheen, we do grave injustice to ourselves because we are under-prepared when the silk is worn out and the ugly fabric stares at us, all exposed. We have to acknowledge the fabric for what it is and, even in "good times", fix it if we want to have a better chance of sustained success.
Fix it ? Easier said than done. In the corporate world, where shareholders elect the Board of Directors and have the right to change them if the results are not to their satisfaction, there is power in the hands of the shareholders (at least in theory). In the cricketing world, where the public neither elect the selection committee nor select the players, they can do little more than wringing their hands or banging their heads against a wall when the players put up a sorry performance. (The more frustrated and adventurous amongst the public may not stop at these hopeless gestures of failure but, tempting as it may be, any more drastic step is something that I would not be at liberty to recommend in this column).
This is where the problem therefore lies, to start with. There is only one team representing India – and therefore just one team on which the aspirations of millions are placed. The public lives and dies with these players' performances – but not for the players themselves, but for what they represent – Team India. This is very important – players come and go, but the public loyalty to Team India is much deeper and stronger than sentiment for any one individual. Each cricketer better get this clearly into his head - he is worshipped because he plays for Team India and brings glory for Team India. The day he stops doing this, he must be replaced for another player who can do the job better. The corporate world is ruthless in its pursuit of success and struggle for survival in a competitive world, there is no reason why the cricketing team representing the country and carrying the hopes of millions should be treated any different. On their part, the public should stop glorifying individual performances over the team cause.
Another point which the cricket establishment would do well to realize is that you can only pick the best from what you have. And if what you have is rotten or average, stop kidding yourself - you will never have a world-beating side. Again we can draw an analogy with the corporate world. The quality of its employees manifests itself in the results of the corporation. Many companies hire the best or ensure they have training programmes or even in-house educational institutes that act as a feed for employee development. There are a few cricket academies in India at the moment but, while they are probably doing creditable work, the tangible output (in terms of value for Team India) has not quite met the requirement. One Srinath or a Prasad, is, I am afraid, not good enough.
A third point to consider is performance-based compensation. I cannot help feeling (and maybe I am out of line here) that, barring a few exceptions, most Indian players are quite content with doing just enough to keep themselves in the squad. They do not seem to have the hunger to go all out to excel. This is possibly because, as long as they are in the squad, their revenue stream is assured and they are anyway well compensated through channels of income other than just their salary from the cricket board. This is a major dampener for the team performance and does great injustice to the fans who expect each player to give his best at all times. In corporate life, usually the terms of employment dictate that the employee shall not engage in any earning activity that may conflict with the interests of the employer or that may interfere with the ability of the employee to perform to the best of his ability.
I know this has been tried by the BCCI and has failed due to the power of the star players involved. But either the BCCI should consider re-inforcing this (and if a player refuses, well, he just cannot represent the BCCI or Team India) or the BCCI should make its player compensations so attractive as to make it worth the player's while to stick with BCCI. This is probably not going to fly (since it involves commercial considerations and market forces) but, instead of concentrating on the process, the BCCI can easily concentrate on the output. If the BCCI raises its performance bar much higher than it is at the moment, players will automatically need to deliver more to be part of Team India and since it is their currency with Team India that makes them attractive for product sponsors, it will automatically require them to push themselves to perform better.
So, if all this is in place, will we see a better performing Team India ? I believe much more is required than just this. All this will help but the fire burning in your stomach that makes you push yourself is something that cannot be educated or trained into an individual – either you have it or you don't.
Till we have our underlying structure in place, we will just bumble and stumble along –with a Bangalore to match every Adelaide, and more positively spoken, with an Adelaide to match every Bangalore.
Until the next Adelaide.
Yours,
Raja Swaminathan
Labels:
cricket
The myth of captaincy
There has been so much written about Saurav Ganguly in the media. Print media, online media. I must be out of my mind to come up with yet another piece on him. But there is more to this than just one individual, there is the bigger issue of Indian captaincy at stake – and that is enough for me to write this piece, even if the subject has been beaten to death a million times.
Like millions of other Indians, I reveled in the glory years of Ganguly. When he made his debut hundred at Lord’s almost nine years ago, I was “over the moon”. He followed it up with another hundred in the next Test – and I became one of his biggest fans. For years, India had depended on two batsmen – Tendulkar and Azharuddin. Now, there were two more to hold the fort – Saurav Ganguly and Rahul Dravid. (That series was also Dravid’s debut series and he also did very well although he did not get a hundred).
For the next few years, Ganguly was one of India’s frontline batsmen – and even after Azharuddin’s fall from grace, we spoke of the troika - Tendulkar, Dravid and Ganguly.
This was before VVS Laxman and Virender Sehwag entered the fray to stake their claim in India’s batting hierarchy.
I suspect it was sometime during India’s disastrous 1999-2000 series in Australia (where even Dravid did not get a fifty) that I remember reading about a chink in Ganguly’s batting armoury – that he was suspect against short-pitched fast bowling.
This may be untrue – and Ganguly insists it is – but the fact remains that the opposition has used the short delivery to its advantage and Ganguly has, time and again, played right into their hands. If this was a psyching tactic, in Ganguly’s case, it has worked wonderfully for the opposition.
This has been going on for about five years now (which is a long time in today’s busy schedule in international cricket) – and although he has got a few hundreds and fifties to show – Ganguly’s batting average has plummeted from a 50-odd excellent figure to a still-good-but-nowhere-near-impressive-enough 41-odd. If Azharuddin fell from grace for reasons which had nothing to do with his batting, Ganguly seems to be steadily falling from grace for reasons which have everything to do with batting alone.
It is difficult to see a player you like struggling so much – especially when you have been enthralled so often by his clean, dominating batting. Who can forget the 1999 World Cup thrashing of Sri Lanka ? For years, Ganguly had the cleanest cover drive in the game and his taking on of spinners had become legendary. It just does not seem to happen anymore, at least not in Tests.
He continues to do well in the limited overs version of the game – a sign that where the need is not to play out a long innings, he can still be reasonably counted upon. But in Tests, where you sometimes have to just stay there for a session or two, Ganguly seems to have increasingly lost the plot.
I am not unused to this. Over twenty years ago, I saw my then-favourite batsman Gundappa Vishwanath struggling to get runs that he could have got in his sleep just a few years before. The classic square-cut, the exotic late-cut, the fluent flick past mid-wicket – trademarks of Vishy – suddenly became something to yearn for as they got increasingly rare. His struggle was extremely painful to watch – he himself refused to accept it as anything other than a temporary loss of form. Finally, when he was not selected for the 1983 World Cup squad to England, a decision that came to him and the country as a huge surprise, it was the final writing on the wall for him. I still have memories of a picture in a magazine of that time where Vishy was at the airport (Bombay or Delhi, I don’t remember) wishing the Indian team the best of luck for the tournament. He was bitter, no doubt, but he was too big-hearted to allow his personal disappointment to come in the way of wishing the team success. The caption for the picture read “End of an era ?”.
I am digressing. We are discussing Saurav Ganguly and, as is typical of me, I have gone back to the days of Sunny and Vishy. Put it down to the bane of carrying too much cricket history in my head.
Back to Ganguly. I am not suggesting for one moment that Ganguly’s career is coming to an end or that his best days are behind him or that he should be replaced by somebody else. My only point is that there have been precedents of players going woefully out of form, some for extended periods, and many have not survived the dip. Ganguly has been fortunate in that he is in the strongest Indian batting side ever, so his own limited contributions in the last five years have been compensated by abundant contributions from the others. Added to this is the fact that he is Indian captain – which serves as considerable (if not absolutely water-tight) insurance for retaining his place in the side. Vishwanath did not have this luxury. Neither was he captain during his lean period, nor did others necessarily carry the team if he failed.
Which brings me to the subject I really wanted to talk about – Ganguly’s captaincy. I am going to become extremely unpopular by the time I am done but I will risk this. For I have to say what I think, even if it defies popular belief.
Inspite of Ganguly’s batting failures in the last few years, I believe he is better than his recent performances indicate. I can accept that he is going through a rough patch and will prove his detractors wrong – that big innings is just round the corner.
What I just cannot accept is what so many people all over the world believe - that Ganguly is a brilliant captain.
Figures and opinions will be thrown in my face to prove me wrong. After all, Ganguly has the most successful captaincy record in Indian cricket. Many leading ex-captains and commentators go ga-ga over Ganguly’s captaincy. He comes across as an aggressive captain, seems very passionate about the game, does not hide behind excuses and has transformed the Indian side into a performing unit. That is what I am repeatedly told.
I beg to differ. If the ICC player rankings are anything to go by, India has some of the world’s top batsmen and top bowlers at the moment. A really top captain would have leveraged this abundant wealth of talent and skills to win not just the odd Test but almost every Test India plays. Maybe this is overly ambitious and optimistic and I do admit that a team like Australia is definitely in a league above India, but India, under Ganguly has not half-achieved what it could and should have. Sure it is third in the ICC rankings but looking at the quality of teams below it, anything lower than third would be a disgrace.
Whenever we talk of Ganguly’s captaincy, one point is immediately brought up – under him, India has become the only real challenger to Australia, having beaten them in a home series in 2001 and almost beaten them in Australia in 2004. So Ganguly deserves credit for this.
Utter nonsense. India’s 2001 performance had everything to do with Laxman and Harbhajan Singh. Its 2004 performance in Australia had everything to do with a whole host of performances from almost every Indian player and a weakened Aussie side.
When Australia visited India late last year, they set the record straight. Ganguly missed a couple of games but he was overall captain and must take responsibility for India’s dismal showing.
Under Ganguly, India has done well notably well in 4 series of consequence :
- against Australia at home in 2001
- against England in 2002
- against Australia in Australia in 2004
- against Pakistan in Pakistan in 2004
In all these series, my argument is that India would have done whatever it did, whether being led by Ganguly or by anybody else.
By the same token, if Ganguly is such a brilliant captain, why did India lose the away-series in the West Indies in 2001-02 ? I remember it being a very average West Indian side. Reason : The Indian big guns, notably Dravid and Tendulkar and even Kumble, did not fire consistently and Sehwag was missing. Ganguly’s captaincy counts for nought if his talented team has an off-day or off-series.
Sure, Ganguly led India to the World Cup final in 2003. Again my argument is that any other captain would have done the same – there was nothing special that Ganguly did.
If Ganguly is such a brilliant captain, how is it that India could not capture four Pakistani wickets on the last day at Mohali ? Sure Kamran Akmal and Razzaq batted very well and the wicket was flat, but could not Ganguly inspire his bowlers to finish off the game, considering the prize at stake ? Any other captain in his place would have got much more flak than Ganguly did. But then he is the “blue-eyed” captain, so this total failure was conveniently glossed over.
Everybody knows that this is the weakest Pakistani side to ever visit India and still India is struggling to win the series hands-down. Surely the captain should take responsibility for this.
As for Ganguly’s aggression and passion, it counts for nothing. If aggression and passion is all it takes, anybody can demonstrate these qualities and claim captaincy. It takes effort to make ordinary players do extraordinary things, to envision and lead to victory a side when every other team player has lost hope and looks totally down and out. Ask Allan Border and Imran Khan, two captains who had far less skilled players at their disposal and who turned them into World Cup winning players. True, Ganguly may have led India into the World Cup final of 2003 but let’s face it, India had a very strong squad with Tendulkar in full form and the one team that could have thrashed India, did so very convincingly. What great captaincy skills did Ganguly exhibit when Australia were thrashing India from the first ball of that final ?
I am ending this blog now. It is not organized in any manner but I am glad I have written this. It takes a load off my mind.
My take on Saurav Ganguly is somewhat different from that of many others. Most people criticize his batting but praise his captaincy. For me, it is different.
I can tolerate Saurav Ganguly’s repeated batting failures. Hopefully he will come good soon.
I cannot tolerate this hype about his “great” captaincy. He is leading a team with top players and has not shown the results he should have. Mohali hurts real bad for me, even today.
I would like to still see Ganguly in the side, playing under somebody else. Rahul Dravid, Sachin Tendulkar, whoever. I don’t expect the results to be any worse than what Ganguly has produced – this, for me, will be the final explosion of the myth of “Ganguly’s great captaincy”.
Like millions of other Indians, I reveled in the glory years of Ganguly. When he made his debut hundred at Lord’s almost nine years ago, I was “over the moon”. He followed it up with another hundred in the next Test – and I became one of his biggest fans. For years, India had depended on two batsmen – Tendulkar and Azharuddin. Now, there were two more to hold the fort – Saurav Ganguly and Rahul Dravid. (That series was also Dravid’s debut series and he also did very well although he did not get a hundred).
For the next few years, Ganguly was one of India’s frontline batsmen – and even after Azharuddin’s fall from grace, we spoke of the troika - Tendulkar, Dravid and Ganguly.
This was before VVS Laxman and Virender Sehwag entered the fray to stake their claim in India’s batting hierarchy.
I suspect it was sometime during India’s disastrous 1999-2000 series in Australia (where even Dravid did not get a fifty) that I remember reading about a chink in Ganguly’s batting armoury – that he was suspect against short-pitched fast bowling.
This may be untrue – and Ganguly insists it is – but the fact remains that the opposition has used the short delivery to its advantage and Ganguly has, time and again, played right into their hands. If this was a psyching tactic, in Ganguly’s case, it has worked wonderfully for the opposition.
This has been going on for about five years now (which is a long time in today’s busy schedule in international cricket) – and although he has got a few hundreds and fifties to show – Ganguly’s batting average has plummeted from a 50-odd excellent figure to a still-good-but-nowhere-near-impressive-enough 41-odd. If Azharuddin fell from grace for reasons which had nothing to do with his batting, Ganguly seems to be steadily falling from grace for reasons which have everything to do with batting alone.
It is difficult to see a player you like struggling so much – especially when you have been enthralled so often by his clean, dominating batting. Who can forget the 1999 World Cup thrashing of Sri Lanka ? For years, Ganguly had the cleanest cover drive in the game and his taking on of spinners had become legendary. It just does not seem to happen anymore, at least not in Tests.
He continues to do well in the limited overs version of the game – a sign that where the need is not to play out a long innings, he can still be reasonably counted upon. But in Tests, where you sometimes have to just stay there for a session or two, Ganguly seems to have increasingly lost the plot.
I am not unused to this. Over twenty years ago, I saw my then-favourite batsman Gundappa Vishwanath struggling to get runs that he could have got in his sleep just a few years before. The classic square-cut, the exotic late-cut, the fluent flick past mid-wicket – trademarks of Vishy – suddenly became something to yearn for as they got increasingly rare. His struggle was extremely painful to watch – he himself refused to accept it as anything other than a temporary loss of form. Finally, when he was not selected for the 1983 World Cup squad to England, a decision that came to him and the country as a huge surprise, it was the final writing on the wall for him. I still have memories of a picture in a magazine of that time where Vishy was at the airport (Bombay or Delhi, I don’t remember) wishing the Indian team the best of luck for the tournament. He was bitter, no doubt, but he was too big-hearted to allow his personal disappointment to come in the way of wishing the team success. The caption for the picture read “End of an era ?”.
I am digressing. We are discussing Saurav Ganguly and, as is typical of me, I have gone back to the days of Sunny and Vishy. Put it down to the bane of carrying too much cricket history in my head.
Back to Ganguly. I am not suggesting for one moment that Ganguly’s career is coming to an end or that his best days are behind him or that he should be replaced by somebody else. My only point is that there have been precedents of players going woefully out of form, some for extended periods, and many have not survived the dip. Ganguly has been fortunate in that he is in the strongest Indian batting side ever, so his own limited contributions in the last five years have been compensated by abundant contributions from the others. Added to this is the fact that he is Indian captain – which serves as considerable (if not absolutely water-tight) insurance for retaining his place in the side. Vishwanath did not have this luxury. Neither was he captain during his lean period, nor did others necessarily carry the team if he failed.
Which brings me to the subject I really wanted to talk about – Ganguly’s captaincy. I am going to become extremely unpopular by the time I am done but I will risk this. For I have to say what I think, even if it defies popular belief.
Inspite of Ganguly’s batting failures in the last few years, I believe he is better than his recent performances indicate. I can accept that he is going through a rough patch and will prove his detractors wrong – that big innings is just round the corner.
What I just cannot accept is what so many people all over the world believe - that Ganguly is a brilliant captain.
Figures and opinions will be thrown in my face to prove me wrong. After all, Ganguly has the most successful captaincy record in Indian cricket. Many leading ex-captains and commentators go ga-ga over Ganguly’s captaincy. He comes across as an aggressive captain, seems very passionate about the game, does not hide behind excuses and has transformed the Indian side into a performing unit. That is what I am repeatedly told.
I beg to differ. If the ICC player rankings are anything to go by, India has some of the world’s top batsmen and top bowlers at the moment. A really top captain would have leveraged this abundant wealth of talent and skills to win not just the odd Test but almost every Test India plays. Maybe this is overly ambitious and optimistic and I do admit that a team like Australia is definitely in a league above India, but India, under Ganguly has not half-achieved what it could and should have. Sure it is third in the ICC rankings but looking at the quality of teams below it, anything lower than third would be a disgrace.
Whenever we talk of Ganguly’s captaincy, one point is immediately brought up – under him, India has become the only real challenger to Australia, having beaten them in a home series in 2001 and almost beaten them in Australia in 2004. So Ganguly deserves credit for this.
Utter nonsense. India’s 2001 performance had everything to do with Laxman and Harbhajan Singh. Its 2004 performance in Australia had everything to do with a whole host of performances from almost every Indian player and a weakened Aussie side.
When Australia visited India late last year, they set the record straight. Ganguly missed a couple of games but he was overall captain and must take responsibility for India’s dismal showing.
Under Ganguly, India has done well notably well in 4 series of consequence :
- against Australia at home in 2001
- against England in 2002
- against Australia in Australia in 2004
- against Pakistan in Pakistan in 2004
In all these series, my argument is that India would have done whatever it did, whether being led by Ganguly or by anybody else.
By the same token, if Ganguly is such a brilliant captain, why did India lose the away-series in the West Indies in 2001-02 ? I remember it being a very average West Indian side. Reason : The Indian big guns, notably Dravid and Tendulkar and even Kumble, did not fire consistently and Sehwag was missing. Ganguly’s captaincy counts for nought if his talented team has an off-day or off-series.
Sure, Ganguly led India to the World Cup final in 2003. Again my argument is that any other captain would have done the same – there was nothing special that Ganguly did.
If Ganguly is such a brilliant captain, how is it that India could not capture four Pakistani wickets on the last day at Mohali ? Sure Kamran Akmal and Razzaq batted very well and the wicket was flat, but could not Ganguly inspire his bowlers to finish off the game, considering the prize at stake ? Any other captain in his place would have got much more flak than Ganguly did. But then he is the “blue-eyed” captain, so this total failure was conveniently glossed over.
Everybody knows that this is the weakest Pakistani side to ever visit India and still India is struggling to win the series hands-down. Surely the captain should take responsibility for this.
As for Ganguly’s aggression and passion, it counts for nothing. If aggression and passion is all it takes, anybody can demonstrate these qualities and claim captaincy. It takes effort to make ordinary players do extraordinary things, to envision and lead to victory a side when every other team player has lost hope and looks totally down and out. Ask Allan Border and Imran Khan, two captains who had far less skilled players at their disposal and who turned them into World Cup winning players. True, Ganguly may have led India into the World Cup final of 2003 but let’s face it, India had a very strong squad with Tendulkar in full form and the one team that could have thrashed India, did so very convincingly. What great captaincy skills did Ganguly exhibit when Australia were thrashing India from the first ball of that final ?
I am ending this blog now. It is not organized in any manner but I am glad I have written this. It takes a load off my mind.
My take on Saurav Ganguly is somewhat different from that of many others. Most people criticize his batting but praise his captaincy. For me, it is different.
I can tolerate Saurav Ganguly’s repeated batting failures. Hopefully he will come good soon.
I cannot tolerate this hype about his “great” captaincy. He is leading a team with top players and has not shown the results he should have. Mohali hurts real bad for me, even today.
I would like to still see Ganguly in the side, playing under somebody else. Rahul Dravid, Sachin Tendulkar, whoever. I don’t expect the results to be any worse than what Ganguly has produced – this, for me, will be the final explosion of the myth of “Ganguly’s great captaincy”.
Labels:
cricket
Mohali : Day 2 : Uphill task for Pakistan
It must be a sobering thought for Bob Woolmer that after a tough tour to Australia his players still have no respite unless they play close to their best.
It is just two days into the series and while the honours had been pretty even at the end of the first day, the game seems to have tilted quite pronouncedly towards India by the end of the second.
Much of this turn of events can be attributed to the Pakistani showing on the field rather than any superlative performance by the Indians out there in the middle. This is not to take anything away from Sehwag but the chances he offered should have been taken by any team keen to make a statement and prove their detractors wrong. You let Sehwag off at your own peril – everybody knows (and none better than Pakistan) that he does give you chances and you have got to grab the first one that comes your way. From an opposition and match situation point of view, the biggest danger of Sehwag being around is not just that he tends to score big but the rate at which the runs come often take the game away from his opposition.
If the Pakistani players look at themselves in the mirror, they will admit that they could and should have put up a much better showing. It cannot be a particularly heartening thought to go out there to do battle with Sehwag and Dravid, knowing that there is still plenty to come from where these guys leave off.
Having said this, the game is still far from over – and even if a Pakistani victory seems rather remote at this stage, a rejuvenated performance from the Pakistanis (or a collapse by the Indians) can get the match back on even keel. Even otherwise, with rain already robbing India of a few precious hours and some more rain forecast on other days, it may be the rain gods who have the last laugh here.
As for me, while many have already written off this Pakistani side as the worst ever to tour India and a few observers have even predicted a clean sweep for the Indians, I have always considered Pakistan as the most unpredictable side in world cricket and would not be surprised if they come out today as if yesterday never happened.
For the sake of Mr. Woolmer - and many of our Pakistani fans here, I hope we see Pakistan playing to their potential. For they are much better than what they showed us on this second day of this game.
It is just two days into the series and while the honours had been pretty even at the end of the first day, the game seems to have tilted quite pronouncedly towards India by the end of the second.
Much of this turn of events can be attributed to the Pakistani showing on the field rather than any superlative performance by the Indians out there in the middle. This is not to take anything away from Sehwag but the chances he offered should have been taken by any team keen to make a statement and prove their detractors wrong. You let Sehwag off at your own peril – everybody knows (and none better than Pakistan) that he does give you chances and you have got to grab the first one that comes your way. From an opposition and match situation point of view, the biggest danger of Sehwag being around is not just that he tends to score big but the rate at which the runs come often take the game away from his opposition.
If the Pakistani players look at themselves in the mirror, they will admit that they could and should have put up a much better showing. It cannot be a particularly heartening thought to go out there to do battle with Sehwag and Dravid, knowing that there is still plenty to come from where these guys leave off.
Having said this, the game is still far from over – and even if a Pakistani victory seems rather remote at this stage, a rejuvenated performance from the Pakistanis (or a collapse by the Indians) can get the match back on even keel. Even otherwise, with rain already robbing India of a few precious hours and some more rain forecast on other days, it may be the rain gods who have the last laugh here.
As for me, while many have already written off this Pakistani side as the worst ever to tour India and a few observers have even predicted a clean sweep for the Indians, I have always considered Pakistan as the most unpredictable side in world cricket and would not be surprised if they come out today as if yesterday never happened.
For the sake of Mr. Woolmer - and many of our Pakistani fans here, I hope we see Pakistan playing to their potential. For they are much better than what they showed us on this second day of this game.
Labels:
cricket
Pak in India and a website anniversary
We have just a few days to go before the next mega cricketing spectacle begins and I, like millions of others, cannot wait. With due respect to the Ashes series (of which I myself am a huge fan), I strongly believe there is nothing as eagerly anticipated as a contest between India and Pakistan, be it a Test match or a one-dayer. If you have any doubts about this, just follow the passion on this site during an Indo-Pak cricket game and you will know what I am talking about.
During and immediately after India’s tour to Pakistan last year, I wrote a couple of articles on this site, discussing the magic of the moment and thanking Pakistan for being a wonderful host. All the misgivings before the tour turned out to be unfounded as the players and other Indians were given a warm reception wherever they went, the games were played in the best of spirit and a huge amount of goodwill was generated – best evidenced by the sight of Indian and Pakistani supporters sitting next to each other, waving their respective flags in a fiercely competitive, yet friendly atmosphere. This picture will remain imprinted in my mind for ever.
For me personally, having grown up trying to convince many around me that there was nothing to fear in building good relations with Pakistan and that there were but a few rabble-rousers - on both sides of the border – who had a vested interest in keeping the countries apart, there could have been no greater vindication of my belief. Short of saying “I told you so”, I did take an opportunity to gloat (read my article, “Thank You, Pakistan”).
I still believe that the vast majority of Indians and Pakistanis have very similar day-to-day concerns in life and have little interest in stoking fires of passionate hatred towards the other’s nation. We are extremely competitive about sports when we play each other (be it cricket or hockey) but we have the sense to separate competitiveness from hatred.
Or, do we ? If the daily messages in the media, both Indian and Pakistani, are anything to go by, the portents for the upcoming tour do not look very promising. I am not talking about the cricket itself – I am convinced that the cricket will take care of itself. It is the other aspects of the tour that are quite worrying.
By now, we are all used to the BCCI’s handling of a cricket series. We would have been very surprised if everything had been well-organised. But this time the BCCI seems to have surpassed even its own standards. Eventually everything will sort itself out (as it always does), but, as far as I know, there is still uncertainty at this moment about the venues and the TV rights. If the media is anything to go by (and I am always a bit skeptical about this), there is a report out there that some PCB officials who visited cricket grounds in India to assess their suitability for the series, were not given the most professional of treatment. Whether this is true or not, we can do without this sort of negative publicity for what is already a very sensitive situation.
But more than all BCCI’s shenanigans, what worries me is the jingoistic tone in some of India’s political establishment. It is not entirely unexpected and I would like to think of this as being only a minority voice but it is worrying nonetheless. Already there has been attempt to damage the pitch in Mohali and security was tightened at the Green Park ground, Kanpur today to prevent a vandalism attempt there. Security has also been heightened for the Feroze Shah Kotla ground in New Delhi.
The sad thing is that it does not take much to succeed in an act of vandalism or a more serious act of destruction. Which is why I respect the views of the Pakistan Cricket Board if they do not wish to play at Ahmedabad. The Gujarat Cricket Association may huff and puff about this and threaten to have the whole tour called off but the Indians need to see where Pakistan is coming from. Whether the objections are justifiable or not, if the Pakistanis do not want to be anywhere near Ahmedabad, I would say – so be it. After all, the Indians also did not want to play a Test in Karachi – much to the disappointment of millions of localites. Ultimately, the one-dayer played at Karachi was of the highest standard – not just in terms of the game, but also in terms of the atmosphere. Perhaps Ahmedabad could learn from this.
I have not even discussed the actual series yet but I will do that at another time. The performances and the results of this series may be a huge deal to millions of cricket lovers but to me, they do not even come close to the real responsibility that this series bears on itself.
It has to carry on from where the series last year in Pakistan left off. It has to continue to build on that spirit of friendship and goodwill. India has to prove that it is as friendly a neighbour as Pakistan proved to be last year. The bridge-building must continue with full fervour.
If the tour can go on without any disturbance or disruption, it would be a success, regardless of the outcome of the matches. And that should be the focus of the Indian government, the BCCI, every local cricket association and the people of India – all of who are responsible to make this a reality. Even the Indian and Pakistani players need to play their part – and if Inzamam’s comments are any indication, he is taking his ambassador role very seriously.
I am hoping against hope that everything goes off smoothly.
Lastly, talking of bridge-building reminds me of the site that first introduced me to following cricket matches online. It was 2004 - on the eve of India's tour to Pakistan that year. A group of young enthusiasts, who believed that cricket could play an important role in building a bridge between India and Pakistan, started this website called indopaktour.com. It became quite a success - the tour was a landmark success itself - and the ball is now rolling for frequent India-Pakistan exchanges. The site has since been renamed to cricbuzz.com.
It is the first anniversary of that site today and I am very happy for the site. I am sure the site creators can take great satisfaction from what they have built over the last year. For, with their limited resources but huge aspirations, they have built a bridge among cricket lovers of India and Pakistan like none other. I, for one, am indebted to them for introducing me to many Pakistani cricket lovers. And, I must say, not just Pakistanis because the site also boasts followers from Australia, West Indies, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, South Africa, Bangladesh and England.
During and immediately after India’s tour to Pakistan last year, I wrote a couple of articles on this site, discussing the magic of the moment and thanking Pakistan for being a wonderful host. All the misgivings before the tour turned out to be unfounded as the players and other Indians were given a warm reception wherever they went, the games were played in the best of spirit and a huge amount of goodwill was generated – best evidenced by the sight of Indian and Pakistani supporters sitting next to each other, waving their respective flags in a fiercely competitive, yet friendly atmosphere. This picture will remain imprinted in my mind for ever.
For me personally, having grown up trying to convince many around me that there was nothing to fear in building good relations with Pakistan and that there were but a few rabble-rousers - on both sides of the border – who had a vested interest in keeping the countries apart, there could have been no greater vindication of my belief. Short of saying “I told you so”, I did take an opportunity to gloat (read my article, “Thank You, Pakistan”).
I still believe that the vast majority of Indians and Pakistanis have very similar day-to-day concerns in life and have little interest in stoking fires of passionate hatred towards the other’s nation. We are extremely competitive about sports when we play each other (be it cricket or hockey) but we have the sense to separate competitiveness from hatred.
Or, do we ? If the daily messages in the media, both Indian and Pakistani, are anything to go by, the portents for the upcoming tour do not look very promising. I am not talking about the cricket itself – I am convinced that the cricket will take care of itself. It is the other aspects of the tour that are quite worrying.
By now, we are all used to the BCCI’s handling of a cricket series. We would have been very surprised if everything had been well-organised. But this time the BCCI seems to have surpassed even its own standards. Eventually everything will sort itself out (as it always does), but, as far as I know, there is still uncertainty at this moment about the venues and the TV rights. If the media is anything to go by (and I am always a bit skeptical about this), there is a report out there that some PCB officials who visited cricket grounds in India to assess their suitability for the series, were not given the most professional of treatment. Whether this is true or not, we can do without this sort of negative publicity for what is already a very sensitive situation.
But more than all BCCI’s shenanigans, what worries me is the jingoistic tone in some of India’s political establishment. It is not entirely unexpected and I would like to think of this as being only a minority voice but it is worrying nonetheless. Already there has been attempt to damage the pitch in Mohali and security was tightened at the Green Park ground, Kanpur today to prevent a vandalism attempt there. Security has also been heightened for the Feroze Shah Kotla ground in New Delhi.
The sad thing is that it does not take much to succeed in an act of vandalism or a more serious act of destruction. Which is why I respect the views of the Pakistan Cricket Board if they do not wish to play at Ahmedabad. The Gujarat Cricket Association may huff and puff about this and threaten to have the whole tour called off but the Indians need to see where Pakistan is coming from. Whether the objections are justifiable or not, if the Pakistanis do not want to be anywhere near Ahmedabad, I would say – so be it. After all, the Indians also did not want to play a Test in Karachi – much to the disappointment of millions of localites. Ultimately, the one-dayer played at Karachi was of the highest standard – not just in terms of the game, but also in terms of the atmosphere. Perhaps Ahmedabad could learn from this.
I have not even discussed the actual series yet but I will do that at another time. The performances and the results of this series may be a huge deal to millions of cricket lovers but to me, they do not even come close to the real responsibility that this series bears on itself.
It has to carry on from where the series last year in Pakistan left off. It has to continue to build on that spirit of friendship and goodwill. India has to prove that it is as friendly a neighbour as Pakistan proved to be last year. The bridge-building must continue with full fervour.
If the tour can go on without any disturbance or disruption, it would be a success, regardless of the outcome of the matches. And that should be the focus of the Indian government, the BCCI, every local cricket association and the people of India – all of who are responsible to make this a reality. Even the Indian and Pakistani players need to play their part – and if Inzamam’s comments are any indication, he is taking his ambassador role very seriously.
I am hoping against hope that everything goes off smoothly.
Lastly, talking of bridge-building reminds me of the site that first introduced me to following cricket matches online. It was 2004 - on the eve of India's tour to Pakistan that year. A group of young enthusiasts, who believed that cricket could play an important role in building a bridge between India and Pakistan, started this website called indopaktour.com. It became quite a success - the tour was a landmark success itself - and the ball is now rolling for frequent India-Pakistan exchanges. The site has since been renamed to cricbuzz.com.
It is the first anniversary of that site today and I am very happy for the site. I am sure the site creators can take great satisfaction from what they have built over the last year. For, with their limited resources but huge aspirations, they have built a bridge among cricket lovers of India and Pakistan like none other. I, for one, am indebted to them for introducing me to many Pakistani cricket lovers. And, I must say, not just Pakistanis because the site also boasts followers from Australia, West Indies, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, South Africa, Bangladesh and England.
The tsunami
The new year is less than two weeks old and normally this would be a period of continued celebration in most places, going on almost into the last week of January.
But this has been the most somber start to a year that I can remember, and for perfectly understandable reasons too. The huge tragedy of December 26th , which took just a few hours to unfold, but will take years for many to live down, has got the world in a state of disbelief and shock. The pictures come streaming into our living rooms and, however impactful they may be on our psyche, their effect on us is nothing compared to the trail of loss, damage and pain left behind by the tsunami on the millions that are left to contemplate their lives from here on.
While there may be criticism in some quarters (isn't there always ?) of the speed at which the world at large has acted, I believe the reaction has been about as swift as one can expect, considering the magnitude of the task on hand and the accessibility of some of the affected areas. But then, I am ensconced in the comfort of my living room and am not out there in Banda Aceh, waiting in a queue for a handful of rice. So perhaps I should just keep my opinion to myself.
For most of us, myself included, apart from financial support and prayers - both for the dead and for the well-being of the survivors - there is not much else to do to alleviate the pain of these millions. I am not a particularly religious person but I have learnt in the last three weeks to count my blessings a million times. It may appear selfish but I do it with utmost humility. For the significance of life cannot have been lost on any of us - that it required an event of such horrific proportions to bring this into focus is a reflection of how self-obsessed and often frivolous in its pursuits modern society, of which I am undeniably and perhaps slightly ashamedly a product, has become.
Having said that, it has been like a wake-up call and, governments apart, the common man has come forward as never before to contribute generously to the cause of rebuilding the affected regions. We can only hope that, with the funds pouring in, the world is able to ameliorate living conditions for the unfortunate many. I suspect this will be a long and arduous process but it has got to be done – in today's fast-paced world where attention span tends to get measured in fractions of seconds, it is important not to let the images of the calamity, however repetitive they may be, ever engender a sense of ennui. For they remind us of the task on hand and the responsibility that the world carries upon itself. Until the regions are rebuilt, at least to acceptable living standards, the task is not finished.
If at all any good could have come out of this (and yes, even in this darkest of tragedies, one must look for that ray of light), it would seem that the united front that the world has put up holds a beacon, however faint, for better understanding and relations across the globe. For once, politics was on the backburner and while I have no doubt the world will be back with its wars and tensions, there is hope that new partnerships will be forged and existing ones fortified, especially in Asia where there is a sense of family bereavement, with the members coming together and sharing their grief. That would be small consolation for the huge price that the world has paid but at least that would be a step in the right direction.
I can write more (I am usually not lost for words) but my mind is tsunamied at the moment with thoughts of the tragedy. I need some time.
But this has been the most somber start to a year that I can remember, and for perfectly understandable reasons too. The huge tragedy of December 26th , which took just a few hours to unfold, but will take years for many to live down, has got the world in a state of disbelief and shock. The pictures come streaming into our living rooms and, however impactful they may be on our psyche, their effect on us is nothing compared to the trail of loss, damage and pain left behind by the tsunami on the millions that are left to contemplate their lives from here on.
While there may be criticism in some quarters (isn't there always ?) of the speed at which the world at large has acted, I believe the reaction has been about as swift as one can expect, considering the magnitude of the task on hand and the accessibility of some of the affected areas. But then, I am ensconced in the comfort of my living room and am not out there in Banda Aceh, waiting in a queue for a handful of rice. So perhaps I should just keep my opinion to myself.
For most of us, myself included, apart from financial support and prayers - both for the dead and for the well-being of the survivors - there is not much else to do to alleviate the pain of these millions. I am not a particularly religious person but I have learnt in the last three weeks to count my blessings a million times. It may appear selfish but I do it with utmost humility. For the significance of life cannot have been lost on any of us - that it required an event of such horrific proportions to bring this into focus is a reflection of how self-obsessed and often frivolous in its pursuits modern society, of which I am undeniably and perhaps slightly ashamedly a product, has become.
Having said that, it has been like a wake-up call and, governments apart, the common man has come forward as never before to contribute generously to the cause of rebuilding the affected regions. We can only hope that, with the funds pouring in, the world is able to ameliorate living conditions for the unfortunate many. I suspect this will be a long and arduous process but it has got to be done – in today's fast-paced world where attention span tends to get measured in fractions of seconds, it is important not to let the images of the calamity, however repetitive they may be, ever engender a sense of ennui. For they remind us of the task on hand and the responsibility that the world carries upon itself. Until the regions are rebuilt, at least to acceptable living standards, the task is not finished.
If at all any good could have come out of this (and yes, even in this darkest of tragedies, one must look for that ray of light), it would seem that the united front that the world has put up holds a beacon, however faint, for better understanding and relations across the globe. For once, politics was on the backburner and while I have no doubt the world will be back with its wars and tensions, there is hope that new partnerships will be forged and existing ones fortified, especially in Asia where there is a sense of family bereavement, with the members coming together and sharing their grief. That would be small consolation for the huge price that the world has paid but at least that would be a step in the right direction.
I can write more (I am usually not lost for words) but my mind is tsunamied at the moment with thoughts of the tragedy. I need some time.
Labels:
musings - not-so-amusing
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
