Death of a Commentator

Once upon a time, Alan Wilkins used to be a humorous, lovable and engaging anchor, who was so much better than umpteen other pretenders on various sports channels. However,listen to him of late and you know instantly that he has lost it. Totally.

I hope its a passing bad phase and he can rediscover himself soon. Because we would like to see him get back to his old avatar where he was a facilitator for all the expert discussions and was not trying to that job by himself. Quite honestly, he underdstands very little of tennis and is even poorer when it comes to the history of the game. At least that is what is apparent.Especially with his rampant usage of words/phrases like "history being created", "genius" and many more!

The Murray-Wawrinka match was definitely an exciting one. And one can very well appreciate Wilkins' sentiments, him being a Welsh man. However, hasnt the British-man-winning-Wimbledon romance been done to death during the last two decades? First it was Henman which to me, was a ridiculous fantasy. Now its Murray which is definitely possible. But it doesnt grant a license even to Vijay Amritraj to pronounce him as a genius after something like a routine volley. And though it comes from Vijay, I dare say its gross injustice to words like that which deserves to be used only sparingly. When you do that you are creating hype right there.

Murray's first three rounds were Kendrick, Gulbis and Troicki which he was anyway expected to win in a canter. His first "test" (if it can be termed so) was Wawrinka, a top 20; but again someone whom Murray is expected to take in straight sets. Muray can definitely go ahead and win the tournament. But the commentators could have saved the superlatives and their limited vocabulary for the expectedly difficult matches to come and for more deserving circumstances.

Another big laugh was the phrase "British No. 1" being used generously all throughout the telecast of that match. I mean does anyone know (or care) who the British No. 2 is? Except for a period when Rusedski was sane, Britain had only one tennis player anyway!For arguments sake you can drop names like Arvind Parmar. But Oh Come on now, be a sport!

Footnote: The most exciting aspect of that match, to me, was seeing Wawrinka's devastating single handed backhand and not any of Murray's strokes of "genius".

Wimbledon Six Packs

Wimbledon 2009 looks more open than any of the earlier years.Whatever the experts might be saying about this year's men's open being a two horse race, I believe there are more contenders than that. And they are not the usual suspects.I am backing Tommy Haas to cause a few upsets at Wimbledon this year. He has been in tremendous form and it just requires him to translate that and his quiet confidence into results. He almost did that at Roland Garros and it was almost as if history intervened. Fernando Verdaso - as surprising as it might sound - is another man who I am picking to cause a few flutters. And then there is Roddick who warrants an obligatory mention at the big W. That makes it 5. If there is a 6th man to be picked, I would go for Cilic, who is on the verge of justifying his immense talent.

In the women's event, Venus remains a firm favorite followed by Serena. Safina will find Wimbledon a tough nut to crack as she is yet to attain high comfort levels on grass, but being number 1 gives her a big mental edge in close matches. So she is in. Caroline Wozniaki and Sam Stosur my 4th and 5th picks in the women's draw. And the 6th pick is the only one for which I let my heart overrule the head. Who else but Ana.

Leave Her Alone

Yesterday's Times of India carried a profile of Saina Nehwal. Starting from what she eats during the day - and what she doesnt (icecream etc.) - they chronicled her sacrifices as a teenager, her sleeping habits and her punishing schedule. For Saina's sake, I hope these guys stay off her.

Why does the media make a big deal about these? Every one of the things that they portrayed as a "sacrifice" or some kind of superhuman self control is actually the regimen of every sportsperson who is out to win. And make no mistake; in individual sports, the break-through age has gone down drastically. You just have to look into a tournament draw to realize that. The most prominent example is the seemingly endless army of Russian teenage tennis players in the top 20. Kournikova, Dementieva, Myskina, Sharapova, Kuznetsova, Safina, Chekvatadze; the list just refuses to end! After being done with them, as an afterthought, you could also think of names like Michael Phelps, Rafa Nadal and now Saina Nehwal.

Just because teenagers being achievers - and winners - has not happened in our country on a regular basis does not mean that we have to romanticise these moments. Maybe I am being too harsh, but these kind of reports carry a "happy-with-little-things" undertone. Just like reports which went gaga over Sania Mirza being the first Indian to reach the top 32! For heavens sake, it has only been a few years that seedings are done till 32. Otherwise it is just another number in the ranking computer which when translated in english means "also ran". To put the whole thing in perspective, Sania Mirza and Jelena Jankovic starting out during (pretty much) the same time. Jankovic has since reached the top while Sania still remains the undisputed queen of the outside courts. A definite victim of the "hapy-with-little-things" syndrome.

Cricket apart, Saina is arguably the biggest bundle of talent - and ability - from India since PT Usha. So she should aim right for the top and nothing less. She has miles to go and that she will, provided she keeps the focus. Firstly, she needs to shed a few more kilos during the next year for her on-court movement and also in order to keep injuries away. She needs to keep making it to the weekends at tournaments and the grand prize (read All England/World/Olympics) will definitely come somewhere down the line. The mini-biographies and anecdotes can wait till such time.

BS

Game, Set, Match - The Sports Quiz

At the "Space Circle", in an auditorium teeming with 35 teams, the best informed sports lovers fought tooth and nail for top honours in "Game, Set, Match"; a sports quiz presented by "Adverb" and sponsored by "JP Realty", "Space Circle" and "Sugandha Garments".

In their new avatar as quizmasters were Mr. Ashok Sanyal and Mr. Somnath Chanda; otherwise team-mates in the prominent quiz outfit "Quizzing Unlimited". And they did not disappoint with their content - which covered an entire gamut of sports, incidents, achievements and trivia.

The written preliminary round was a 30 question knockout to decide the 8 teams who would qualify for the finals. The usual suspects were all there in fine fettle but there were a few rookie teams in the final as well.

The questions for the finals were designed to challenge even the stalwarts at their own game. "Which Sportsman was a weakling as a child before going on to excel in his family sport, having taken it up as a mark of respect to his brother who died in the field of play"? "What connects (in form of pictures) Zaheer Abbas, Deutsche bank, Somerset County(logo) and a West Indian calypso?"Which term in sport is technically a movement between 0.1 seconds of a certain sound having reached the human ear?"

In case you were clean bowled, the answers are Jahangir Khan, Sunil Gavaskar and "False Start". The Audience was knowledgable; grabbing some questions which the teams on stage could not answer and in the process, some nice audience prizes!

The battle hung in a fine balance right till the very end and all that seperated the top two were a mere 2 points. "Byapok Byatha" (Souvik, Soubhadra and Titash) finished on the wrong side of those 2 points, being edged out by the champions "Ump, Bump, Fizz" (Deepanjan, Debopam and Sounak). "Inmaniacs" (Gautam, Anirudh and Abhijit) finished second runners up.

The top three teams received generous cash prizes from the prize sponsors "JP Realty". "Adverb" promises to be back with more such events in the near future.

Know-it-alls or Poor Losers?

Actually Both! Indian cricket fans are a bunch of know-it-alls and more importantly, poor losers.

Admitted - no group of supporters or perhaps a few react kindly to defeat. However, most sleep over it and let it pass, instead of trying to pull down individuals and strategies over a million reams, reels and forums (the new age tool). Unsuccessful cricketers turned commentators - with either a legendary surname or some Ranji success as their credentials - fuel the fire over inane panel discussions, misleading the common cricket fan. Knowing the country's passion for the game, it is only natural that people should discuss cricket at "addas"; everything from what Dhoni did wrong to the best possible combination or batting order. However one expects the media to show these obsessed but illiterate cricket fans some perspective instead of going blatantly for higher copies/TRP.

Lets face it. There have been bigger shocks this year in sport.Rafa losing at Roland Garros and Celtics crashing out in the NBA (with the uncanny resemblance of having an injured key man) being the two which come to mind immediately. India losing in the T20 world cup does not even qualify along with these upsets (however upset we may be, emotionally).

Indian cricket has seen a lot of success in recent times. So lets not get greedy. MS and team India will have an odd bad day or 120 bad overs. But as long as they are putting in the effort, they are too good not to get back to winning ways. Lets say Vamos India! instead of being poor losers.

BS

Weirdly Wired

Trust the Indian mind to reach conclusions based on 'hunches', aka pop-psychology of the Indian variety. Throw in mild esteem issues or just pure defensiveness some cases, and the conclusions and implications are plain absurd and downright reprehensible. TOI / IANS, in their infinite wisdom, bring up, even though it's utterly irrelevant, the issue of 'proper behaviour' among some Indian students. 

Firstly, the worthies quoted as expressing concerns are probably 'embarrassed' by the behaviour (in their perception) of some students who they may see as relatively unsophisticated or even downright uncouth (that is hardly ever the case). This reeks of utter condescension on the part of Indian immigrants or residents who almost recoil at the prospect of being identified with the 'student' crowd. In any case, the whole issue is brought up as if to suggest 'these people invited trouble'. If the argument was for taking a pragmatic view and maintaining a low profile, it may have made sense, but to assume an admonishing tone betrays insecurity and lack of empathy for the victims. No matter that often the worst behaviour comes from 'locals'.

Secondly, there is no question that there is indeed a racial element to at least some of the attacks. Non-whites have had to deal with such behaviour in many predominantly white societies over the years and still do. As in other places, this kind of thuggish behaviour often emerges not from some ideological moorings or brainwashing, but from problems within, particularly in urban environments. But each of the incidents has to be looked at separately and investigations must be thorough. Now that would be a victory for some of the student bodies that have rallied around the issue. I have respect for students who have been bold enough to try and make themselves heard in the face of apathy - bearing in mind, administrations are an end in themselves these days.

Third, Victoria Police have no business telling people to not speak in their 'native language' or loudly (a lot of Indians are actually quite soft spoken). The problem is the thugs who commit these acts, and if the police really wanted to do something, they had better go about it instead of throwing subtle hints at how people ought to conduct themselves. Practical tips are useful but they ring hollow when not backed by action.

Lastly, for emphasis, none of the victims was ever an aggressor - these were unprovoked incidents from what has been reported so far. They deserve commiserations, not a judgmental tone.

- NK

Hallelujah

I feel so blessed at times. Imagine - the Pussycat Dolls, with Lady Gaga thrown in as a bonus! Truly bountiful times these.

The Truth about IPL

The only time I have turned to that 'hopeless little screen' - as Leonard Cohen called it - in recent times was to tune into the IPL. It was of course no coincidence I was in India at the time. It is impossible to get away from cricket in India - or so it seems at any rate when you are 'on vacation'.

The 'IPL experience' was better than what I expected of T20 in purely cricketing terms. There were quite a few close games, although I'm not sure it was because teams played high quality cricket consistently or because a truly dominant team is yet to emerge. Delhi and Chennai, frontrunners both, looked good, yet they were not truly dominant. Although when Hayden made his form really count, Chennai seemed to have got into cruise control with Shadab Jakati providing some surprise knock out blows. Only to have their seam bowling fall apart a bit under pressure.

Anil Kumble was cannier than ever, and watching him bowl was a delight. Not only was he not caned too often, but what truly pleased the senses was the amount of air he gave the ball and the subtle variety he threw up. Kumble continues to thrill with his ability to reinvent himself. This is in contrast to Sourav Ganguly, though in theory it should have been a smoother transition for Ganguly to the new form. Apart from a few bright spots, 'domestic' Indian batsmen generally had a poorer tournament, or at least that was my impression. Among those on the fringe, only Rohit Sharma enhanced his reputation, considering Raina is already a regular in the national side, as is Yusuf Pathan. Manish Pandey chose the best time to put his hand up; Irfan Pathan did enough to stick around, while doing nothing to dispel the impression that he may be past his peak unless he is once again hungry and willing bowl at a lively pace in the longer form. One hopes not - when he bowled with pace and confidence, Pathan was an attacking swing bowler who threatened the best. So was Lakshmipathy Balaji, although he has played much less top level cricket, who with his remodeled action seems to have lost a bit of sharpness. I wish that this were not true either, having met the easy going yet genial Chennai cricketer, at a time when he was seeking medical advice for injuries that proved to be more than just niggles.

If the cricket proved reasonably interesting, the IPL TV culture was nauseating, especially with the seven minute 'strategy break'. The Max studio team with the less than distinguished Arun Lal got on the nerves far too much. The commentary was no better. And there was much adolescent fun with all the cheerleading. For the relatively grown up, Mandira Bedi dressed and looked better, even sounded downright pleasant after a bout of L Siva or, heavens forbid, Srikkanth with the occasional Hindi throw in. If I could order a mafia hit, I might have done it on a whim when I heard Arun Lal dismissing Shane Warne's claims to Australian captaincy :) Warne's supposed transgressions may not please some, but for some it has become quite the excuse to portray the leg spinner as some sort of degenerate. It is a cricket team, for fuck's sake. We elect people far worse to run our (or is that over?) lives.

As for the strategy break, the players clearly weren't keen on it, yet the league persisted with it. I can't recollect what the franchise owners thought of this, which brings me to the power centre of the IPL. Clearly, the Modi-led administration is firmly in control of the proceedings. The franchises are eating out of Modi's hands, for the moment anyway.

Haigh on the money, again

Gideon Haigh got it absolutely spot on with his comments on Chris Gayle's controversial (yawn!) comments about Test cricket. He is right when he laments the absence of characters, which is hardly unique to cricket these days; he is also right when he rips the hypocrisy of cricket administrators in the matter. To be fair, the BCCI has not been bashful about where their priorities have lain in the last couple of decades. To that extent they have been more honest than other boards, notably the ECB, who have shown themselves almost as adept as Tony Blair and co at spin, except that they end up looking exactly like Blair in the aftermath.

Administrators are expected to be smart about how they milk the T20 opportunity - and use it to finance Test cricket, even though I am not convinced that all Test cricket is financially unviable. But this will only happen if boards see any value to Test cricket. There is still enough public support for it, at least when it is competitive.

As for characters, increasingly athletes are being forced to be robots who are 'good at what they do'. My jaw drops when people can only remember John McEnroe as an enfant terrible - well, whoever remembers Lendl now, as good a player as he was? That is not taking account the sheer genius of McEnroe, as much as 'genius' can be applied to sport. The only characters left now are the Haydens, strutting around like a bully or ones generally taking it all a bit too seriously, a la Rahul Dravid (though he is probably just a nice guy). I'll take Ian Botham any day.