Playing For (just) Pride

What it means to represent your nation in a sport? And how important is money for you? It’s amazing that in different contexts these perennial questions have resurfaced again. It started with ICC chief executive Malcolm Speed responding to players’ complaint of too much cricket. He said that they (players) were in their chosen profession and no one forced them to play cricket. It’s not too surprising either to see players playing club or country cricket while complaining of too much cricket at the same time. Shahid Afridi is a very good example. Just days after retiring from tests in the name of too much cricket he is playing in England now.

Ex Indian captain Sunil Gavaskar also disagreed with notion of too much cricket and said he was willing to work hard 365 days of year for India. Gavaskar is a proud Indian and his nationalism is well known for years. Another Indian great Tendulkar was rather diplomatic two days ago and asked for balance. So does it make him less patriotic? Ex Pakistani captain and coach Javed Miandad also rubbished the call for less cricket and claimed in his days they wanted more. West Indian fast bowler Michael Holding (who played against both Gavaskar and Miandad) and now a reputed commentator has views in sync with modern players though. He thinks there is too much cricket and he couldn’t last as long as he did if he was to play today.

Is there really a connection between nationalism and playing day in and day out? West Indies cricket is in turmoil for a number of years now and one of the reasons for that is constant dispute between WICB and players. West Indies remain only international team without retainer contracts for its players and negotiations never seem to be over. Richie Richardson (who captained West Indies in 1996 world cup) criticized that present generation takes no pride in playing for their team but only worry about money, unlike (obviously) his generation and the ones prior to that.

Wondering why these past players often don’t agree with present crop? It seems like a generation gap struggle often seen in families, between a father and a son. With all due respect to Gavaskar’s patriotism (And I am one of his biggest admirer) it’s not directly convertible into physical limits a body can extend to. As a matter of fact if only a will to win can do everything no batsman will ever get out due to exhaustion or cramps. No soldier will die on a battle field for reason other then getting shot at the temple.

It’s always important to be in others’ shoe before making a judgment and I have little doubt if these past players were to play cricket today, they would have been feeling the heat too. Coming to Richardson’s remark it’s also not in tune with time. There was a time when there were no radio, TV or even newspapers and generations lived through it without complaining. In Richardson’s era no international team had retainer contracts and most didn’t have coaches either. You demand things when they are available to your contemporaries but not you. True West Indies players despite being best in the world were not the richest but that’s a generational thing. 80 s team was surely better paid than 60s team. Even today West Indian players won’t be richest but they too deserve a decent retainer contract as is the norm in this 21st century for international teams.

With pride alone you can sacrifice your life for your country but to continue living and serving it you will need to keep giving your body rest as needed and make some money to give a life to your family. And this wouldn’t mean that pride is missing by any degree of imagination.

Tendulkar: A different view on retirement

Two interesting statements came out yesterday. Shahid Afridi took temporary retirement from test cricket and Indian coach Greg Chappell said Sachin Tendulkar still has a role to play especially as a mentor. This generated a thought in my mind that no one has talked about so far.

Talk of too much burden on player is everyday thing and it’s a fact. Neither this burden is going to reduce in future. The result is retirement from one form of the game by several cricketers. Most famous probably is Shane Warne’s retirement from one day cricket after last world cup in 2003. It came slightly early for him as events turned out after he was handed a year long ban for using drugs just before the tournament started.

Often it is selectors, and not players themselves, who decide if a player won’t play a particular form of the game any more. Steve Waugh and Anil Kumble are two such cases. Only one Indian cricketer so far took retirement in just one form of cricket initially and he was Javagal Srinath who first retired from test cricket only. It’s another matter that he had to come back due to pressure from Captain Saurav Ganguly, selectors and fans.

Just before leaving for London for his shoulder surgery recently, Sachin Tendulkar replied ‘I am not interested in that question’ when a journalist asked him about his retirements plans. He is the best person to judge when to go of course. Every cricket fan would want him to continue playing for years if it was possible but age and amount of workload has taken its toll on him. May be he should consider retiring from one day game after next year’s world cup and there after concentrate only on test cricket. Even his contemporary Brian Lara has cut down on number of ODIs to prolong his test career. Indian team too doing a lot better in shorter form than in tests and this is where Sachin has so much to offer. Physically too demands would be less with no flying around every second or third day for largely meaning less one day series. Bradman never played one day game and now is the time for Sachin to only concentrate on reaching those bradmansque highs he was almost touching in test cricket.

Historically World Cups have been swan song of leading cricketers. Every world cup brings with it last chance to see some of the greatest cricketers of the generation. Sunil Gavaskar retired after 1987 world cup, Imran Khan took final retirement after winning 1992 world cup, 2003 world cup saw curtains on Wasim Akram’s splendid career just to name few. Sanath Jayasuriya has already announced his plan to retire from one day game as well after world cup 2007. All of these great cricketers have won a world cup but Sachin hasn’t even after playing in four world cups so far and despite being the most successful batsman by a distance at sports’ premier stage. So what would be better than Sachin saying goodbye to one day cricket with tag of world champions on 28th April 2007 in Bridgetown, Barbados?

The 'Truth' is out

So the truth is finally out. Marcus Trescothick left the Indian tour crying, as reported everywhere, because he caught a virus. I doubt I read more interesting piece of news this year so far. How brave Michael Vaughan and Steve Harmison were for letting whole world know they got injured before leaving India tour midway. They let their privacy hit for four. Next time I have flue I must keep it secret?

In his statement Trescothick also hinted of suffering from home sickness apart from this ‘bug’ that couldn’t let him drink or eat. Another interesting statement he made is “Touring Pakistan and India are probably the hardest you can do, because it is not easy to take your family away to that part of the world.” Now is this an excuse or a slap on face of all the tourists who care to visit the subcontinent with their families or just a rather polite way of saying he is becoming another in the line of top cricketers who never wanted to visit South Asia. Trescothick has visited that part of the world number of times so probably that’s not the case.

Not sure who Trescothick is expecting to buy this reasoning. He demanded his privacy be respected and he could just remain silent on it instead of coming up with hard to believe reasons. Everyone has personal matters to attend and he too is entitled. Flintoff visited home to see his new born before the start of one day series and has even got flak from ex English cricketers for doing this. That was a personal matter too and he didn’t have to let it be public (may be it couldn’t remain secret either way) as he did. Few years ago Graham Thorpe was going through personal turmoil due to separation with his then wife. Initially it was only known as personal matter until news reached to press. Nobody blames Thorpe for leaving England team when he was still their best batsman of the time. Thank goodness none of these other guys came up with a pseudo excuse.

We respect your privacy Mr Trescothick. We don’t have to know the exact cause of your leaving the tour. You don’t owe any explanations to anyone. England team needs you so it’s good news you are out of the trauma you were going through. But for truth’s sake please don’t make any more statements and just get on with the game.

...and then there were none

Wrote this one a while back...but thought I was being too sentimental about the sport. I guess I will let it be read though...maybe I am being too senti. Who gives a crap...:)

========================================================

So what happened to Tendulkar again? Oh that’s right; he failed to win India a match once again. Really, he’s over the hill now isn’t he? He is the mediocre shadow of his colossal self. He is the worst player in the Indian team today. He does not even warrant a place in the eleven. Let’s boo him come on…boo Tendulkar boo. Boo for being the hero of a sick team for so long. Boo for almost being the god amongst men for as long as most people remember watching cricket. Boo for being there when the team went through hell and boo for being there when you took on other teams single handedly to make up for the mediocrity and insincerity of your other players. Come on lets boo him..

But can you boo a person like that and not feel a slight bit immoral about it. A man who has borne the brunt of the expectations of a hungry nation. A person whose achievements bear no count. A person who stood alone in the ruins once and saw an empire built around himself. The fact remains that the emperor of that empire was once Ganguly and now it’s Dravid, who’s been the logical successor. But the fact also remains that the empire was always built around one person. There was one constant in a team plagued by controversies ranging from betting and fixing to corruption and politics. There was one person you would always look up to and say – please perform a miracle today…please make us happy. There was this one person people trusted would save any game. Any game…absolutely any situation. He could make your day, he could move the nation…he could even move the stock market they said. Let’s boo him today?

Now the incident where the hero was booed has been exaggerated to a hype by the press and commentators. It is always fun to see the mighty fall; it is always spectacular to see a hero become human, breathtaking to see the wings of an angel clipped. The fall of the one Sourav Ganguly was magnificent wasn’t it? It sold more newspapers than any political downfall. We saw one mighty hero fall and that was a thrill. Lets do it to the mightiest one of them all next.

Now let’s face the facts. Sachin Tendulkar has been playing a game for sixteen years. A virtual eternity when talking of sports and sportsmen. Heroes have their time and heroes have a mortal soul. Michael Jordan fell, so did Mohammed Ali. Babe Ruth’s gone and so is Donald Bradman. Sachin Tendulkar is not yet spent but one day he will be. I think that the boos some people heard in Mumbai recently were a sounds of things to come. Indian public have never been very good at retiring heroes. In any field (not just cricket or sports) they have always taken their heroes off pedestals and thrown them away like toys they don’t want anymore. They did it to Sourav Ganguly recently. Much as he deserved to be out of the team, he did not deserve to be the joke that he became in media and amongst “pundits”. They will do it to Sachin Tendulkar one day and Rahul Dravid after that. Oh but they will remember these guys…once the fog of time clears things, they will remember these three. How can you ever forget the three massive figures in Indian cricket who stood in filth once and who proudly shone in their blue armors a decade later?

Voting for shorter Champions Trophy

This year’s Champions Trophy will be played for a period of 29 days with 21 matches in total and all 10 test playing nations taking part. To me it sounds almost like a world cup. Consider this, 1987 world cup had only 8 teams and a total of 27 matches. No doubt today a cricket world cup is much larger event with last edition comprising of 54 scheduled matches over a period of almost 2 months and 14 teams taking part. Still I feel a Champions Trophy should be a shorter tournament, both in terms of teams and staging duration.

In one way this year’s Champions Trophy promises more meaningful matches then next year’s world cup does with no unknown teams taking part. This is certainly a welcome change as also reducing the number of teams from 12 to 10. But ICC may not want to make their mini world cup event equally, if not more, exciting than the show case event of world cup.

Since its inception the tournament has continued to evolve. At first the intention was to hold it at non test playing venues to promote cricket there. Bangladesh (not a test playing nation then) and Kenya hosted first two editions but since then major nations are playing host. The exciting knock out format has taken a retirement as well. The other objective of this tournament, that is earning revenue for development of the sport, is still being fulfilled handsomely though.

Timing too is an issue; with ‘2007 world cup’ coming just few months after 2006 Champions Trophy. That’s almost inevitable with biannual nature of Champions Trophy. So it’s important the format is changed again to give this tournament its own unique identity without taking any sheen out of the world cup. Here are some of my thoughts to make it more meaningful

• Option1: Restrict the tournament for only top 6 teams. Have a round robin format followed with a final (this would restrict the number of matches to 16).
• Option2: Restrict the tournament for only top 8 teams. Go back to knock out format (this would restrict the number of matches to mere 7).
• No qualifying structure like this year.
• ICC ODI rankings will be all the more meaningful with this restriction.
• Keep the length of tournament no longer than 15 days.
• Since major source of revenue will be broadcasting rights and in-stadia advertising, ICC should try to host it again at non test playing centers, may be similar to the lines of recent initiative taken by India and Pakistan boards.
• With fewer teams taking part in this tournament, for many teams world cup will remain the only major competition and that should be good for the premier event.
• Never held a Champions trophy within 8 months of either side of a world cup.

Let’s see if ICC makes any changes to 2008 edition. The call has been made.