‍'Yeh Dosti Hun Nahi Chodenge....' - Virat Kohli, Ravi Shastri And India-England Test Series

Indian cricket team captain Virat Kohli and coach Ravi Shastri might have more answering to do now that the fifth Test of India’s tour of England has been rendered redundant, and the IPL’s early participation may have been compromised.

After Covid Gaffe on the event of The coach’s book launch, the Team India is drawing comparisons with the Australians from two years ago, when they partied on the England pitch after getting ahead in the Ashes only to have to settle for a humbling draw in the end. After all it is hard to imagine any international sports team with a tour in the balance whose coach decides to launch his book overseas.

Three Tests down after that fateful misadventure at the World Test Championship final, Kohli and his team were yet to establish themselves convincingly as “the team to beat” as the Indian captain declared at Shastri’s book launch.

The eventual result in favour of the visitors on the final day of the fourth Test only reaffirmed that fact, as India had to dig themselves out of a hole and not without substantial help from the wobbly hosts. Few teams could have got a reprieve, let alone a jail-free card, after being twice bowled out for less than 100, had they been playing against a stronger, more consistent team than England.

It is something of a feat that India under Kohli have pulled off what the team under Kapil Dev did, winning two Tests in a series in England. Overall India were favourites but not outright winners, which says something given how low England have been on the Test charts.

The fact remains that the trophy cupboard has been empty since 2013 despite the familiar and repetitive backslapping between coach and captain. No amount of touting wins by the coach (which seems his most effusive role to date) is going to change that. Not unless India have a trump up their sleeve for the Twenty20 World Cup which is expected to be Team Shastri’s last hurrah.

For now all the bluster has led to massive embarrassment and worse, a potential series hanging in the balance, as Shastri and the rest of the support staff remain quarantined because of a positive Covid test which has overshadowed the fourth Test and cast a huge cloud of doubt over the possibility of the fifth.

There have been a fluster of discussions between the ECB and BCCI over the awkward timing of the fifth Test, which now threatens to compromise the IPL interests of the latter, and over the impossibility of moving the IPL back so close to the T20 World Cup.

It was the ECB who came out with the statement first, which might lead to some clarification and correction from the BCCI, who have been opposed to the ECB’s demand that India forfeit the match:

“Following ongoing conversations with the BCCI, the ECB can confirm that the fifth Test between England and India Men due to start today at Emirates Old Trafford will be cancelled. Due to fears of a further increase in the number of COVID cases inside the camp, India are regrettably unable to field a team.”

Reportedly the ECB changed the wording of this statement, adding the word “regrettably”. The mean of forfeiture also disappeared in a matter of minutes from the public eye, suggesting that backdoor negotiations were still happening at the late hour - with India unwilling to cede their advantage and England wanting to hold India accountable.

Rajiv Shukla was first to speak on behalf of the BCCI, to suggest that despite the ECB claiming to release the statement after discussion with the BCCI, “the match was only called off. The match was not forfeited.” That still seems like a bone of contention, with the ECB not alluding to the result since taking the forfeit statement off the table.

It only highlights how the situation has quickly spiralled from a coach’s breach to several considerations about the match to now boards playing tug of war at the negotiating table, undoubtedly with some give and take before deciding what the final result of the series will be.

Once again it will be a game decided by the boards and not by the play on the field, in what should have been a straightforward decision with pre-laid contingencies.

If this was not a bad enough reflection, intentions on all sides were plainly evident as the ECB wanted India to forfeit the match if any of the players tested positive ahead of the Test, while India felt they would rather call off the match (without forfeiture) for fear that positive results here would impact foreign participation and timely preparation for the imminent second leg of the IPL.

It is not an everyday occurrence that on the eve of an important Test match that could possibly decide the series result, that the head coach of the visiting team decides to launch his book.

Ravi Shastri should thank his stars that it was a relatively modest affair. India’s position in the fourth Test looked like it would force Kohli to eat humble pie, before another horrendous England collapse on the final day made India’s win easier.

Flabbergasted was not the word as a muted launch was planned for Ravi Shastri’s book on the eve of the Oval Test, particularly since India had been blowing hot and cold through the first three Tests, coming into the contest with an emphatic win at Lord’s but succumbing to the understaffed hosts almost immediately to even the scales.

One does not have to leaf back very far into history to see that the Indian captain is standing on fragile ground. While his captaincy future might not be in immediate doubt, his words at the end of the World Test Championship have the potential to come back to haunt him.

Having lost rather poorly in the end to a determined New Zealand team in Southampton, Kohli was visibly miffed. In a familiar sermon of heads will roll, he seemed to suggest that there were too many tourists on the trip, and players who lacked intent and had it made it to the team despite his own exhortations for accountability.

It would have been a scathing but true indictment if the captain had been at the helm of more than one shoddy performance without a team of his choice at his disposal.

A disgruntled, not to mention embarrassed Kohli, could not quite mirror the reactions of Kane Williamson, the New Zealand captain, in defeat. Instead of taking responsibility he virtually threw the team under the bus.

His statements in the immediate aftermath, which included the words, “Bring in the right people who have right mindset to perform,” must now make him look sheepish because by his own batting assessment on the England tour, he cannot be asking much of his team when as captain he has been quite unable to counter England’s charges with the ball.

Meanwhile his counterpart, England captain Joe Root, has been in impeccable form in both victory and defeat.

Contrary to Sourav Ganguly’s recent assertions that India are the better team by a mile, Virat Kohli’s team haven’t shown quite the impetus that should have put them in the driver’s seat much sooner.

Given that their last Test appearance was down under when Ajinkya Rahane led the team in the three remaining Tests to a phenomenal series victory after Kohli’s departure after the first Test in Adelaide (which incidentally India lost) the disgruntlement of a grumpy captain unwilling to accept defeat gracefully became all too apparent.

After all, Kohli and Shastri have had more than just a few run-ins when the Indian selectors were left red-faced, having picked squads for tours while coach and captain made their own calls, sometimes in obvious contradiction of the selectors’ assessment.

To somehow suggest that the team was thrown into disarray after his absence for a few easy riders, when the results were emphatic Down Under is something that will unfortunately go down in the tour diary.

It is true that Shastri took over as head coach at a turbulent time, when he was director of cricket and Duncan Fletcher was not having a good time as India coach.

But the shenanigans that followed in the falling out between Kohli and the subsequent coach he did not want, Anil Kumble, in an unfair one-year tenure for the leg spinner before Shastri’s surprisingly smooth reappointment by the Kapil Dev led Cricket Advisory Committee in 2019, showed that Shastri and Kohli had developed an all too comfortable relationship of bonhomie, allowing one to take a comfortable backseat while the other had unfettered reign, on and off the field.

Accountability too must then come from the top down.

Cricket fans were not willing to look past the obvious. In one of the more prominent instances, cricket aficionados were agreed that Shastri, as coach, should have had a more mentoring hand in how he handled Rishabh Pant.

Pant to his credit bounced back from being initially overlooked for the World Cup, then being asked to unfairly fill big boots in the semifinal. And did so again after being targeted by the coach when the going got tough for India Men, to transform himself into one of the chief architects of India’s success in Australia under Rahane - all under the tender age of 21.

For those who chose to paint lightly India’s victory down under, it could be argued that the challenge for Kohli has been fairly similar to that for Rahane. Although it is hard to fault Kohli who has been a prolific run getter in Test cricket, not to mention a champion for the five day format, his bat has been conspicuously silent when it came to the big hundreds. If intent and performance hold measure, Jimmy Anderson has painted the Indian captain in such humiliating light that it is hard to see how Kohli can lift his own profile without a captain’s knock to his name.

It bears repeating that England’s team is a visibly compromised one. Although they have creditably taken the challenge to their superior visitors, frankly speaking the situation has not changed much before or during the series, where the burden of run-getting remains with their captain, Joe Root, and of the bowling strike on James Anderson.

While others have played support to spoil India’s facile part, India will look back on this series, irrespective of the result of the fifth Test, and wonder why they were so inconsistent for a team that should have had a tighter leash on the game, given the strength in their batting and the genuine talent in their seam bowling, which has also come to their rescue with the bat on more than one occasion in the past year.

Excuses are often made in hindsight. India, who have more recently adopted the policy of next to no tour matches before Test series - call it the bane of the Indian Premier League era, pandemic notwithstanding - are often seen being bloated with praise by the likes of Ravi Shastri when the wins come, or being scathingly cut down by the likes of the coach, who targets one or two players - not unlike his stint in the commentary box where he is likely to return.

Given the imperative for India to re-establish their authority over the game, particularly after the humiliating climbdown from Lord’s and with results swinging wildly through the course of the series, the opportunistic manner of the coach’s book launch unfortunately only shows that Ravi Shastri timed this one wrong, and not for the first time in this rather cosy coach and captain relationship.

Winning for Virat Kohli has become more than a matter of prestige and pride. It is important for the outgoing coach to finish this relationship on a high to secure the captain’s consent in the choice of the next coach. After that acrimonious falling out with Kumble, Kohli too will be under scrutiny.

Shastri’s exit might make life easier for many. After all, it was Shastri who took to social media to lament before the series how Bharat Arun, the bowling coach, had to serve isolation time as per UK health protocols after coming into contact with throwdown specialist-cum-masseur, Dayanand Garani:

“My right hand back in the house. Looking fitter and stronger after being in isolation for 10 days even though testing negative all the way. Bloody frustrating these isolation rules. 2 jabs of the vaccine has to be trusted.”

With a blasé, ignorant attitude like that, coming as it does from the head coach whose vaccination certainly didn’t spare him the embarrassment of covid at an inconvenient juncture putting the team and the series in peril, is it surprising that India find themselves in this late and rather needless off-field turmoil?

Fortunately, the second leg of the truncated Indian Premier League is not too far off, and even with the possibility of prolonged player quarantine as a result of this mishap, all shall soon be a thing of the past. #KhabarLive #hydnews

‍‍Cricket’s Problematic Bid For The Olympics

What is a true representation of the sport?

The irony of only two teams competing for cricket’s gold and silver medals at the Olympics in 1900 is not lost as cricket contemplates a re-entry with an eight-team pool that is not likely to feature any team outside of the so-called big league, making it a largely a redundant affair on the world stage, not to mention a problematic representation of the sport.

There is strong reason to believe that even the Olympics courting cricket is not for the right reason which is why the idea sits somewhat uneasily on cricket minds.

Almost stealing the thunder from the Indian medallists being felicitated in the country upon their return from the Tokyo Olympics, Jay Shah of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) confirmed the news that the International Cricket Council (ICC) was indeed pushing for a bid for cricket’s inclusion at the Los Angeles Games in 2028 but also, that India would be participating if the deal went through.

The news was met with mixed reactions, with some rejoicing cricket’s long-awaited entry into the Olympics while others, and this includes a fair number of cricket traditionalists, purists and fans alike, were more sceptical of the idea.

While the epitome of any sport lies in its viability across the globe and its inclusion in an epic multi-discipline event like the Olympics to honour the best in the discipline, cricket has a few pointers that counter the fact.

In announcing the decision, ICC chair Greg Barclay released a statement to the effect:

“We see the Olympics as a part of cricket’s long term future. We have more than a billion fans globally and almost 90 per cent of them want to see cricket at the Olympics. Clearly, cricket has a strong and passionate fan base, particularly in south Asia, where 92 percent of our fans come from, and whilst there are also 30 million cricket fans in the USA.”

But the problem is almost immediate. The claim of a billion cricket fans is not hard to see given where cricket’s interest is primarily centred – India – and the idea that the USA has a thirty million fan base does not automatically translate to USA cricket having a following of 30 million followers.

Statistics can easily be misrepresented as they can be used to paint a false, even delusional picture. However, the numbers themselves cannot lie.

Looking at the same numbers, it is not hard either to see why the Olympics is showing an interest in cricket.

Olympics viewership has halved from the London Olympics in 2012 to the Tokyo Olympics in 2021 to only twenty million viewers.

The Olympics would like to breach this largely virgin South Asian territory and given that cricket is second to be the world’s second most popular sport after football despite its concentrated pockets around the world, it would seem it was a marriage of equals.

India is celebrating the most medal winners in its history – seven. It seemed ignominious for a 1.3 billion population that they could only produce seven medal-worthy winners, while other more established nations like the USA and China are racking up the medals tally consistently.

Here is the tricky story though.

Firstly, only twelve cricket teams currently play Test cricket. Although the ICC boasts of 92 affiliate nations.

When was the last time an affiliate team broke through the ranks? One has to go back to 2003 and the ICC Cricket World Cup in South Africa to remember the heroics of Kenya which got into the business end of the tournament.

Increasingly, there has been a push within cricket’s own circles to sideline these affiliate nations from their only means of exposure – qualifying for the World Cup tournaments – simply because they are not commercially viable for broadcasting and media rights packaging.

Even if cricket were to make it to the Olympics, it would still be likely that even amongst the 12 teams, there would be the usual suspects showing up at the event, leaving cricket to be showcased at the event but sending false hopes to its nearly hundred strong teams on the periphery.

The West Indies will not be able to represent as one nation and neither will England under the Great Britain bracket.

Which Caribbean nation will go through? Without sufficient development projects to bridge the gap of disparity of competitiveness between the permanent member nations and the affiliates, how does cricket aim to be a true representative of deciphering the best team at the Olympics which is riveting only because the quality of the performers is too close to call?

Is medal assurance is now making India change its mind about sending cricket to the Olympics? Is that not convoluted enough?

Secondly, one of the conditions in a sport making it to the Olympics is that the format in which it will be presented at the Olympics should be in international operation.

Cricket has run into hot water over this issue, apart from vested interests of boards in the past. Will a compromise be reached now?

While there is euphoria over the possibility of cricket being showcased at the Los Angeles event even though there is some consideration that cricket would be better off making its debut once more at the Brisbane Games in the next edition in 2032, there is still little consensus about the format in which it will go ahead.

The England and Wales Cricket Board pushing for the Hundred comes as no surprise though there is also in some quarters a push for T10 (as opposed to Twenty20) as a more palatable sport given the time constraints of being able to create space for doubleheaders in a ten days span of time that the Olympics can afford.

The problem with the Hundred is that it is yet another variation of shortening the sport and not all that different from Twenty20 given that it only reduces the match by 20 balls an innings. As far as T10 goes, while the ICC has sanctioned this version in the gulf, it is not an internationally prominent format and therefore, goes against the traditional Olympics regulations.

Twenty20 for all its globally viable purposes is not the true representation of skills and temperament of what makes a cricketer at the highest level.

With it being a more franchisee based concept than a World Cup viability, Twenty20 is about specialists than about cricketers in the true sense. Is that a fair representation of being medal-worthy for something as worthy as the Olympics?

There is some consideration that a better compromise would be the one-day internationals as a fairer representation of the sport though it might be an overkill given that cricket has its own legitimate version to decide the overall winner in the time tested World Cup format. Redundant enough?

There are suggestions that Twenty20 might be easier to push through and also, make cricket’s case easier at the Olympics simply because the format has been around and also, that it would kill two birds with one stone by allowing cricket to do away with the currently overcooked goose that is the ICC Twenty20 World Cup.

The only problem with promoting this idea is that the sports that do make it to the Olympics not only feature athletes of the highest quality, but also, in the version of the sport that is internationally renowned as the very pinnacle in its form.

Can cricket say the same for Twenty20, leave alone the Hundred or T20? At the moment, teams that do well at Twenty20 events such as the West Indies rarely reflect the gulf that has developed after the top four teams in the game that are fairly consistent across all three accepted formats.

Although it is being claimed that pushing cricket at the Olympics will be an impetus to push the governments of fringe teams into driving funding into developing these teams, increased medal tally has not done the trick even in the Indian context despite this unprecedented adulation that often comes after the fact and soon as easily forgotten.

Paraag Marathe, part of the ICC Olympics Group that also includes the ECB, the Asian Cricket Council and Zimbabwe cricket, seemed overly optimistic of what cricket at the Olympics could do for USA Cricket.

“USA Cricket is thrilled to be able to support cricket’s bid for inclusion in the Olympics, the timing of which aligns perfectly with our continuing plans to develop the sport in the USA. With so many passionate cricket fans and players already in the USA and a huge global audience, we believe that cricket’s inclusion will add great value to the Los Angeles 2021 Olympics Games and help us to achieve our own vision of establishing cricket as a mainstream sport in this country.”

What Marathe failed to mention was that too many young Indian cricketers are already “retiring” in order to qualify for the Major League Cricket in the USA because of the BCCI’s current restrictive policy that does not allow Indian cricketers to participate in franchisee Twenty20 leagues overseas.

So it is questionable how much of it is homegrown talent and how much of it is a talent that has emigrated overseas, which in the past has made up the numbers of certain affiliate teams that made it on the rare occasion to the top league in a world cup context.

That this exposure will drive the Chinese and USA markets into greater development of cricket seems highly unlikely given that they are not likely to sudden divert their resources from their tried and tested disciplines into a sport where it is highly unlikely that their team will break ranks at the highest level in the immediate or even ten years down the line and that too account for a medal or two at most.

Thirdly, and most importantly, the whole premise of participation at the Olympics seems diluted by the idea of the very motivations that are driving cricket and the Olympics into this arranged marriage.

The ECB sees it as a way of promoting another home driven format – Twenty20 before the Hundred – in the hope of resuscitating cricket interest in the flagging home of the sport.

The BCCI now sees its potential perhaps in how the medal winners are being received and with government impetus – Shah is after all the son of Amit Shah which in itself is contravening of the Lodha committee reforms that looked to separated political affiliations from sports administration – is looking to create its own larger entity.

With conditions of course, since it has traditionally opposed losing its autonomy to bodies like the Indian Olympics Association and through the avoidance of drug testing arm of WADA in India, NADA.

Olympics is meant to be the pinnacle of any sport. It is why the world-class athletes begin training the very next day after the conclusion of an Olympics event in preparation for the next one four years away.

This has also caused some problems in sports like tennis where the top players have tended to be choosy over what they value and where they wish to spread their time – the Grand Slam or the Olympics.

One of the biggest reasons the BCCI is stating this change of heart is the push from the current Indian government for increasing the medal score at the Olympics.

The idea of having a men’s and women’s version at the Olympics means a possibility of two medals, notwithstanding the fact that India is yet to taste top success in the men’s arena since the ICC Champions Trophy in 2017.

However, it has to be remembered that this at the end of the day will ensure at best two medals. This with a large contingent of players who make up a team.

It seems that the Indian government and the sports ministry are better advised to divert their energies to developing the infrastructure to produce greater medal possibilities by following the China and USA models of throwing the gates open to discovering talent by training a larger number of athletes in the various disciplines instead of resting medal hopefuls around the neck of one team in an elusive discipline.

With the podium potential of three medals in each discipline, increasing the calibre and number of athletes makes far better sense.

Besides, cricket, particularly in the Indian subcontinent, does not need a platform nor additional spotlight that takes away from much-needed resources in the other disciplines where athletes could do with greater financial assistance, support structure and backing.

As far as the Olympics goes, if the South Asia Market is their goal to tap into a larger commercial market, perhaps they might want to look into providing impetus towards these governments enhancing interest in non-cricket sports.

Besides, until cricket can sort itself out, having greater exposure is going to do little for the sport itself if it is only going to add to its languishing affiliate nation tally.

Will cricket give up its precious revenue-making bilateral series time, particularly time like the IPL window or the Hundred, for an Olympics event every four years while the remuneration is not likely to justify the decision?

Is cricket willing to incur the short term loss for potential long term gains that might still not accrue from the Olympics where medal racing nations have their traditional sports back?

How likely will it be down the line when cricket might see the merit of sending a second-string team to the Olympics to make up the numbers while the likes of mainstream players are engaged in more lucrative, bilateral engagements?

Is it not why football has so little weightage at the Olympics while the recently concluded Euro took on so much attention and importance?

What is a true representation of the sport? An abridged version, made up of teams with expats and retiring players who will make up teams like Major League Cricket in the USA in a couple of years time?

When purely commercial interests drive even a body like the Olympics to include a sport not for its high-value quality but for its ability to bring it a market, it feels like a self-goal, not done for the right reasons, which is marrying the two because it enhances sport at the highest echelons. #KhabarLive #hydnews 

‍‍Indian Bowlers Outstanding Performance In International Cricket Makes Proud

After several winnings, Indian bowlers proved to be the key players in International Cricket with their techniques, discipline and World class expertise. The latest win makes proud and happy with pacemakers extraordinary efforts.

Even among the many notable triumphs notched up by Indian teams in the recent past the victory at Lord’s will occupy a very special place. After all it is not every time that a side which looks in a really vulnerable position shortly after play starts on the last day turns the tables around so dramatically that shortly before final draw of stumps the same side emerges victorious by a thumping margin.

On that count alone India’s win over England by 151 runs on Monday will recall fond memories for a long time. But of course that is not the only reason. The dramatic events on the final day did not fully overshadow the gripping cricket that was seen over the first four days. There were times when it was Test cricket at its grimmest as India took their time to fight back on the fourth day after being in arrears on the first innings.

But overall it was the traditional format at its best as there was much good batting and bowling and a keen contest for supremacy between two rather evenly matched teams. Certainly the eventful cricket at Lord’s has set the stage for what could be a fascinating contest with three more Tests to be played.

The visitors of course cannot afford to be complacent. Virat Kohli and his men would do well to remember that in 2014 India had taken a 1-0 lead by winning the second Test – incidentally also at Lord’s – only for England to win the next three. This time England on the face of it has gaping holes in its top order batting but there is always the feeling that the home side could regroup by finding adequate replacements even if they are rather over dependent on Joe Root.

They are of course better served in the bowling department. James Anderson is a modern day marvel continuing to display his manifold skills and seemingly never tiring even at 39 and he has splendid support in Stuart Broad, Ollie Robinson and Mark Wood. The spin of Moeen Ali can be termed as adequate but then England’s strength is in their pace bowling quartet.

For that matter India too are not without their problems. Their much vaunted middle order batting is rather wobbly and the trio of Cheteswar Pujara, Virat Kohli and Ajinkya Rahane will have to live up to their lofty reputation in the next three Tests if India are to nurture any hopes of holding on to their lead and winning the series. There has also been considerable debate whether the visitors should field four pacemen and only one spinner. Three pacemen and two spinners in Ravi Ashwin and Ravindra Jadeja would be the ideal line-up even for English conditions. The inclusion of Ashwin will also bolster the batting.

However with the quartet of pacemen having performed in exemplary fashion at Lord’s it is unlikely that there will be any change in this policy especially with the conditions at Headingley, the venue of the third Test, likely to help the fast bowlers.

Kohli has spoken about how the on field tension motivated the team to rise to the occasion when it mattered most. There were unsavoury incidents that could have been avoided but with an ultra aggressive, over the top passionate Kohli in charge these things are now par for the course. But certainly one could see that the fast bowlers were motivated to the point where they were really destructive on a fifth day surface that would have been ideal for a spinner.

It does not happen every time in Indian cricket that after two Tests the five pacemen have accounted for all the 39 wickets to fall to bowlers with Jadeja the lone spinner going wicketless. There is little doubt that the performance of the pacemen is the main reason why the Indians are ahead in the series. They have been absolutely outstanding. #KhabarLive #hydnews

‍How Fintech And Edutech Companies Calling The Shots In Cricket Sponsorship?

The much hyped Bitcoin exchange platforms are the latest to join the cricket sponsorship bandwagon already in the grip of edutech and real money gaming players.

Cricket press conferences can be predictable and mundane in nature. It can be worse if the speaker, invariably a top cricketer or coach, is a poor speaker.

Recently, virtual press conference called by the title sponsors of the Sri Lanka vs India limited overs series in Colombo was one such -- boring.

But if the media had cared to grill the two new-age companies -- Unacademy for CoinDCX -- who have taken to cricket sponsorship in a big way, the session could have been more interesting.

Most reporters who logged in on Thursday had little inclination to know about why edutech and fintech companies are seriously making inroads into sports sponsorship.

Hence after a few predictable questions to Yuzvendra Chahal and even more anticipated answers, the press conference was over in about 15 minutes.

If cricket is a roaring business today, it's because of the money edutech companies like Unacademy or Byju's are spending. Fintech made its presence felt in IPL 2020 with CRED becoming a BCCI partner. Newer players like Upstox are fast emerging.

A new bred of spenders have arrived from the Bitcoin/cryptocurrency space. Whether they will catch the imagination of people is another matter but fintech companies are going full steam to display their wares through all available media channels.

Not sure if CRED were able to make an impact during IPL 2020 with a slew of TV commercials that seemingly lacked imagination and weird.

Retired cine superstars like Anil Kapoor, Madhuri Dixit and musician Bappi Lahiri clearly didn't drive the CRED message despite consuming plenty of expensive commercial time. They were subsequently dropped.

CRED, of course, roped in former Indian cricket captain Rahul Dravid in their next series of TVCs. But it was not the brand but the 'Wall' who made news for his unusual "anger issues" and it was still not clear if CRED actually profited from the advertisement.

But that's not stopping fintech companies from jumping into the cricket sponsorship bandwagon. A financially struggling Sri Lanka was perhaps a perfect starting point for CoinDCX. They are the title sponsors of the three-match T20 Cup.

Ramalingam Subramanium, the marketing head of CoinDCX, admitted Bitcoins were new in India and the sponsorship was part of the plan to build awareness.

"Cricket has a mass appeal and it pans across generations. As we see crypto evolving in India, awareness and education is key for sustainable growth. By partnering and sponsoring the tournament, we believe we'll be able to bring right kind of awareness in the category," said Subramanium.

Sumit Gupta, the CEO of Coin DCX says: "Almost 30-40% of the audience that watches or follows cricket in India is in their early 20s or 30s and with that viewership as the base, we aim to reach out to the millennial and Gen-Z populations in the Indian market, who have either already invested in cryptocurrency or are curious about or interested in them and hence most likely to consider investing in crypto assets."

While CoinDCX will be the title sponsors, another company in similar business, WazirX will be co-presenting sponsor for the live streaming of the Sri Lanka vs India series.

Unacademy, which are the title sponsors of the three-match Sri Lanka vs India ODI series, seems to be leveraging its brand name better. It's marriage with education has been boosted by meaningful association with former cricket stars like Sourav Ganguly.

Unacademy is an IPL sponsor, too. They even wanted to be the title sponsors of IPL 2020 but fantasy cricket operators Dream11 outbid them in a close fight.

"Edutech and sports are actually a natural fit, not just in terms of the demographics but also the way the new generation consumes content. Both students and their parents follow sport, and cricket in particular is massive with a cumulative audience northwards of 400 million for an IPL season alone," said Karan Shroff, Unacademy's chief marketing officer.

"Add to this the fact that the younger generation's involvement with their mobile and computer screens (whether for learning or for entertainment) and their involvement in sport are not mutually exclusive, and we have a winning proposition of reaching out to these new learners who are breaking free of the traditional modes, in their natural habitat in a sense," explains Shroff.
 
There is a huge probability that edu and fintech companies may rule sponsorship in the Indian market, if not globally. With real money gaming facing uncertain times in high courts and even the Prime Minister's Office, operators like Dream11 and MPL may become increasingly circumspect.

Dream11 and MPL, of course have deep pockets with big investors backing them. Both are heavily involved with Indian cricket but deep down they know the honeymoon can end if the government equates the real money gaming business as betting or gambling.

MPL is already exploring the Esports market very seriously and has even tied up with the Indian Olympic Association ahead of the Tokyo Olympics.

From an ease of business point of view, these fledgling fintech and edutech companies have a clear vision, says Bhairav Shanth of ITW.

"The new age tech companies are more open to innovation and know what is the outcome or brand impact they are seeking. Since they operate in a digital environment where everything is trackable, the outcomes can be optimised by selecting the right property," explains Shanth.

ITW is a leading player in securing sports sponsorships and brand promotion. ITW works with some of the top cricket boards of the world and is also a partner of Sri Lanka Cricket too.

Shanth says: "Typically the brick and mortar brands mainly want brand visibility and are generally risk averse. Digital companies are agile and adaptive, they can tweak or adjust a campaign based on how it is delivering on their desired outcome.

"On the contrary, traditional brands have more of a legacy approach with preset ways of running a campaign. To use a music analogy, we can say one is consistent, sort of like legendary rockers Pink Floyd, while the other is evolving and agile, a bit like the K-pop chart busters BTS."

The traditional sponsors are surely on their way out. Coca-Cola, associated with football and the Olympics, are long-term global players with billion dollar deals with organisations like FIFA and International Olympic Committee.

The cricket ecosystem is much smaller compared to football or the Olympics. In keeping with the changing times in cricket and a proliferation of Twenty20, the likes of Unacademy, CoinDCX et al are expected to play smart and get the mileage they want. #KhabarLive #hydnews

IPL 2021: Free Australian Cricketers Can Be Replaced And Brought Back

The availability of Australian cricketers is now confirmed after the One-Day International (ODI) series against Afghanistan and India has been postponed. Cricket Australia (CA) will issue No Objection Certificates for the players who want to return to the IPL 2021 continuation in September. 

The VIVO IPL 2021 started in April in India but was later postponed in May due to the rising COVID-19 cases in the country. Eventually, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) decided to hold the continuation of the rest of the IPL season starting on September 19 in the UAE. 

Since the confirmation of the venue and the dates, it was a matter of waiting game to know the availability of the players. Fans and cricket punters held on to their 10CRIC IPL bet until they know if their favorite cricketers will be available for phase 2 of the biggest cricket tournament worldwide.

The boards said in a statement, “The Afghanistan Cricket Board and Cricket Australia agreed to postpone the tour given the complexities of travel, quarantine periods, and a finding a suitable location for the matches given the relocation of the T20 World Cup to the UAE. With the World Cup relocated from India to the UAE, the ACB will continue to explore the possibility of hosting a proposed T20 tri-series involving Australia and the West Indies.”

The Possibility that Not All Australian Cricketers Will Be Back

Even if CA has already confirmed the availability of their players, it will still be up to the cricketers themselves if they will want to join the upcoming IPL matches. CA said, “No objection certificates will be granted to Australian players wishing to take part in the remaining upcoming Indian Premier League matches to be played in the UAE.”

These certificates will mean that the players opted to participate in the remainder of IPL matches themselves. A player who’s not likely to sign this is fast bowler Pat Cummins. Cummins has already spoken about where he’s at when it comes to attending the IPL in the UAE.

On a YouTube live session, Cummins explained why he won’t be coming back and said, "Unfortunately, at this stage, I don’t think I will go for the IPL. Haven’t made an official call, but Becky, my partner, is pregnant, and our baby is due right in the middle of the IPL. There are also travel restrictions on getting back to Australia. There’s two weeks quarantine, and there’s also quarantine going into the UAE. So, it’s going to be tough to go and play there.”

So far, only Cummins is likely not to return this September.

Players Like Shreyas Iyer and T Natarajan Cleared to Return

Aside from the Australian players, IPL COO Hemang Amin also told the franchises that players who were replaced because of injuries or other personal reasons during the first leg of the IPL are cleared to return on the IPL phase two. The deadline for the submission of the replacement players list will be on August 20.

Amin told the franchises, “If in case any player who was injured or unavailable during the India leg of IPL 2021 and is now fit or available, then the franchise which had taken a replacement player [due to] such previous unavailability, will need to elect [either] one of them."

According to the IPL COO, the players who were brought in as replacements and will not be retained for the second leg will be put into the IPL’s registered pool of players. However, if the original player is released, he will not be part of the registered pool.

One of the players who had to be replaced during the IPL in India is Delhi Capital’s (DC) Shreyas Iyer. This happened after he dislocated a shoulder in March during the ODI series against England in Pune. Iyer is already fit to play once again and he is now in Dubai to join the rest of the contingent next weekend after his mandatory quarantine for a week. DC has not yet made any announcement on whether Iyer will take his leadership duties back from his replacement, Rishabh Pant.

T Natarajan suffered a sore knee and was also taken out of the IPL in late April to undergo surgery. Sunrisers Hyderabad (SH) has not yet made any official announcements on whether the player will be back in September but there is a good chance that he will. SH is now at the bottom of the table after only having one win out of their seven matches of the current season. #KhabarLive #hydnews 

Hyderabadi-Lad Mohammed Siraj’s As Test Bowler Adds New Strength To India's Pace Attack

The player of the match adjudicator in the Lord’s Test was surely a batter or is a fan of only batting in cricket. For what else explains player of the match being awarded to a batsman, Lokesh Rahul, instead of the bowlers? Should Hyderabadi-lad Mohammed Siraj have been named the Player of the Match of the Lord's Test?

Surely, there were many in contention for the award. Everyone in the Indian pace attack deserved a look-in for their performances with the ball throughout the Test.

https://youtu.be/Y1J9_9-vNcU

But, most importantly, didn’t anyone think about Mohammed Siraj’s match haul of eight for 126? Or the fact that he came close to claiming a hat-trick twice in the Test?

Siraj surely changed the complexion of the match in both the innings. He charged in throughout the Test, showed great skills with the ball and delivered each time skipper Virat Kohli threw the ball to him.

Even in the first Test at Trent Bridge, Siraj struck at regular intervals to keep bringing India back into the contest. Something similar happened at Lord’s.

Probably the only thing Siraj didn’t get right was his judgement on Decision Review System (DRS). His excitement at hitting the pads cost India two reviews. His pleading and his drama around the reviews in the first innings deserves a separate social media handle. He almost begged Kohli each time and the captain reluctantly agreed.

The only reason Kohli may well have agreed would have been because the man at the other end of the appeal was England’s talismanic captain Joe Root. So, each time Siraj begged, Kohli acquiesced despite protests from wicket-keeper Rishabh Pant, himself a terrible reviewer.

There is something about Siraj that endears him to Kohli. He is most vocal in celebration each time Siraj strikes and seems to love the energy that the Hyderabadi has added to the Indian pace attack. You can sense that Kohli rates the young quickie quite highly because he is keen to get him involved in a scrap.

Siraj has that bounding energy about him when he runs into bowl and he never seems to tire. He is always ready to put his body on the line with long spells. It is a delight to watch Siraj running with the same purpose – whether it is his first, second or last spell. He just goes on and on and on, almost like that battery in a commercial.

Years of bowling in first-class cricket in India has toughened Siraj for bigger battles quite tremendously. If you have seen his first-class record you will realise that Siraj had been earmarked for the bigger stage for a while now. He had been a consistent performer for Hyderabad in red-ball cricket and with India A, over the last few years, has been quite simply the most outstanding new-ball bowler.

So, it was only a matter of time that Siraj would be fast-tracked into the Test side. His performances in Australia underscored his ability with the red ball. He used the bounce in Australia quite effectively.

In England, he has used the conditions to good effect and has been an effective third seamer. He has the ability to even take the new ball. On this tour, his more illustrious seniors like Jasprit Bumrah and Mohammed Shami are around so Siraj has to bide his time. But to have someone like Siraj to back up the opening combination is a luxury that very few captains have these days.

In fact, even fewer captains in Indian cricket’s history have been that fortunate. Add the experience of Ishant Sharma to the mix and you have a pace attack to gloat about.

Siraj is a red-ball specialist even in today’s context. His bowling average of 24 in all first-class cricket underscores just how vital he is to any first-class side that he plays for.

But unfortunately, Siraj’s performances in the past few years, before his Test debut, were viewed from the prism of T20 cricket. He got bashed around in the Indian Premier League (IPL) like most bowlers do and that led to a lot of unsavoury comments being passed about him.
It was then that the wise sage of Indian cricket, Mahendra Singh Dhoni, stepped in with vital advice.

“Mahi bhai (MS Dhoni) taught me to not listen to everyone’s opinions. He says, ‘You have one bad game, and they will tell you that you are not good. If you think about all of this, it will drive you crazy. The next match if you do well, then those same people will come and praise you’,” Siraj was quoted as saying during IPL 2020.

That proved to be crucial advice because performances in Test cricket in Australia and now in England have really ensured that Siraj has risen in stature. He is now quite high in the pecking order of pace bowlers for India.

Hence, now Siraj feels confident enough to come up with a celebration of his own to celebrate the fall of a wicket.

"This story (celebration) is for the haters (critics) because they used to say a lot of things about me, like he cannot do this and cannot do that. So, I will only let my ball do the talking and hence this is my new style of celebration," Siraj said at the end of the third day's play in the Lord's Test.

The new style of celebration, his chatter with the incoming batsmen – especially his eyeball to eyeball confrontation – has really caught everyone’s attention. He is not afraid to share a word or two, which really goes down well in the Kohli playbook, because the skipper himself is not a quiet character.

In addition to all this, Siraj is also quite accurate with the ball, which is exactly the plan of India’s quicks. "The role of fast bowlers is important in England because when you come to England, you want to try things, but our plan here was to be consistent and bowl at one place," he opined.

India’s biggest mistake thus far on the English tour may well have been about leaving out Siraj from the playing XI for the World Test Championship (WTC) final against New Zealand. A fit and energetic Siraj would well have made a huge difference in that grand finale. But better judgement has prevailed and Siraj has proved his value to the Test XI.

Now, the biggest casualty of this growth of Siraj as a Test bowler is really only one man, Umesh Yadav. The Nagpur quickie’s unfortunate injury in Australia paved the way for Siraj’s emergence. The result? Yadav has played just one official match in 2021 thus far and that too the first-class tour fixture against County Select XI.

Yadav also played the intra-squad match before the WTC final. So, effectively, since that Boxing Day Test injury, Yadav has been either recuperating or serving drinks or equipment.

To have the luxury of seeing a Yadav on the bench just underscores the depth of the pace attack that India currently boasts of in Test cricket.

Hence, it is baffling that the player of the match for the Lord’s Test was not a bowler. Maybe, Siraj deserved at least an official pat on the back. #KhabarLive #hydnews

‍Will Rashid Khan, Mohammed Nabi Play In Indian Premier League Amid Afghanistan Crisis?

The fall of Kabul to the Taliban has put the dreams and aspirations of every Afghanistani in jeopardy, once again. As a result the big question remained unanswered 'will Rashid Khan and Mohammed Nabi will play IPL and WT20 this year?'. Let's keep the fingers crossed.

Both Rashid Khan and Mohammed Nabi are two of the biggest stars in world cricket and they have been playing their parts in the Indian Premier League (IPL), winning hearts and showing their proverbial Afghani fighting spirit. But as the world's premier T20 cricket league gets ready for the UAE leg of the COVID-affected 2021 edition, uncertainty emerges about their future.

The fall of Kabul to the Taliban has put the dreams and aspirations of every Afghanistani in jeopardy. Sadly for the adventure-loving Afghanis, the Taliban are not the best custodians of sports. Now, with the political situation taking a new turn in Afghanistan, an uncertain future is waiting for their top cricketers too.

The Taliban took over the reins of the South Asian country as President Ashraf Ghani fled to Tajikistan.
Rashid Khan and Mohammed Nabi, who are in the United Kingdom competing in the 'Hundred' tournament for Trent Rockets and London Spirits respectively, are due to compete in the remainder of the IPL in the UAE from September 19. Though they are currently not in Afghanistan, the turn of events has deeply affected them. Both Rashid and Nabi play for Sunrisers Hyderabad.

The T20 World Cup will be held soon after the conclusion of IPL 2021.

Earlier, they had urged the world leaders to intervene as Afghanistan faces its worst socio-political crisis in the last two decades.

"Dear World Leaders! My country is in chaos, thousand of innocent people, including children  women, get martyred everyday, houses, properties being destructed. Thousands of families displaced. Don't leave us in chaos. Stop killing Afghans and destroying of Afghanistan. We want peace," Rashid had tweeted a few days back.

Meanwhile, the Indian cricket board (BCCI) is reportedly keeping an eye on the developments and is hoping to see the participation of Afghan players in the IPL.

"It is too early to comment but we are keeping a watch. For us, nothing changes and we expect Rashid and other Afghan players would be part of IPL," a BCCI source told.

Rashid, Nabi and Mujeeb Zadran are some of the Afghanistan players who are regular features in IPL teams. Rashid is one of the most sought-after T20 freelancers in world cricket currently.

It remains to be seen if Rashid and Nabi stay back in the UK after completion of 'The Hundred' on August 21 as they have families back home.
And if they stay back in the UK, it will be interesting to see if the BCCI asks them to be on the same charter flight that will take the Indian players to the UAE from Manchester on September 15.

The BCCI is expected to speak with the Afghanistan Cricket Board on the situation.
As per ICC's FTP schedule, Afghanistan are scheduled to tour Sri Lanka for six white-ball games this month but the final schedule is still not out yet. Now, Rashid is Afghanistan's T20 captain too. #KhabarLive #hydnews 

Indian Squad's Passion, Patriotism, Hope And Desperation In Tokyo Olympics 2021

This is not a dampener. This is a reality check. While passion, patriotism, hope and desperation jostled for space on the Indian air waves one week into the Tokyo Olympics 2020, the air was also hanging heavy with a rather familiar déjà vu feeling about the whole exercise being largely a case of much ado about nothing yet again.

Late on a humid Friday evening at the Olympics, world champion Sifan Hassan, representing the Netherlands, appeared to be out of contention and altogether disinterested as she started and remained at the back of the field for the first half of the 5000m women’s heat in the track and field events. But a very subtle gear shift almost went unnoticed past the 2500m mark as she slowly made her way up midfield before appearing resigned to settle for seventh place until the penultimate lap.

On the seventh and final lap though, while her Kenyan and Ethiopian counterparts held steady ground at the front, Hassan quietly made her pitch for first and the finish line in such sublime fashion that they could only look on shocked, disgusted and most importantly, exhausted, as she gracefully moved past them and then into a league of her own.

Hassan, it turned out, had quietly executed a very stealthy and rather deceptive plan, building steadily and sure footedly, slowly at first and then with consistency, pushing past when it was time. This was only the first heat as she is expected to take part across three events.

As exhilarating as it was to watch, it was not easy to shake off the lingering feeling that India were continuing to miss a beat.

After all, what happened to the P.T. Usha’s of the country? What has happened to the next great hope? Where is the build up, the foundation, the steadiness, the consistency and the core, and the bench strength? The ceiling barriers are yet to be broken, once and for all and comprehensively at that as far as India at the Olympics are concerned.

This is not a dampener. This is a reality check.

When USA lost one of the world’s greatest gymnasts in Simone Biles at the last minute in the all round team gymnastics event, they found a new champion in Suni Lee who claimed gold in the individual event to add to USA’s prowess as the fifth successive champion to take the gold at the Olympics. Great Britain were rewarded for staying with Tom Daley and his ten year Olympics history of medals finally yielding him a gold in the 10m platform men’s synchronized diving. Michael Phelps’s Olympics record is being challenged as is Mark Spritz’, unbelievably so, by Caeleb Dressler in the swimming events.

One could not help but cut back to the picture earlier in the morning as Hassan silently disappeared into the background as did Dutee from Indian minds.

At the fifth heat of the women’s 100m, a relatively diminutive woman lined up at the very end in lane 9. More exalted champions such as Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce took their place in the middle. The commentator on air did not even bother to go to the end of the field to introduce the athletes and Dutee Chand remained largely incognito, finishing a rather lacklustre seventh in an eight women race and much behind her national record time. Finishing 45 out of 54 participants reminded one of the shoddy affair that passed for sports events at many a school.

Still Chand was at the Olympics. Getting here was a Herculean effort and could not draw comparison. But that summed up India’s campaign in a nutshell.

Getting here is everything and then being here is automatically translated to medal hope in the minds of a billion. Never mind the mental challenge of watching athletes around the world show up with a larger support staff and a more rounded practice and facilities behind them. Hurdles are often overlooked in the public eye.

After all, while the likes of Anurag Thakur and Kiran Rijuju can sing laurels of our athletes when they make progress, it could be argued that like India’s lamentably bleak Olympics history, much of India’s untapped sporting talent continues to remain hidden.

It can also explain the almost monotonous voice in which the electronic media were already talking medal even as family members of P.V. Sindhu and Lovlina Borgohain encouraged cautious optimism. “Going for gold” screamed the headlines even though both women were still only into the semi finals in their respective disciplines of boxing and badminton respectively and had to still get past one more opponent to throw the final gauntlet for gold.

Once over the euphoria on a rather quiet, less newsworthy Friday where the farmers protest and the opposition took a backseat, the overwhelming feeling returned once more at the end of another epic day at the Tokyo Olympics that it was better to read the list of who had made the leap ahead rather than read out the long list of Indian athletes who didn’t.

Why are India’s medal hopefuls over hyped before the Olympics and then reduced to less than a handful midway through the two week celebration of sport only for India to be able to count on one hand the number of medals returning home? What is wrong with this picture?

Consider the déjà vu. There lies the answer.

Consider this for comparison.

A billion plus strong nation and 128 athletes represent India. Australia boasts a train of over 450 athletes at the Tokyo Olympics and only has a population that is about 25 million. Yet Australia are sitting pretty at no.6 behind the Russian Olympics Committee with nine gold medals to their name against the leader China who have now leaped over Japan with eighteen gold medals. Australia have 22 medals by the end of a hot and muggy night at the Olympics. India, still just the one.

Missing the top spot in the headlines were the archery duo of Deepika Kumari and Atanu Das who were holding their respective ground in the women’s individual archery event and men’s recursive individual archery, heading into the quarterfinals. While their efforts are commendable, they still represent a tiny fraction of India’s athletes who made it to the Olympics which is a great feat in itself but also, an even more miniscule percentage of the population, which is blasphemous to say the least.

Women’s hockey also provided some hope and as rightly pointed out, a semi final place is a great place to be in a ten year development. The emphasis has to be on development.

On a day when the likes of P.V. Sindhu were being hailed, there was an out-of-touch-with-reality moment when actor R. Madhavan posted this reply to a picture of the Tokyo Olympics silver medalist Mirabai Chanu having food on the floor of her humble home back in Manipur:

“Hey this cannot be true. I am at a complete loss of words.”

Why, Madhavan? First of all, it has to be pointed out, there is nothing wrong with having one’s lunch on the floor. To put things in context here though, he should know better the plight of Indian sportspersons given that he has played a coach to one in one of his movies.

It certainly puts playing for honour and pride of the country in perspective. That is a school of thought that has been given much lip service but not much credence in the wake of introduction of a sporting culture such as the Indian Premier League.

But it highlights not just the humble conditions from which these sportspersons come from but also, of the great demands on them, sometimes on their own two legs and on their meagre resources to get as far as they do. Showering laurels when medals are won is easy. In that sense, walking that opening ceremony in Tokyo was already a dream too high but achieved. But what about those who made it on their own merit and great hard work but didn’t get far, like Dutee?

Often this is not a rags-to-riches story for many of these sports persons who achieve elite Olympics medal levels. Promises made to them – not incentives but rewards after they hit the spotlight – are not kept. Homes are denied, jobs going a-begging, their talent, experience and wisdom untapped as the governments fail to use their success as a slipstream to build a steady stream of athletes inspired in the wake of their accomplishments.

Then four years later, it appears the names once again come out of the woodworks, the politicians bring out their patriotic Indian montages and the fans their tricolour and march alongside the sportspersons to unrealistic dreams and expectations.

The dismay is obvious.

The handful of aspiring shooters have had enough turmoil on the results board and back in the dressing room with enough ruffles over rifts between shooters and coaches. Manu Bhaker, who was expected to be the flag bearer in the end leading the medals tally, had a run in with her coach, Jaspal Rana, and thereafter with a rare malfunctioning pistol that hurt her chances in the 10m air pistol qualification event.

As news headlines kept screaming… “so-and-so crashes out,” “so-and-so crashes out”, and “so-and-so crashes out”, once again it highlighted the great disparity of how sports like cricket are given deliberate vantage point and therefore, focus, while it is hard even for seasoned journalists to extrapolate on the goings-on back in Tokyo simply because they have been fed and raised on a consumption of mainly one sport and also, then forced into specialized fields that earn their employers and themselves bread-and-butter. This is simply a fact of life, which some journalists have been candid and also, brave enough to admit openly.

One had to go deeper and read in order to learn why the nineteen year old Bhaker “crashed out” (visuals were not made available at the time). Not mentioned were her still impressive scores while she lost time while her pistol was being repaired as opposed to replaced with a spare because of the time it would take to make adjustments.

While the National Rifle Association of India (NRAI) stated that India’s performance at the Tokyo Olympics was “inexplicable” and the sports authority talking about an overhaul, what is not easily forgiven is the repeated manner in which sportspersons find themselves in needless tangles, whether off the field like Mary Kom is in her final Olympics showdown, calling out the IOC over unfair judging, or the “usual suspects” (for want of a better term) of the likes of Rohan Bopanna and Sania Mirza calling foul of the AITA over selection muddles and confusion.

Where is the next generation? And where is the accountability? Where is the quiet pacing from the back of the field to make track steadily and then to take the finish line?

To think India lacks talent is appalling given that despite this sudden euphoria that comes out of the closets every four years – from the government and sports aficionados alike – India, despite its vast wealth, has very little infrastructure to show why there is no great grassroot level at which India’s budding talent is given ground on which to train.

Budget reels every February rarely do the untapped and underprivileged talent in the country little justice, leaving sports on the backburner. Between politics, nepotism and corruption, even existing infrastructure is elusive to these athletes in their four year long training that demands endurance and commitment of an extraordinary nature. The Olympics highlights this fact amply.

It is not enough that somehow, Dutee Chand is India’s only athlete in the track and field with hope and even she finishes at the end of the tail. While India’s hopes now rest on Sindhu and Lovlina and on the archers to wipe out the dim spotlight over the coming weekend, something is wrong with this picture and has been for a very long time. #KhabarLive

Everyone Knows Test Cricket Is Dying But Few Will Step Forward To Save It

The ICC mooted the idea of a World Test Championship in 2008. Nine years later, we’re still discussing how to save the oldest format of the game.

Robert Southey was meditating on the futility of war; he could just as well have been musing on the “Test” series just completed between India and Sri Lanka, and the one now under way between the West Indies and England.

‘Maybe It Is Time To Change My Son’s Name’: The New Reality Of Being Muslim In India

Rumours, lies, violence and political support for bigotry embolden many Hindus to reveal hidden prejudices.

Saira does not call her son by his name when they are out of the house. “I prefer using J, it doesn’t have a Muslim ring to it,” said Saira, 40, a former colleague whose first name I have changed on her request and whose Muslim identity was never previously a point of discussion. “I cringe as I say this, but it is true.”

Whenever J asked his mother the difference between him and his friends, she always told him there was none. They were all Indian with different names, she said. That explanation, an evidently troubled Saira told me, is weakening at a time of uncommon anti-Muslim prejudice and violence.

At The Root Of All Lynchings: Vigilantes Don’t Expect To Be Punished, Victims Don’t Expect To Get Justice

Pehlu Khan, a Muslim, was lynched by Hindu criminals, professing to be cow vigilantes. The incident fills one with grief and anger. Around the same time, Farook, a Muslim atheist in Coimbatore, was lynched by Muslim criminals, claiming to be true believers.

Search deeper and you will find the case of a Hindu doctor lynched by a mainly Muslim mob, over a cricket dispute. Hindu rail passengers lynched a Muslim youth, in what began as a dispute over seats.

Inside Chandrababu Naidu’s plan to make Andhra Pradesh a sunrise state

Nara Chandrababu Naidu’s ‘Sunrise Andhra Pradesh-Vision 2029’ aims to make the state India’s most developed, overcoming the legacy issues that came with the creation of Telangana.

In the calendar of the state administration of Andhra Pradesh, the second day of the week is not a Monday. Instead, it is designated Polavaram day—after the ambitious multi-purpose irrigation project that entails interlinking the unruly waters of the Godavari and the Krishna to bridge the water deficit in the latter’s river basin.

An Open Letter To Salman Khan: Out With Bollywood

Salman Khan, do the right thing; propose a sportsman’s name for the ambassador of Indian Olympic Association.

Dear Salman,

Even as I start this letter I know that while you are never going to take an interest in it, your armies of fans might. The love and loyalty that you inspire knows no bounds. And that is truly admirable. Everyone wants to have a piece of you—the selfie, the reply on Twitter, the handshake—it must get exhausting.

How H-1B Visa Changes Could Benefit Indian Professionals?

President Trump has issued an executive order directing some U.S. agencies to review the nonimmigrant, H-1B work visa policies, which at present allow companies to hire “skilled” foreign workers when employers say they cannot find qualified Americans. Trump has questioned the impact of the program, saying that it represses American wages by paying foreign workers less. 

The U.S. issues 85,000 H-1B visas annually, and extends or reissues another 100,000 visas, according to Forbes. Last year, nearly 127,000 visas went to Indian nationals, about 21,700 to Chinese workers and 2,540 to Mexicans to round out the top three.

‘I don’t bowl with the intention of taking wickets’: Bhuvneshwar Kumar, IPL 2017’s Purple Cap holder

The 27-year-old spoke about his tremendous form at the IPL this year where he has taken 23 wickets in 12 matches.

Come each year, the Indian Premier League throws in a slew of players’ names to keep track of. These players range from the most established names in the sport to the relative novices, who not only wade through the fervour and flavour of the IPL, but also seek to make the tournament their own.

The Ayodhya evasion: Why is the Supreme Court reluctant to pronounce verdict on a property dispute?

The top court has never shied away from instituting policies on everything from the organisation of cricket to the auctioning of coal. What gives here?

Wouldn’t the world be wonderful if we could all just get along? Unfortunately, people don’t always achieve that ideal, which is why we have laws and courts. Imagine now, that organisations which don’t get along at all have been fighting each other in court for decades, as sometimes happens in Indian trials. Nearly 70 years on, individuals among the original petitioners have all died of natural causes, hundreds of citizens unconnected with the case have died of unnatural causes as a result of the dispute, and the nation’s Supreme Court finally gets ready to pronounce a verdict. Having listened to all sides, and considered the complex issues carefully, the most senior judge in the country addresses the litigants. Why do you need courts at all, he asks, can’t you just sort this out by yourselves? Can’t you all just get along? He offers to play mediator, but is reluctant to play the role assigned to him, the role for which tax payers provide him a salary and perks, that of a judge.

That’s what Chief Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar did on Tuesday in the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi case. He might as well have entered the field of Kurukshetra and asked the Kaurava and Pandava armies to sort things out amicably. Barack Obama was fond of saying that every decision he made was complex and tough because anything simple would already have been done by somebody else.

Supreme Courts of every country are in the business of making difficult decisions. Ours, though, shies away from matters pertaining to law and basic rights while instituting policies on everything from the organisation of cricket to the auctioning of coal.

Babur to Babri
For those who came in late (which is a majority of Indians, since half of those alive today were yet to be born when the Babri Masjid was demolished, and about 15% more had not got to secondary school), here’s the gist of the back-story. The Central Asian king Babur defeated the army of Ibrahim Lodi in 1526 CE, founding what came to be called the Mughal dynasty. He spent four years consolidating his rule before losing the unequal battle against Indian bacteria. In 1528, his governor in Awadh province, a Shia general named Mir Baqi, constructed a large mosque in Ayodhya town, which came to be called the Babri Masjid.

From the middle of the 19th century, there were attempts by Hindu groups to take over the site under the pretext that it was Ram janmabhoomi, the birthspot of Lord Rama. A local akhara forcibly wrested a part of the complex for itself and commenced prayers in the open. Later, it sought legal sanction to build a shrine on the platform. Muslims protested and successive layers of the colonial administration ordered maintenance of status quo, with a section of the land held by the akhara, and the bulk of it controlled by the mosque’s caretakers.

The dark night
In December 1949, a group of Hindu activists entered the mosque at night and placed idols of Rama and Sita inside. The following day, the Akhil Bharatiya Ramayana Mahasabha declared the idols had appeared miraculously. As credulous devotees flooded the venue, the state administration locked the gates, disallowing both Muslims and Hindus from praying there. Jawaharlal Nehru and Vallabhbhai Patel tried to reverse what the trespassers had accomplished by ordering the state to remove the idols, but the district administration refused to do it, fearing riots. Within a year, the issue ended up in court, and there it has stayed ever since.

In the 1980s, right-wing Hindu organisations launched a political movement to construct a temple where the mosque stood. They claimed Mir Baqi had demolished a Rama temple and built the Babri Masjid over its ruins. On December 6, 1992, a Hindu mob broke through the paltry police cordon placed at the site by Uttar Pradesh’s Bharatiya Janata Party government, and reduced the Babri Masjid to rubble. A criminal case related to the demolition against BJP, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, and Vishwa Hindu Parishad Hindu leaders has been stalled for years.

In 2010, an Allahabad High Court judgement divided up the land where the mosque had stood, giving a third to the Sunni Waqf board, a third to the Nirmohi akhara, and a third to the human representatives of the infant Lord Rama. The court based its judgement substantially on a 2003 report by the Archaeological Survey of India which claimed to have found ruins of a temple under the erstwhile Babri Masjid.

The great red herring
The demolished temple has been the great red herring in the Babri Masjid saga. Secularist commentators played into Hindutvavadi hands in the 1980s by allowing it to become the centrepiece of the debate. The secular position should have been something to this effect: Islam’s iconoclastic streak is one of the repugnant aspects of the faith from a liberal perspective. A number of Hindu temples were, indeed, demolished by Muslim rulers in centuries past. There is no evidence that the Babri Masjid was built on one such demolished temple, but it shouldn’t matter anyway. A modern state cannot turn back the clock of history, and should restrict itself to addressing contemporary injustices.

Since the Allahabad court, like most left-wing commentators and all right-wing ones, accepted the notion that the mosque’s history counts, here’s a summary of the facts. Babur is renowned for his remarkable memoir, Baburnama, in which he put down details about everything from his drug use to his wars. Unfortunately, not long after the Babri Masjid’s construction, a sudden storm brought down Babur’s tent in the midst of a campaign, drenching his books and manuscripts. He saved what he could, but most of his 1528 and 1529 entries were probably lost at this time, and he died the following year before he could rewrite them.

In the parts of the memoir that have survived, Babur expressed no fondness for demolishing Hindu shrines. We know he left temples intact in forts he took over from Hindu rajas. At the same time, he wasn’t above the odd act of vandalism against places of worship that offended his sensibilities, even Muslim ones, and may not have objected to a general’s proposal to bring down a temple and build a mosque in its place. The contemporary record, in other words, is of no help whatsoever in resolving the Babri Masjid question.

The Archeological Survey of India’s report to the Allahabad court isn’t much better. The ASI asked a private company to map the area using ground penetrating radar, and drew conclusions on the basis of that data. The radar detected a few anomalies, which the ASI concluded were remnants of a temple’s pillars. If it was a temple, it was a pretty small one, far from the grand monument to Lord Rama’s birthplace we were led to expect. The report provided hints that the Babri mosque was built on the ruins of another mosque, which in turn might have been built on the ruins of a temple or after demolishing a temple.

Irrelevant history
Whether it was mosque on demolished temple, or mosque on ruined temple, or mosque on ruined home, or mosque on ruined mosque on ruined temple, or mosque on ruined mosque on demolished temple, cannot be ascertained on the basis of a radar scan.

Which is fine, because, as I’ve said, the history is irrelevant to the case. The Supreme Court ought to set aside myths of the birth of an avatar, and dubious archaeological reports, and treat the matter as a dispute over property rights. In such a dispute, it is difficult to envision the infant Rama as a beneficiary. The property ought to be divided unequally between the Waqf board and the akhara (since squatters gain some rights if they occupy land for long enough). This would return the site to the status quo of the 19th century with one difference: no mosque stands on the spot any longer.

At that point, a BJP government could use eminent domain to take over the land and construct the temple it’s been promising for decades. Or a secular government could build a hospital there, on the basis that Ayodhya’s Hindus and Muslims have plenty of places to pray, but inadequate health care. But neither secular parties nor religious will make such a move. The secular parties are weak and scared, while the BJP prefers to keep the pot of the public’s emotions simmering.

Who can blame them for indecisiveness when the nation’s highest court is reluctant to pronounce verdict on a property dispute?

Dear India And Pakistan, Can’t We Convert Our Grudges Into Love?

By ALI JEFFERY From KARACHI

Let's move beyond the discourse of 'You started it!,' 'No, you started it!'

I find myself increasingly upset at the abuse and hatred tossed from both sides of the border, with little rationale apart from the 69-year-old chips on our shoulders.

These chips have, over time, turned into boulders.

Yet, we have an affinity with India.

When Amitabh Bachchan is in the hospital, we pray for his good health.

When Ranbir Kapoor’s film is a hit, we’re prouder than Neetu and Rishi.

We can’t deny that no one sings about romance like Kishore and Rafi.

When we meet Indians abroad, they’re desi just like us.

Our history is their history. Our language is their language.

But it’s complex, our relation.

Like siblings, we know each other’s soft spots very well.

We retaliate to each other’s provocations like children, impulsive and emotional.

“You attacked us first in Uri!”

“You started it!”

“No, you started it!”

Like trust-fund babies, we feel entitled to demand things from others, yet have no idea how to cope and be responsible for our own actions.

Mistakes on either side
They don’t accept that Muslims and other minorities are sometimes attacked on the mere suspicion of eating beef.

And us? We turn a blind eye when Christians and Hindus are assaulted for eating before Iftar in Ramazan.

They’re occupying Kashmir, we say.

But we forget how we imposed ourselves on the Bengalis. Why did we force Bengalis to accept Urdu as their national language? We never talk about that, do we?

When I think of some of the best moments during the last ten years, most of them include my brothers and sisters from across the border: food, music, laughing, dancing, singing – a refusal to be separated by political boundaries.

I think we are wrong to look to the West for support. In the past, foreigners succeeded in making sure we saw each other as enemies. And boy did we fall for it.

We carry the burden of our past mistakes.

We should look to each other for support. What I find strange is our reluctance to acknowledge that we have each other.

What’s absurd is our blindness to the immense opportunities that lie before us if we work together and the desolation if we continue to be enemies.

What characterises our relation are the ever-changing roles we occupy.

To the world, we are siblings at loggerheads, each trying to get daddy’s attention so that he may buy us toys and increase our allowance.

At other times, we are like a divorced couple constantly bickering over who lost out in the settlement, unable to come to terms with the fact that it’s over.

It seems that the scars of our separation are still so ripe, so painful, that we only find solace in making sure that the other is just as hurt as we are. And so we put in our all our resources, our best efforts, to do exactly that.

When I read that India had carried out a surgical strike inside Pakistan, it felt like a personal setback. The Pakistani rhetoric has been no less disappointing. As we each take the moral high ground, point fingers, and beat the war drums, we forget how much is wrong with each of us.

I hope that very soon, these ugly scenes will disappear.

I, for one, don’t want to remember them.

I long for peace, not war.

Better days
What I will keep in my memory instead are the moments that embody love and respect for each other:

Prime ministers of both countries using cricket as a tool of diplomacy.

Indian players acknowledging that there is no better fast bowler than Wasim Akram.

Shoaib Malik marrying Sania Mirza.

Our tennis players teaming up at international tournaments, calling for us to stop war and start tennis.

What I am saying is that I want Uri to be history, confined to textbooks. I want Uri to be remembered as an event when the cold war between India and Pakistan did not turn into a hot war.

I hope it turns out to be no more than just another episode that provides for good banter with my Indian friends.

But what is not a mere episode is our past, our shared histories and the fact that we used to be one, before we were divided.

And what is comforting is that when I messaged one of my closest friends across the border, expressing concern over the megalomaniac tendencies of our governments, he responded: “it doesn’t matter what they do, you know I will always love you.”

I want to be optimistic and believe that our next generations will turn to our ancient scriptures and holy books. It won’t take them long to see that since time immemorial, there is only one message they have been trying to convey: the message of love.

I truly believe that it’s possible for love to triumph.