The People's Sachin

‘The People’s Princess’ initially started off as a radio play drawing parallels between two royal weddings and divorces – those between George IV and Caroline of Brunswick and then more recently, Prince Charles and Diana. The play itself focused on the nature of the divorce, the media’s role in each saga and the effect it had on the perception of the monarchy from the point of view of the British working class. The biggest impact the show had, however, was to firmly associate the People’s princess tag with Diana to such an extent that it continues to follow her until today, many years after her tragic death.

This can happen with some public figures – in some cases a result of clever PR used to ingratiate them with the masses, and in other cases via a series of (sometimes unfortunate) events, a bit of the extraordinary and sometimes with a slice of luck – they become icons. Throw over a billion people with a penchant for the romantic, sometimes bordering on the insane, and this icon hood can turn into quite an uneasy crown to wear. Of course, Sachin Tendulkar has worn it now for over two decades. Most recently, Greg Chappel, who had a rather uneasy relationship with Sachin and a majority of the Indian team, spoke about the regret he feels about not being able to have understood his pressures better at the time. These pressures have been spoken of ad infinitum, without much thought into what it means for him, or the fans.

Much like any public company, cricket loving Indian fans feel a sense of ownership towards Sachin. They haven’t invested any money into a share of him of course; what they have invested is their time and emotional energies. Speaking as one such “shareholder” myself, it is safe to say that we all have our personal memories of Sachin, much as we would of our favorite birthday present, or the best dinner we’ve ever had. We’ve all been guilty of crossing that thin line between admiration and possessiveness, albeit unknowingly. The Sachin that we see belongs as much to himself and those who know him as he does to us. Those pulled sixes off Kasprowicz, that other pulled six off Caddick, his lonely walk back after holing out off Saqlain in that test match in Chennai – we all think our treasure trove of Sachin goodies is different and better than anyone else’s. Everyone has a Sachin. Everyone. My Sachin may not be the same as Your Sachin. We are all like those blind men trying to feel their way around the elephant and taking away our own versions.

Cricket has always been the only sport that has had its hand on India’s pulse, but all of the cricketing stars before the 80’s have been reduced to anecdotes, sepia-tinted photographs and the occasional sound byte in the newspapers. It was television that brought them into every living room like never before, and the 90’s ushered in the opening of the markets and freedom from the post colonial hangover that led to a nation wanting poster boys. A young prodigy named Sachin fulfilled that void perfectly. His entire career has been played in front of a television camera – right from the time an awkward looking Sachin in ill fitting trousers was interviewed by Tom Alter at Shivaji Park up until the time when he was lifted on Yusuf Pathan’s broad shoulders and paraded around the Wankhede in front of 33,000 adoring supporters in the flesh and millions of others watching on their TV sets. We all know of every action he makes – the little nod of the head before he goes out to bat, the way he adjusts his crotch before taking guard, and the neat little right-wrist-over-left flick-off-the-pads as the ball rolls down to the square leg boundary before the bowler has finished his follow through. It’s like a reality-show that’s been on air for over 20 years. And it still draws as many eyeballs as the latest YouTube sensation.

It’s almost that everything that has happened before this has been prologue. The wait for that 100^th 100 is palpable. You can sense it in the air every time he walks out to bat. The monkey on his back is real. And it is only getting bigger and slightly more comfortable on his back the longer it takes for it to come. The media have played the Jekyll & Hyde role perfectly here – goading the frenzied fans to demand it on one hand, and chastising them for being unreasonable on the other. And yet, it comes back to the obsessive possessive Sachin disorder, if you could call it that. They want it for themselves, as much as they want it for him.

It hasn’t been done before and judging by the crowds in attendance at test matches these days, coupled with the mad lust for T20, it is unlikely that this record will ever be broken. The Man Himself has come out and spoken about how this milestone is just a number, but even he must know deep within that the only way to stop the madness is by getting one hundred runs in an innings. The fascination for milestones and numbers is too deep rooted in the Indian psyche and the masses are not going to collectively transform overnight. The way the drama is being played out right now, it is almost akin to a blood-thirsty mod willing a Roman Gladiator to plant the dagger into a poor victim’s gut and get it over with. They can’t wait for it anymore.

It is likely that when the time actually comes – surely, it is only a question of when– those that are present to witness it live will tell their grandchildren stories of how they watched him score his hundredth in the flesh with more enthusiasm than Sachin himself is likely to tell his grandkids about how he scored it. And once it’s done, maybe the monkey will be off his back. But then that’s what we thought when a World Cup sized monkey got off his back. I fear there will be some sort of burden that Sachin will have to bear until the day he hangs up his boots. He is, after all, the People’s Sachin. 

Post honeymoon post mortem

If, by any chance, you had yourself cryogenically frozen on or around that fateful night of April 2nd when the Indian cricket team won the 2011 Cricket World Cup and have only recently risen from your extended period of hibernation, you are in for a bit of a rude shock. It's fine if you believe in the theory that all good organizations go through cycles - The Roman empire was a shining example of that - but even the Roman empire took a few hundred years to fall. Had they followed Team India's model, history would have degenerated into a B-grade sci-fi flick where an army of giant termites attack and start gnawing at the foundations of the capital within a few minutes of their most golden period. 

Of course, it's not like the players or the fans were given much of an opportunity to take in the victory. If some rumors are to be believed, N Srinivasan - the current Godfather of Indian cricket - ordered the entire squad to be doused with a bucket of ice water barely hours after they had started celebrating, and got them all changed out of their India kits to their respective IPL PJ's. My source is prone to exaggeration and this sounds a bit far fetched, but I have been wrong to doubt these kind of news before. But then with the kind of money on offer at the IPL, I doubt there was a lot of grumbling. Gambhir even started pushing and shoving everyone who was not part of KKR to get into the spirit of things.

However, the way these things work is that something is bound to give. For the irrelevant tour of the West Indies (who the ICC insist are still a Test-playing nation), as well as the tour of England, India went through more injuries and replacements than Elizabeth Taylor went through husbands during a busy year. By the time the ODI series comes to an end (and it cannot end soon enough), I doubt there will be anyone left in India who could salvage even a single positive out of it. For years, we have pondered in silent dread over what would happen if and when: 

1. Zaheer breaks down for the 7th time. (Or is it the 8th?)

2. Sehwag and Sachin are both decommissioned. 

3. The Indian population realizes that Laxman and Harbhajan Singh and two of the most overrated cricketers to be playing for the country and that Dhoni can not turn water into wine. 

#1 is probably the most scary of the lot. Our over-dependence on Zaheer has to be addressed before any other issue. The South African tour and World Cup should have made the administrators wrap him up in cotton wool between important series. Ishant showed signs of being back to his best, but that was against a sub-standard West Indian lineup and any feel-good factor from that tour must have definitely eroded by now. That we had to depend upon Praveen Kumar, who in his early 20's, labors to the crease as if at gunpoint, and proceeds to bowl in the early 120's, was a throwback to the 1990's when Srinath broke down and we had Venkatesh Prasad leading the attack for us. To us Indian fans, those memories are akin to survivors' World War memories. We had all got down on our knees and prayed that we don't have to see such a day again. And yet those dark days have returned. As if that is not enough, we now have to endure R Vinay Kumar, in all his mediocrity, wearing an India shirt and bowling some extremely friendly length balls that even the most English of English batsmen would not have any trouble with. And all this while we have that rarest of beasts, Varun Aaron - who is said to be capable of bowling in the 140's - warming the bench. What kind of message is this to the kids watching?

I say issue #2 is not as worrying as #1, but that is only relative. In the shorter formats, we can still get by without either of these players performing and we would still end up being competitive. However, there is no doubt in my mind that in test cricket, we need at least 1 if not both of these guys to deliver, otherwise our batting ends up looking a touch too feeble, especially in Australia/England/South Africa. With absolutely no disrespect to Dravid, I have to say that his innings are the types that make our margins of defeat slightly more respectable. But at this point, only Sehwag has the capacity to turn an entire test match around on his own. The BCCI did try and offer the band air solution of rushing a visibly unfit and slightly deaf Sehwag to England only for the move to fall flat on it's face. 

#3 is something that certain people still believe is news fabricated by aliens who want to take over the world. Describing Laxman's batting is some kind of national sport where his flowing drives have been compared to everything from floral meadows to Deepika Padukone's hips. Also, saying you don't like Laxman is almost like admitting you are gay in India - it's a ticket to becoming a social pariah. And yet, when you realize that this guy has been playing for India for over 15 years without ever asserting the kind of authority you would expect after all this time, it's fairly obvious that he is in the team on the basis of a few admittedly outstanding innings. Harbhajan, on the other hand, is not afforded the same affections in the media and yet continues to represent the country at every given opportunity. In every recent interview, he has stressed how "the ball has been coming out of the hand really well." and how this is the best he's ever bowled. If he is to be believed, there must be some sort of inverse relation between how well he's bowling and how many wickets he's taking. My advice to him would be: Please bowl the crappiest you've ever bowled and pick up bucketfuls of wickets. I really hope the selectors take this opportunity to give the likes of Kohli/Sharma and Ashwin test berths to build for the future. And it would also be a good time for Dhoni to take a long hard look at himself and try and go back to figuring out why he was selected into the team in the first place. 

After the great high came the IPL. After this lowest of lows, comes the Champions League. Let us hope that the only way from here is up.

The Gods must be crazy

The cricketing Gods (I'm not referring to India's obsession with Sachin Tendulkar here) have just completely lost it. I think this is their way of getting back at cricket's administrators for ... well, a lot of reasons that we shall not get into here. But they are being just incredibly cruel! An India-Pakistan semi-final followed by a possible India-Sri Lanka final? (Ok, I know there could be 3 other possible outcomes but the one mentioned makes the following analogy perfect). That would be the equivalent of watching a show that features ghosts of John Lennon and George Harrison performing with Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr only to realize that it was only a cover for the real performers of the night - The Jonas Brothers featuring Justin Beiber!!! The mouth watering nature of the contest and the anticipation almost ensures that the other semi-final between Sri Lanka and - drum roll - New Zealand as well as the final will be almost completely eclipsed. 

Before we move on to the semi-finalists thought, it's worth mentioning a thing or two about the quarter finals. West Indies were steamrolled by Pakistan in a now-familiar fashion. Chris Gayle looked sufficiently disappointed but it is hard to tell whether that was because his team lost, or because he lost an opportunity to impress some IPL team-owner with a quick cameo in Indian conditions. Pakistan's spinners applied the squeeze and the Windies obliged by shrinking their bottoms so they could fit snugly in their grasp. England showed that not much has changed since 1996 by duly getting blasted out of the quarter-finals against the same opposition. Despite a century by Ricky Ponting, Australia scored almost exactly a 100 runs less than they did the last time the two teams met in a World Cup knockout. 260 was never going to be enough (regardless of what Ravi Shastri said) against the Indian batting lineup.  They chased down the total relatively comfortably, except for the time when Gambhir seemed in a hurry to get back to the dressing room to either rush to the toilet, or get out of some really ill-fitting underwear. Which brings us to the other game. There is no way to describe the game in normal cricketing terms. Which is why I'll try another approach. 

The South African team reminds you of the deer from the deer-in-the-headlights line. Imagine a fast, graceful dear that is generally regarded as amongst the best in it's class. It can seemingly outrun anyone and anything in sight. But there is a slight problem. The minute it sees headlights, something comes over it. The headlights needn't even be directly heading for it. It rushes towards the headlights in the nick of time to leave the truck no chance of getting out of the way. Now thinking of the New Zealand cricket team a truck is a bit like calling the Gieco lizard Godzilla, but I shall let it pass. On the day, both teams did exactly what was expected of them. New Zealand punched above their weight in the manner that has given them the title of honorary underdogs in any competition they enter, and the South Africans did more than just the regular choking. They unburied the grave after pretty much sealing New Zealand in, pulled them out of the coffin without them having to resort to any Uma Thurmanesque moves, handed them a particularly thick rope and lassoed their own heads in, while smiling benignly the entire way. That is the only way in which I can describe that quarter final. We all know that pressure can do funny things to people, but South Africa have officially taken the art of choking to hitherto unforseen highs (or lows - you can never be totally sure in these matters). 

The first semi final seems to be an open and shut case given just how the Sri Lankan spinners strangled the NZ run-chase when the two teams met in Mumbai during the league phase of the tournament. Again, Sri Lanka might end up making a complete mockery of the form-book by pulling off a South Africa, but imagining New Zealand in the final is a bit like visualizing Arjuna Ranatunga in a bikini. Just plain wrong and extremely disturbing. Before anyone tries to dwell on that image and causes serious damage to themselves, its time to talk about the final of all semi-finals: The India-Pakistan game. 

There is no point repeating cliches here that have already been digested by cricket fans the World over. Even Siddhu in his infinitesimal wisdom understands that this is a big game. What is not very well known is that given the obsession for the sport in the two countries, arrangements have been started to take the players of the losing team (and their families) to some remote location on the moon, where cricket is not the number 1 sport. The throwable-stones business (boxes of 25, 50 or 100) as well as the flammable-effigy business might also receive a shot in the arm in one of the two countries. Point being that the team that is the best likely to handle pressure on the day will win this match.

Sachin will be a talking point regardless of the opposition and rightly so. That Pakistan need him out of the way early is a given. However, Sehwag's ability to not carry any kind of baggage from 1947, or the previous delivery will stand him in good stead. Also, if he is able to get past the initial barrage from Shoaib Akhtar (hard to imagine him not playing) and Umar Gul, he will be a very good weapon against the Pakistani spinners who have been untested against really strong players of spin in the opposition so far. Yuvraj has been in great form but isn't the best players of spin around and that makes the likes of Gambhir extremely important to the middle. Let's hope he finds the right pair of underwear and takes a strong enough laxative before the match this time round. All the talk has centered on this being a match of the Pakistani bowlers against the Indian batsmen, but the Pak bowling attack is a far cry from the time when Wasim and Waqar opened the bowling. Also, despite the Indian bowling not looking great either, Zaheer is the obvious danger-man and Ashwin opening the bowling has given the attack a new dimension. Harbhajan Singh generally raises his game against Pakistan and their batsmen will need to find a way to attack him in the middle overs because Younis and Misbah have a tendency to really slow things down. You think Pakistan are missing someone like Anwar in the top order and someone like Inzy in the middle-order. If the Indian batting can negate the threat of Umar Gul and the batting power-play and manage to get a good score, its going to be hard for Pakistan to match India run-for-run. 

So after 42 inconsequential matches and 4 matches of the sudden-death variety, it's down to the last three games. These are the kind of games that professional cricketers dream about their entire lives. You could either rip your trousers while fielding at fine-leg and end up embarrassing yourselves in front of millions (the kind of embarrassment only Kamran Akmal is impervious to), or you could make yourself the toast of the nation. Along with huge dollops of butter. One thing is for sure though: after the India-Pakistan game, the final is bound to end up being the mother of all anti-climaxes. Miss that semi-final at your own peril!

Can the real World Cup please stand up?

After the 1992 World Cup, I had read an article by Rajdeep Sardesai where he imagined what the 2092 World Cup might look like. It included a final between the USA and UAE played at some exotic South American location, if memory serves me right. Sounds great, doesn't it? Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like it is going to happen. The reason being that cricket administrators, journalists, and other what not's seem to believe that the way to "spread the game" in non-cricket playing nations is not some TLC - wherein you build the system at the grassroots and carefully monitor the progress of the team until they are ready to face the big boys. Instead, they think the correct approach is to let the Associate nations play in a World Cup despite being absolutely outclassed by regular cricket-playing nations and then ignored for 4 years until it's time to play the next World Cup. It's like asking an amateur wrestler to build their bones (or in this case, break them) by fighting against the heavyweight champion so they can "learn". Somehow, it doesn't quite sound right. Although it isn't as bad as getting your bones broken (except for Sultan Zarawani who had his skull rearranged by an Allan Donald bouncer), consistently getting trashed must have some kind of an effect. Possibly even on Canada. 

Questions have been asked over and over about the format of this World Cup. What a lot of people don't quite know is that this was never intended to be a World Cup. It was always supposed to be a knockout tournament following on the heels of the 2000 ICC knockout that New Zealand won (which proves that it really was open). There was a debate in the ivory towers in Dubai about what the tournament must be named. They decided not to call it the knockout because that was supposed to be a secret. One of the names considered was "Who can win 3 in a row?" but it was quickly withdrawn when a few people confused it with a B-grade reality show and the ICC got applications from a group of circus jugglers, some boy bands and a troupe of bhangra dancers. It was thus decided that the best way to keep this secret was to call it the World Cup. To make it appear like the World Cup. To even play a bunch of games like any other World Cup. Except that they sneakily got in a format that had a quarter-final in it. 

And now, considering that everyone who anyone expected to be here is here, it's now time for the tournament to start in earnest. At this point, it really is a question of who can win 3 in a row. Let's try and review and analyse the matchups: 

QF1: West Indies v Pakistan: Everyone is obsessing about the possibility of an India-Pakistan game when both teams are still a match away. Pakistan have to fell the West Indies, which admittedly is a relatively easier task than the one facing India - beat Australia. Makes you think back to 1987 when nothing was in the way of an epic finale (except for Australia and England, of course). What happened? Both host nations were ousted only for an England-Australia final at the Eden gardens which Australia went on to win for their first ever World Cup title. West Indies have been beaten and bruised so far in this cup, but the point is that they are still in it. Both teams will know that it will take one inspired innings by Gayle and probably a good lively burst from the rapid Roach. Pakistan have been well, Pakistan. Afridi has been at his fiesty best as a bowler and a brainless chump with the bat and the same team that have beaten Australia to end their 34-match winning streak almost suffered embarrassment at the hands of Canada! They will be the first to admit that their batsmen have been solid at best, and Kamran Akmal has provided comedians all over the cricket-playing world with at least a year of material. All said, the West Indies suffer from a real lack of belief and it is hard to see Pakistan not being in the semi-finals. 

QF2: India v Australia: Tim Nielsen, who probably has won a lifetime contract as Australian coach (along with Ricky Ponting as captain) has already started the verbal jousting by claiming that all the pressure is on India and billing this contest as a mini-final. He's not totally wrong, of course. Except that it's a quarter-final and whichever team they end up facing will be happy that these teams will be mentally and emotionally drained by the time this match is through. India's top order have done exceptionally well, of course, and Sachin Tendulkar needs no reminder as to how important this match is. However, the middle-order has suffered a nervous breakdown in the tournament so far the minute the words power and play have been uttered in the same sentence. This is just as likely to be a battle between the Australian pace unit and the Indian top order, as between the Indian spinners and the Aussie middle-order (Ponting v Harbhajan, anyone?). The winners of that battle might well decide this contest, but it's just too close to pick a winner here. 

QF3: England v Sri Lanka: One reason that Sri Lanka would be relieved with the Indian win over WI the other night is that they get to play at home. And we all know how good they are in Sri Lanka. They might be a bit wary of England though since England are not the same England who Jayasuriya and Kalu obliterated in the last QF the two played against each other in 1996. England have shown distinct Pakistani traits in the first part of this World Cup by winning and losing (and tie-ing) when everyone least expected to. Their main falling though has been Anderson's absolute lack of form. Also, after the match against India, their batsmen (apart from Trott) have not been getting a lot of runs and it was only because the West Indies showed their mastery of the Collapse that England have actually gotten this far. Although Sri Lanka have been accused of being overly dependent on their top-order (and fairly so), they are in pretty good form and England don't seem to possess the kind of bowlers to trouble them. Also, it's hard to see the England batsmen put one past M&M, which makes picking this one rather easy: Sri Lanka all the way. 

QF4: South Africa v New Zealand: I'm going to stick my neck out here and say this: easy win for South Africa. Not only do South Africa look like a well-oiled machine, New Zealand have looked seriously out of their depth. But for some awful bowling at the death and Kamran Akmal proving why he is the butt of all jokes these days, despite Ijaz and Salman both being at-large in Pakistan, NZ might have not been able to put together a single win over a test-playing nation in the tournament so far. They were blown away by Australia and Sri Lanka and despite having McCullum and Taylor in the team, they just don't seem to have the necessary consistency to pose a serious threat. Also, South Africa seemingly have most bases covered except for possibly a power-hitter in the lower middle order, in the Klusener mould. It still seems likely that this one will be the kind of one-sided affair which might make people wonder whether the knockouts have even started. 

But we know that they have. You read it here. May the real World Cup begin!

The hieroglyphic DRS and the powerplay trojan horse

It has been a while since I last posted anything on this due to a variety of reasons (travelling and what not), but I'm pretty sure my 3 regular readers (all of which are close family and friends) will manage to go about their business without being too disappointed. And there have been way too many mismatches for the odd bright spot to balance out what has otherwise been a tepid tournament so far. The fact remains that the best 8 teams in the world play only 12 of the 42 matches in the league stages. Most of the games between the big teams so far have been pretty exciting, which makes me look forward to the leaner and meaner 10-team event of 2015 with hope. I'm also prone to agree with an Indian website that suggested that the ICC has hired England to make the weaker teams look good. England are the type of hunter that took on a particularly ferocious lion and slayed it, came out of hand-to-hand combat with a grizzly bear with it's pride intact but then took a rather bad beating from an adolescent cub and a domesticated zebra. I'll save the debate of how the weaker cricket nations can be helped to a future point. Also, all the matches have been analyzed to death so I won't repeat that here. There are a couple of very interesting things to have come out of this world cup so far: the UDRS and the batting powerplay.

Now a lot of people realize that the Duckworth-Lewis is something that most people who aren't mathematicians won't understand all too well. Most people think of that as Forrest Gump's mama's proverbial box of chocolates: you open it and just accept whatever is inside it. The UDRS, however, is a completely different animal. On the surface, it's motive is simple enough: To eliminate as many errors from cricket as possible. However, keeping things simple is something the ICC (and lawyers) have traditionally struggled with (along with many other things including but not limited to getting things right and showing common sense). I'm pretty confident in their ability to bungling things up to an extent that they can probably make eating a bowl of cereal seem inhumanly difficult. Something I just haven't been able to grapple with is this whole system of appeals and 2.5 meter distances.

Now consider this alternative: The umpire makes a decision. In the time that the bowler walks back to his mark, the captain adjusts the field so the short third-man is 3 inches more to his right than before, the batsman adjusts his crotch and the camera-man focuses on his newly found true love in the stands, the third umpire does what he is presumably there for - takes a look at the decision and either upholds it (in which case no one notices), or overrules it (which would, admittedly, make everyone take notice). Now I'm pretty sure Darryl Harper would find ways to get even that wrong - he is the type of person I would not trust with using a coffee machine without being a serious threat to himself and those around him - but all in all, it would result in reducing the number of absolute howlers. Apart from making the whole system easier to understand than the Theory of Relativity. And let's face it - cricket is inherently a stop and start sport. And complaining about the few extra few seconds that this could potentially add is like complaining about a few extra drops in the ocean. 

Secondly, the batting powerplay has thrown up an extremely interesting conundrum to all capains: when to take it? It is like a harmless looking Trojan horse that could end up housing an army of lethal soldiers who attack when you least expect it. Something that by conventional wisdom is an ally to the batting side has been anything but, on an average. Like Robin Jackman said on commentary during the India-SA match, it doesn't matter when you take it, you have to bat well in it. Batsmen who take it start acting like 16-year olds who are under immense pressure of "being cool" from their peers and end up sucking at the wrong end of their cigar resulting in long, fitful coughing while also burning their tongues and looking extremely foolish and positively uncool in the process. Maybe the trick is to not try and be cool, to not try and whack the cover off every ball, to not try and feel the pressure of hitting in the air all the time, but pressure can make you do funny things. I have a feeling it is decidedly easier for armchair critics like me to sit around and talk about it than actually using a batting PP well. But I may be wrong. The trick really is to keep a realistic target and not try and score 70 runs off every batting PP. Kamran Akmal, after all, cannot be the keeper in every match. 

This also brings up another point: the temerity of modern-day captains. If the great explorers of the past were anything like any of the captains seen so far during the tournament, we would have thought the world is still flat, the English would have eaten their food without spices and  ... well, you get the point. Zero sense of adventure. Why, after all, does it need a batting power-play for them to bring the field in and make the batsmen take some risks?Also, one boundary followed by three dot-balls is definitely better TV than four ambled singles in a row while the batsman, bowler and fielders are on auto-pilot. 

So as things proceed towards the knockouts, the only thing to see really is whether Bangladesh are able to sneak in at the expense of England, and what the actual matchups are going to be like. Now this might be a bit of an oversimplification, but I get the feeling that the team that ends up conquering the batting powerplay might be the one that has the best chance of winning the trophy.  

Why the US dept. of Homeland Security is investigating Ravi Shastri

The first 3 days of the World cup so far (as well as the opening ceremony) have been largely predictable affairs, except for the New Zealand vs. Kenya game where New Zealand caused a major upset by skittling the 2003 semi-finalists for a meager total and then going on to polish the runs off in less than 10 overs themselves. For a side that has lost more games than it has played this year, to have such a confidence boosting victory in the first round means a lot. A slightly sterner test awaits for them in their next game against Australia. By a simple process of extrapolation, it can be argued that if Hamish Benett bowls his full quota of 10 overs, he will end up with 8-32 in that match, which makes a New Zealand victory almost a certainty. Surely, these one-sided ODI's have to end!

India and Sri Lanka both did what was expected of them by obliterating the minnows. India went so far as to try and help Bangladesh by playing Sreesanth, but even that could not stop them from scoring an 80+ run victory against the home side. Bangladesh seem to have a sure game-plan though. They are quickly taking all the pre-tournament pressure off themselves and trying to settle once again into the role of minnows before hustling their way towards a World Cup victory. If I read their strategy right, expect a 100+ run drubbing against either Ireland or the Netherlands before they pick their game up and end up winning the tournament unbeaten from that point and then winning the next 3 world cups without dropping a single game. There might still be some debate about the legitimacy of a "You just dropped the World Cup son" comment by Imrul Keyes when either Kapugedara or Angelo Matthews drops a catch at square leg while trying to celebrate (this is the part where the crystal ball gets a bit fuzzy) and Keyes then goes on to score a match winning century in the Quarter Final. It can thus be said that their World Cup campaign is off to the perfect start. From the time they put India in, only for Sehwag to blitz his way to a 175, the result was never in doubt. The gregarious Sreesanth did what he does best by providing the home side with some moments of cheer in his 5-over spell, but the writing was on the wall by then. It is interesting to note that India have never lost a World Cup when one of their batsmen has scored a 175 against a minnow nation so that must be a good sign for the tournament hosts.

Canada, of course, have no real ambition. They are only in it to click some pictures of Bangladesh and India for their flickr accounts and argue with fellow countryman Bryan Adams about what flavor of maple syrup goes better with a Kottu-roti. There are certain rumors that Canada have been specifically hired by Haroon Lorgat to lose games by such huge margins that no one argues about not including minnows in the 2015 World Cup anymore. Minor upsets like NZ victories over Kenya will be forgotten if Canada continue to play as per plan. Sri Lanka once again proved that on flat pitches and against bad opposition, there are no better looters. They hold a record for the highest ODI and T20 scores against minnows and I have already put a vast fortune of $1 on them beating that record during this World Cup. 

And finally, who can forget the opening ceremony? It captured the local flavor and the general theme of the tournament perfectly. But you had to read between the lines, of course. The boring speeches by the politicians and the overly long cultural shows represented the games including minnows during this World Cup that no one really cares about. Sonu Nigam and a local Bangladeshi woman dressed in a saree over someone like a Beyonce or Rihanna (say) represented how the ICC know exactly what the viewers don't want to see but will make no effort to do anything about it nonetheless. A performance by the 112 year-old Bryan Adams (despite being the best recorded performance by a person his age) went out to show just how the ODI format can still continue to entertain despite fears that is largely irrelevant. And a recording of the the largely un-inspiring World Cup theme song played 3 times in loop was a true representation of the lukewarm nature of a majority of the pre-quater games as well as the fact that its 3 times longer than it should be. It was all very cleverly done, it must be said. And then there was Ravi Shastri. 

While his constant mumblings of "tracer bullet" have put him on the radar of the US governments Department of Homeland security (who make it a business to make everything their business) for a while now, his accent at the World Cup opening ceremony put him firmly on the country's blacklist. Language experts analyzing his accent found traces of Egyptian, Iranian, Syrian and Cuban dialects in there somewhere without being able to trace his roots 100%. His dogs bouncer and beamer are now under a 24-hr watch and the US are showing a lot of restraint by not trying to bring democracy to his living room. How this sub-plot emerges might just be the most exciting bit about the World Cup before the Quarter finals start.

The World Cup is upon us!

And lo and behold! The World cup is here already. After 8 years! The ICC has announced after much deliberation that the 2007 World Cup did not happen. So Australia are still looking for their third consecutive title, India are yet to lose to Bangladesh in a World Cup game and Bob Woolmer is still alive. Ok none of that is true. But this time we can get it right. As long as Australia don't win again, India don't lose again to Bangladesh and Bob Woolmer does not die again, the tournament will be considered more successful than the last. Given that one of those three outcomes is extremely unlikely (Australia winning, of course), we can be sure this tournament will be a bit less of a drag than the last one. 

For those with the ability to pretend that the first month of the World Cup is of any consequence, it is a time of great excitement! Two groups of 7 each. Of which, there are 4 who have only recently figured out the difference between the meat and the handle of the bat. And of the rest, 8 will go through to the knockout phase. 8 among the 9 test playing nations and Zimbabwe. And just in case the teams don't get warmed up enough playing 6 league games before the knockouts start, there was an extra week of warm-up games. Considering that people with about the same IQ as those who approve of 7-match ODI bilateral series design the format for the World Cups, it really isn't that surprising. 

Having said all of this though, there is something about the India-Bangladesh curtain raiser that warrants special mention. No one needs any reminding of the circumstances in which India were kicked out of the WC last time round. If Bangladesh could have been considered a banana peel, India slipped on it quite spectacularly. In general, people who slip on banana peels are generally embarrassed. India took the art of banana slipping to unknown levels. By running as fast as they could (knowing that the banana peel had been put there for them), they did a somersault and landed with inch-perfect precision on the peel. And then slipped on it again while trying to get up and ripped their trousers in the process. All in all, it was a rather forgettable episode. 

If Bangladesh were at banana-peel levels of slippability then, they have attained the status of a newly waxed floor by now. Slightly harder to avoid. You have to wear the right kind of shoes and what not. They recently proved that in home conditions, an ODI victory against a fellow test nation isn't the cricket equivalent of a Haley's comet viewing anymore. They trashed fellow basement dwellers New Zealand 4-0 (and it wasn't 5-0 only because one of the matches was washed out). Certainly a team not to be taken lightly anymore. 

When asked about the challenge of facing Bangladesh, the newly anointed 'Obama of cricket' was quick to resort to the "Well of course, we will not be complacent" kind of reply that made for rather boring reading. Which is why the same question was then asked to Sehwag. If Dhoni offered a dour dead-bat, Sehwag closed his eyes, left his crease and swung wildly at it, as is his wont. He explained that he was looking forward to this "revenge" match. What a guy! Coming from the same person who had gone on to call them an "ordinary" opposition not-so-long ago, it was a typical Sehwagism, for the lack of a better term. The episode was doubly great to follow because this was the same guy who had started the procession 4 years ago by chopping a Mortaza delivery on to his stumps, resulting in a boom on the market for Sehwag-shaped flammable effigies. But now the time for talking is well and truly over as the action shifts to Mirpur for the opening game. 

The one key player whose services Bangladesh are likely to miss is that very Mortaza who had played a key part in that victory 4 years ago. Although Bangladesh have some honest seamers playing for them, they are definitely going to miss the nip with which he operated, not just in the match against India but through the rest of the tournament as well. Although their army of left-arm spinners will prove effective against teams not renowned for playing spin well (and will undoubtedly be a source of many nightmares for Kevin Pietersen), to win the World Cup, they will need to get past the subcontinental teams and that is where they might face an issue. Their bowling attack is eerily similar to India's 1970's test attack when Gavaskar and Solkar were used to take the shine off the new ball just so the real bowlers could start bowling. Having said that, after the warm-up games, India's current pace attack have not quite distinguished themselves either. However, with Zaheer Khan back and due to some more variety in the bowling attack, India are definitely the better bowling team. 

Where batting is concerned, India are the outright winners on paper but as we have seen in the past, that can count for very little. However, due to the sheer firepower at India's disposal, this could prove to be a lineup that's a bit too strong for Bangladesh to overcome. What is good to see is stability at the top of the order and the sheer brutality of Yusuf Pathan in the middle. He might be troubled by the really quick bouncer, but Bangladesh don't have anyone to test him and spinners stand as much of a chance against him as a bunch of sausages in a doghouse. 

It is very hard to imagine anything other than a comfortable Indian victory in this one. Of course, all of India want their team to not only beat Bangladesh but also make every team member run 20 rounds of the ground and do 50 push-ups for good measure. As Sehwag rightly said, this is a "revenge" match. There could have been no better game to signal the beginning of the World Cup!

A tale of two ballgames

Now I haven’t watched a cricket game live for a very, very long time. I did, however, watch as many cricket matches live growing up as I could whenever the BCCI deigned to give Bombay a game or two by taking cricket away from the big centers like Guwahati. And let me tell you this - the atmosphere at an India A vs. India B game was as sensational as it could be when the marquee players at this tournament consisted of such elite names as Gagan Khoda and Ajit Agarkar. I'm not going to complain about why the IPL was not around when I was in college and had all the time in the world and actually was in-situ, so to speak. Instead, I'll just reflect on the kind of excitement that games like those generated and even Khoda would agree that watching Sachin take on Kumble or Warne is slightly better than watching him pummel Kanitkar to all parts. So I can only imagine the kind of noise levels at the ground when this spectacle is in progress.

Contrast that to baseball. I was led into believing that baseball was a distant cousin of cricket and now that I live in the US or A, I might as well give it a chance. Which I did. And guess what - it is a distant cousin. But it's the kind of distant cousin that everyone tends to have (unless you are that distant cousin). You know, the type that grew up in a remote village where a toaster is still considered the greatest technological achievement of our times. Yes, that person. While most American sports are alive due to the marketing aspect associated with sports, baseball thrives on it more than any other. Watching a live game of baseball is about as exciting as watching the grass grow and the average American viewer relies on overpriced beer to get them through. I went to that Mecca of baseball watching - the Fenway Park to watch the Boston Red Sox take on the NY Yankees! Now that has to be a great game, correct? Unfortunately not. It's just not cricket. My memory of the game is alternating trips to the hotdog/beer stand and the restroom (the perfect cause-effect relationship). And watching other pink American males do the same without anyone really caring about what was going on in the game. The odd dog barked. And this wasn't some kind of Khoda-Agarkar contest. Jeter was leading the Yankees lineup, A-Rod was present, and Josh Beckett was pitching for the Sox. However, the average interest in the game was probably as high as it would be during the 4th day of a high scoring draw between a Vidarbha v. Tripura plate league playoff. And the end result? 1-0. I don't remember who won. And I did not remember the run being scored. I might have been watching - or maybe I was taking one of my aforementioned trips.

Moral of the story? All of those 7 people reading this post (if it's my lucky day), if you live in India - and you are geographically located anywhere close to a cricket venue, the next time a match comes along, please do watch it. Take you mother with you. Call you neighbor and ask them to bring their dog along. Maybe even your distant cousin. Because before you know it, you might be stuck watching a Yankess-Sox game at the Fenway with alternating trips to the beer stand and the rest room. So make the most of it while you can.