Cricket versus Nationalism

Gaurav Sabnis writes:

Unpopular opinion. The most overhyped, banal, and annoying "rivalry" in all sports is the India-Pakistan non-rivalry in cricket. Because it's not a sports rivalry at all. It's just a periodic proxy for people of those two countries to express their jingoism and mutual hatred.

Quite.

Frankly, I do not understand the sense of immense happiness some fans seem to experience when India plays Pakistan. When Pakistan defeated India in what in sporting terms would be called a drubbing, in the Champions Trophy in 2017, there were many expressed that they were shocked and that it was shameful the way India lost. This time, there was a video circulating of a Pakistan fan crying as they lost while blaming the Pakistan players for being fat and unfit.

As a cricket fan, I am happier when I see a great delivery or a beautiful shot, a great spell of bowling or a great innings, no matter who it is. In the match in question for example, I loved the turn Imad Wasim was able to get. Some thing Kuldeep replicated later and bowled a sharp turner ball to dismiss Babar Azam.

Yes, it is pleasing when India wins a match, however, it isn't exuberance except on rare ocassions. Winning a limited overs World Cup match certainly does not pipe my emotions. There is the whole aspect eluded to by Sabnis that we do not really share a sporting rivalry between the nations which is true. Should I establish my sense of joy and identity from this one match?

Do we become better as a nation in any which way if we defeat Pakistan, and do we become worse if we lose against them? In a sporting contest, any team can win, and would it mean all the progress India has made as a cricketing nation, or a nation, would fail, if India came out worse off on a particular day in a game versus Pakistan? Not really.

I will enjoy my cricket regardless of what every other fan tells me while abusing India or Pakistan and it's players depending upon their nationality. 

Ball Tampering Explodes

Every one is up in arms against Steven Smith and his team, and rightly so. Ball tampering is cheating. Scheming to tamper the ball, as Smith admitted, is even more heinous. Reports are coming in that this is it for coach Lehmann and that Smith and Warner will get one year bans. Seems fair. The buck stops with the captain in cricket, which in this case is Steven Smith. Let me be clear, I am satisfied that he is being punished. 

Two points, I will ponder here, though. 

Firstly, why so much outrage at Australia compared to South Africa, say. It seems to me that for years, every one has been trying to get a point to bash Australia over. When finally, after years, they are caught red handed, all hell breaks loose. Harbhajan cries foul about the punishment meted out to him ages ago. Every one is raging. Finally, they get to say, 'fuck you, Australia'. This explains the reaction of the world far more than the reason given - the boorish culture which has existed under Smith, Warner and Lehmann. Else, I don't see why the cricket world would explode as it has. Is it exploding because it's cheating, or because Australia has done it and has no where to hide?

The second point is about people trying to justify this anger saying this is different from other times we have had ball tampering as usually they are impromptu events. I would like to ask those gentlemen, how did the mint used to tamper the ball suddenly come on the cricket field in earlier cases? Ideally, I would have liked to have seen Faf du Plessis also banned for a year for his actions. 

Why stop at that? Dravid was clearly seen using a cough lozenge. Why should standards be different for Dravid and Afridi compared to Smith? The Tendulkar incident makes me cringe now when I think about it. 

On the third day Tendulkar had bowled four overs of gentle medium pace but had almost immediately started swinging the ball more than any other bowler. The local TV producer instructed cameramen to zoom in on Tendulkar's hands, ostensibly to check what grip he was using. Instead, on two occasions he was spotted working on the seam of the ball with the thumb and forefinger of his left hand. The commentators went into overdrive and close-up replays were shown ad nauseam. 

In his eyrie Denness saw this and asked to be sent a copy of the recording. What he saw left him in no doubt something untoward had occurred. But lost in the maelstrom that followed was the fact that Tendulkar stood accused of not informing the umpires he was cleaning the ball under Law 42.3 (b), rather than tampering with it. 

On the fourth day Denness informed India he would be banning Tendulkar for one match, suspended for a year, for his actions. Ganguly was to be given a similar suspended punishment for not controlling his team - Wisden noted that considering he had been suspended and/or fined three times in the previous 12 months "he was fortunate to get away with only a suspended ban for not upholding the spirit of the game".

[Cricinfo]

No one in Australia is at least going 'oh Smith is a god and cannot have any blemishes'. Mike Denness was cast away from the ICC soon after, for no fault of his except doing his job. 

I am glad Smith and company are being penalised for the wrong doing. I wonder why the cricket world didn't wake up earlier to this malaise. While it's better late than never, it will take a culture change in various countries to root out ball tampering from cricket. 

Ill Preparedness Ahead of South Africa

India is touring South Africa for three tests, six ODIs and three T20 internationals. This is the twenty fifth year and we are yet to win a test series in South Africa. Having toured the country so many times, you would think that we would have learnt a fair bit.

Never has an Indian team went to South Africa so unprepared. India has always had tour matches before the test matches. In the modern world of lots of cricket, teams even adopt a policy of less tour games. Alternatively, they prepare extensively at home in conditions tailormade for challenges they will face in foreign lands on artificial pitches with bowling machines and throw in. In addition to that, they tour nearby countries. England tours Bangladesh, for example, before coming to India to acclimitise. Even South Africa, the home country, played versus Zimbabwe as a means to get prepared for the matches ahead versus India.

India never felt the need for the same. For BCCI, matches versus Sri Lanka at home and away a million times a year makes more sense. Virat Kohli, the Indian test captain, pointed out that ideally they require a month to prepare for such a tour. Here, in Kohli's own words, in two days after the Sri Lankan tour ended, they were to fly to South Africa.

Is it a wonder then that India slumped to 92 runs for the lost of 7 wickets in 41.4 overs facing a real danger of being bowled out below 100 and before facing even 50 overs? Had it not been for Pandya's raw talent, India would have been in a terrible situation. Who do we blame? The cricketers for not having the time to adjust to the bouncier, more seaming wickets, or the BCCI, for not putting cricket first?

If India loses the first test, some how draws the second and goes on to win the third, would it not have been an opportunity missed to win the first series in South Africa in 25 years merely due to the lack of foresight of the people holding office at BCCI? Maybe some one can give a detailed explanation why the matches with Sri Lanka were very important financially. Why can't the BCCI, the richest board in all of cricket, put cricket first, just for a change? 

The Power Struggle - Kohli versus Kumble

A lot of people have commented on social media that Kohli got Kumble out. Kumble's release on twitter directly mentions Kohli too. I would be quite surprised if Kohli would stand against Kumble if he was the only one having an issue with Kumble. Is the Indian team a bunch which doesn't believe in discipline? Kohli has been quite a disciplined cricketer. So to question this, I find odd. 

I am not sure why people can't accept Kumble might have been a bad coach and so he was wanted out by the players. When the same thing happened with Kapil Dev, no one believed otherwise and they backed Tendulkar and the other players who didn't think Kapil was a good coach. If Kumble was any thing but a disaster, people wouldn't have wanted him out.

I do know for any basic job you require experience. Has Kumble had any coaching experiences for a season with even a state side or any coaching training that suddenly he got the top coaching position in cricket in the country? One way coaches could get to the top position is by coaching club and first class teams apart from learning the aspects of coaching. For international teams, dealing with A teams , taking up smaller jobs in the Indian team first would be better. A lot of time in soccer for example, the person who get's the manager's job is first used part time before getting the managerial position or he has a lot of experience. 'Indian coach' is a glamour job which attracts all and sundry. Last time there were 20-30 applicants for coach. The number of misses we have had in the past 15-16 years is too much. We can't afford it as a team.

Finally, I wonder how much of a power struggle this is. Gavaskar lashing out is interesting. Kohli and company aren't bowing to pressure of former players. Kohli wanted Shastri as coach. Got Kumble. He wasn't able to work and was opposed and removed. Kohli appeared in every press conference. He is the captain and he is taking a lot of control in his hands. It's not a bad thing. Ten committees try to take Indian cricket in ten directions. Ultimately the blame game ends with the captain. I like some one who leads from the front rather than one who doesn't.

India versus Pakistan

India plays Pakistan in a cricket match on Sunday. However, it is much more than a cricket match, every one will tell you. In many ways it is. So many people who don't usually watch cricket matches would watch. They will abuse the other country's players or their own; make them into superstars or throw stones on their houses depending upon the result.

In a time of right wing politics prevailing in our country, the atmosphere will be even more charged up. The government says that we can play Pakistan in ICC tournaments but not in bilateral tournaments. I can't quite understand this stand. If it's not okay to play them, surely it's not okay to play them, period. Not playing versus Pakistan in such a tournament would lead to commercial loss. So this is probably the real reason but any ways.

With so much fervour associated with the match, drama and false pride abounds. A fan posted on WhatsApp a hand written note that he would never watch another Indian match if we lost this game. Another asked me to leave the country as I thought that India will lose the match.

Why can't we focus on the cricket? Pakistan bowls well, so does India. Indian batting is stronger but I feel Yuvraj-Jadhav-Dhoni is a a chink in the armour which Pakistan can exploit. Jadhav and Dhoni haven't had a chance to bat much either so far. Hasan, Raees, Shadab and every one else are bowling really well. Moreover, Pakistan is fielding exceptionally well. This never ever happens. They have a tremendous spirit about them right now.

Why can't we focus on the pitch and the weather and cricketing aspects? There is no shame in losing a cricket match and no extra pride in winning one. Of course one can feel happy the team one supports won. However, the upmanship beyond the cricket which we see every Ram and Kabir expouse is cringeworthy. 

Anil Kumble and the Art of the Coach

This week saw the start of the eight edition of the Champions Trophy. A tournament which started as a knock out in Dhaka in 1998, it has had a storied past. The week has also seen rumblings about a controversy regarding Anil Kumble as coach of the Indian cricket team. The BCCI has taken in fresh applications for the coach and Kumble is part of the process and among the six people who have applied for the job.

There are topics which emerged like Kumble being a strict disciplinarian and fitness freak which didn't sit well with some of the players. Anand Vasu brushed aside the whole controversy as Chinese Whispers. We should probably not indulge in it then.

I will indulge any ways. When the rumours first emerged, it was said that the reason Kumble will be booted is that he had backed the players for the pay hike and the BCCI was not happy with it. Later, reports started emerging that players were not happy with him including Kohli.

However, no one has commented any thing officially. It would have helped if the process for the coach had happened after the Champions Trophy. It would have also helped if Kohli had made some sort of statement backing Kumble regardless of whether he is happy with him or not to shut down the whispers once and for all.

One aspect which troubles me is that BCCI kept Duncan Fletcher as coach till his tenure expired. They could have sacked him earlier but they chose not to do so. For months later, they had Shastri as a figurehead in the team, some one Kohli seemed quite happy with. Yet, they went for Kumble to the utter dejection of Shastri who had also applied for the job.

The coach is an important position. The successful runs of the team has coincided with great coaches - John Wright and Gary Kirsten. We cannot play musical chairs with this post. Depending upon the player and fan, one thinks the coach has more of a management role or more of a coaching role. This shouldn't be the case either.

In England, the roles are defined. Andrew Strauss is director of operations and there are coaches which work on their own roles. Andrew Strauss has remained the director of operations for a while now and it has lead to a functioning which has lead to some sort of system for the English team. Players are not picked and dropped for a game usually and it's mostly for a season or series before they are let go. There are so many aspects. Why do we not have such roles. We have appointed Ganguly, Dravid and Tendulkar as part of a committee but how often do they actually meet?

What I call for is some structure, more than any thing. Let's have basic qualifications and track record for coaching the Indian national team. We had a fiasco when Kapil Dev was coach, similarly with Greg Chappell (whose coaching experiences with smaller sides were quite ordinary). Let's bring in better coaches, better administration process. Let's give due respect to each position. Let's have players talk about issues with the media and not have them mumb about it to give rise to these Chinese Whispers. I am sure we can. 

Let's Put Cricket First

The BCCI and ICC are at odds over how much revenues should go to the BCCI. What bothers me most about this situation is that there is no willingness to work together and come up with a solution for the welfare of cricket. Two years ago, BCCI had held the ICC to ransom by giving it's proposal and blackmailing countries that it wouldn't tour if the proposals were  not adhered to. Since then, the Indian cricket team has toured many of these countries. It is no surprise that Sri Lanka, which the BCCI is to tour this year, voted with the BCCI.

People in Nepal watch a cricket match. 

The positive aspect of the proposals put forward by Mr. Shashank Manohar is that the smaller countries get a portion of the money pie. We cannot understand how successful cricket is by how much money it earns. If money was the only gauge, we could hold the IPL twelve months a year and cricket could be the number one sport (cringe) in the world.

It is a strong step for cricket that the countries have held firm in reducing a chunk of the pie for the BCCI and letting it go to the smaller nations. In 1996, we had 12 countries playing the World Cup with Kenya defeating the West Indies in a match. Ireland's progress was thwarted by politics many a times. There was even a proposal to have a ten team world cup as it would be better 'economically'. Why isn't there more support for countries like Afghanistan, Nepal, Ireland and others? Countries should pay these smaller countries a visit and play three day games there. More tour matches should exist on long tours.

T20 should exist but only in small pockets. Have a 1.5 months window two times a year when all the T20 cricket takes place. It shouldn't be T20 any ways. It should be 25 or 30 over games with 6 wickets a side maximum to restore some sort of parity between bat and ball.

Chances are, we will have BCCI along with the Big 3 will hold cricket ransom again. However, it is commendable that cricket at least put up a fight.

Let's put cricket first.