- Put simply, the Melbourne Cricket Ground is just too damn big for us
- A bowler who bowls 145+ kmph is special. But me thinks that a bowler who bowls 129.9kmph for 4 out of 6 deliveries in one over is very very special. Step forward Stuart Clark. Comparisons with Glenn McGrath are so easy and so obvious and so bloody true.
- The Melbourne cricket pitch is just too suited to Stuart Clark
- The loss at Sydney affected me more than any match since India lost to Pakistan at Chennai and Kolkatta in 1998-99.
- Nothing kills like a silent killer. With the obvious killers, you know what is coming. Symonds is one of those obvious ones. You prepare for him. You plan for him. You lay a trap for him. Nothing guarantees success, but that is all you can do. Brad Hogg is a silent one. We did not worry about him. We weren't prepared for him. We did not have a plan for him. As a result, we paid a price because of him.
- When it comes to marriage expenses, the saree is a silent killer. Apparently, jewels for the occasion are procured from the time the bride was born. The cost for renting the marriage hall and the cheque for the caterers are spoken about rightaway and allocated for too. Then comes the day when the parents from both sides and the bride get together to shop for sarees. I knew that there would be one for the wedding and one for the reception. And that both of these would be expensive. What I did not know was that, there would be one for the engagement, one for the 'maru veedu' and one because the bride liked something she saw. In case a friend is reading this, and wondering why he/she was not invited for the engagement, let me clarify that we did not actually have an engagement ceremony. We just have a saree for that occasion.
- Honestly, if that is all there is to this saree thing, I would not have brought it up. But no, it does not stop there. Not even close to there. Any woman, closely or vaguely related to the marriage, who wants a new saree, is gifted one. Who does not want a new saree for free?! Even I want one!
- One friend who got married on February 1st said that she got SEVEN sarees, including one for the wedding night and excluding the gagra choli that she was going to wear for the reception. Another one, that is set to tie the knot on March 9th, said that without any considerations over buying a number that is required for the various events around occasion, she just gets ELEVEN dresses for her wedding. Totally unaccounted!
- Watching India's victory over Australia at Perth was my favorite wedding gift, and I got it the day before the wedding. Initially, I thought that it would have been perfect had it happened on the actual day itself, but on careful analysis, I conclude that if it was going to happen on the wedding day, I would have either gotten married or gotten the gift. There was no room for both. So, this was just perfect!
- Chennai traffic does not matter! You just need to be in the right mood to disregard it completely.
- Chennai weather does matter! Whatever mood you might be in, it is hard to disregard the beads of sweat running down your face.
- So, if visiting Chennai, visit during winter. I am referring to those 30 odd days that get labeled as winter. It is nice out there during those days. There is no sweating. So, you are in a good mood. So, traffic does not matter. Still, don't push it. Stay away from T.Nagar!
- Brett Lee was one of the reasons we dominated and drew 1-1 with Australia when we visited during 2003-04. The primary reason for Australia winning the 2007-08 series 2-1 are well, Benson and Bucknor, but Brett Lee gets the vote from amongst the players.
- Australia have been carrying Lee in their test team for more than 5 years. Now, they are reaping the rewards. By the looks of it, they got their timing just about right by blooding Mitchell Johnson now. 5 years hence, when Lee retires, Johnson will be the Lee of today.
- The word 'stain' has a negative connotation. A physical stain is typically looked upon as disgusting. Strangely though, volunteering to get crap on one's hand evokes admiration, and the stain it leaves behind elicits 'Oohs' and 'Aahs' and becomes the focal point of so many conversations during marriage time. Welcome to the girly world of Mehendi.
- Manly Ponting getting worked over by new boy Ishant means that our hypothetical pace attack is getting stronger by the series. The star list now reads Zaheer, RP, Munaf, Sree, Pathan and Ishant. Hopefully, this means that when the next series comes around, we will have atleast two of them fit to play!
- I am a bigger fan of Sachin now than ever before. Not so much for his batting, but more for his general demeanor and his realization and acceptance of the passage of time.
- I am a lesser fan of Harsha Bhogle now than ever before. I refer to Harsha the commentator. I still enjoy his columns, but listening to his commentary after ages, I realized that he caters primarily to the least intelligent cricket viewer. I don't belong there.
- I miss Ricky Ponting manning backward point
- I was all for bringing in an appeals system wherein television could play a much bigger role in decision making, until I realized that Channel 9 deliberately did not show a single replay of Clarke grounding the ball when he rolled over after 'catching' a ball that might or might not have bounced in front of him.
- This blatant 'no-show' was the equivalent of the incorrect Dravid dismissal being shown for 24 hours on all Indian news channels.
- Extensive media coverage can be quite a problem. While I don't think it can be termed as the same, getting photographed through the day on that day, made me quite uncomfortable. So much so, that by the end of the day, I did not just consider the photographers to be a nuisance, but to be proper Tamil movie villains. One day later, when I viewed the raw images taken on that day, my opinion of them remained the same. 5 days later, after viewing the album filled with digitally enhanced pictures of myself, I look back at them as the angels that made a memorable day, a rememberable, memorable one.
- People that came onto the dais, and embarrassed me by asking if I recognized them, in spite of the perfectly decent smile with which I greeted them, while not having a clue as to who they were, are just cruel people. I met a lot of cruel people that day.
- I met some more cruel people that day - they gave flowers as gift!
- At a perfectly decent restaurant, a fairly unruly roar erupted when the TV screen showed Rajnikanth being awarded with the title of "Man of the Year" for 2007. My brother, an ardent fan, while grinning from ear to ear, remarked that only Rajnikanth could bring about such a response. Half-heartedly, I remarked that maybe Sachin would too. But deep down, I knew that that in Tamil Nadu, Rajnikanth fans would outnumber Sachin's or anyone else's fans by 10 to 1. A pretty sad 'state'.
Monday, January 28, 2008
2 weeks of Cricket, Chennai and getting Married
Tuesday, January 01, 2008
Our Captains and their Decisions
Earlier this year, when Australia landed in India for the one day series (immediately after our Twenty20 triumph), Dhoni had to choose between Harbhajan and Powar for a spot in the playing eleven. Powar had been a consistent presence in the side through the tour of Ireland and England and had done really well. In fact, Powar and Chawla tossing the ball higher and higher during the middle overs of the one dayers with a fair bit of success is a romantic memory that lingers from the past year.
Harbhajan, on the other hand, had been dropped after the ODI World Cup and was making a comeback into the ODI side based on good performance in the Twenty20 competition. One can't really take away the success he had during that tournament, but anyone that watched his bowling, would know that it was success based on consistent flat blockhole or thereabouts bowling rather than flight based deception. In fact, he did not seem to have much else to offer. When Misbah moved deeper into the crease and went after him in the finals, Harbhajan could not do much. Still, overall, he was a success story from that triumph.
Coming back to the Ind-Aus ODI series, Cricinfo ran a preview, in which, it was stated as a given that Harbhajan would be preferred over Powar. It took be by surprise, but I grudgingly accepted that that was a reality of Indian cricket, wherein, star power would trump on-field performance. On matchday though, Dhoni, the new captain, much newer to the international arena than Harbhajan himself, played Powar.
--------------------------------------------
Now, during this backlash after the Melbourne loss, Sehwag is the man that has been anointed by the media as savior of this Indian team that is taking on the mighty Australians in their own backyard. This is the very same Sehwag whom the whole world thought was getting a free ride in the Indian team just a year ago. Nothing much has changed. He made a comeback in the one dayers. Did not succeed. Some old failings showed up. And apparently, he has been in the same form in domestic cricket that Brian Charles Lara was in the ICL, without the record dollars per run scored though.
Ian Chappell had perfectly valid reasons for including Sehwag in the Indian playing eleven. India gives away too much in too many departments to the Aussies. So, in order for them to stand toe to toe with the Aussies consistently, they would need something special. His pick Sehwag, made a career out of playing special knocks until a couple of years ago. He hasn't done that in a long time though. So, picking him, as Ian made clear, would have been a gamble and nothing more.
Unfortunately, because of the fact that the negatives of our performance from the Melbourne test are theoretically solved by the solution, that is Sehwag, everyone appears to be taken up by it. A gamble was suddenly deemed crystal clear logic. Instead of weighing up skills, respective styles of batting was all that mattered in discussions and debates.
By the time the test match came about, I had taken it for granted that Sehwag was in and that Yuvraj would miss out. Much to my surprise, Kumble has selected an unchanged batting lineup. I suspect that the actual batting order might differ from Melbourne, though, I wouldn't be surprised if all we see is a change in attitude towards run scoring.
--------------------------------------------
One decision, one knock, one spell - these things don't mean much over an entire career. But a great career is something that has many of these 'ones'. Kumble and Dhoni have put up an excellent 'one' against their names with their respective decisions.
Harbhajan, on the other hand, had been dropped after the ODI World Cup and was making a comeback into the ODI side based on good performance in the Twenty20 competition. One can't really take away the success he had during that tournament, but anyone that watched his bowling, would know that it was success based on consistent flat blockhole or thereabouts bowling rather than flight based deception. In fact, he did not seem to have much else to offer. When Misbah moved deeper into the crease and went after him in the finals, Harbhajan could not do much. Still, overall, he was a success story from that triumph.
Coming back to the Ind-Aus ODI series, Cricinfo ran a preview, in which, it was stated as a given that Harbhajan would be preferred over Powar. It took be by surprise, but I grudgingly accepted that that was a reality of Indian cricket, wherein, star power would trump on-field performance. On matchday though, Dhoni, the new captain, much newer to the international arena than Harbhajan himself, played Powar.
--------------------------------------------
Now, during this backlash after the Melbourne loss, Sehwag is the man that has been anointed by the media as savior of this Indian team that is taking on the mighty Australians in their own backyard. This is the very same Sehwag whom the whole world thought was getting a free ride in the Indian team just a year ago. Nothing much has changed. He made a comeback in the one dayers. Did not succeed. Some old failings showed up. And apparently, he has been in the same form in domestic cricket that Brian Charles Lara was in the ICL, without the record dollars per run scored though.
Ian Chappell had perfectly valid reasons for including Sehwag in the Indian playing eleven. India gives away too much in too many departments to the Aussies. So, in order for them to stand toe to toe with the Aussies consistently, they would need something special. His pick Sehwag, made a career out of playing special knocks until a couple of years ago. He hasn't done that in a long time though. So, picking him, as Ian made clear, would have been a gamble and nothing more.
Unfortunately, because of the fact that the negatives of our performance from the Melbourne test are theoretically solved by the solution, that is Sehwag, everyone appears to be taken up by it. A gamble was suddenly deemed crystal clear logic. Instead of weighing up skills, respective styles of batting was all that mattered in discussions and debates.
By the time the test match came about, I had taken it for granted that Sehwag was in and that Yuvraj would miss out. Much to my surprise, Kumble has selected an unchanged batting lineup. I suspect that the actual batting order might differ from Melbourne, though, I wouldn't be surprised if all we see is a change in attitude towards run scoring.
--------------------------------------------
One decision, one knock, one spell - these things don't mean much over an entire career. But a great career is something that has many of these 'ones'. Kumble and Dhoni have put up an excellent 'one' against their names with their respective decisions.
Friday, December 28, 2007
Post '07 Boxing Day test match thoughts
So, Dravid opened. The scorecard shows that the experiment was a disaster. Everyone is now keen to slate Kumble and the management for playing Dravid in an unfamiliar position. I did, during a phone call yesterday. However, I think that the problem is a little more complex than just being about positions. As I touched upon in my previous post, and as Ian Chappell mentioned throughout, the problem lies with the combination.
Jaffer and Dravid will not work against the Aussies. Against say, South Africa, if India moves along at one run per over for the first twenty, it is almost guaranteed that life gets easier from there on. Not against the Aussies. They hunt as a pack and they keep at it for 90 overs a day. No letups. So, stonewalling, as a tactic, is out.
Dravid is not in form, but also, he is not getting any help from the stroke players in the side. Even now, Dravid is capable of batting through the day and making his share of runs. But if the scorecard isn't moving, he cannot do this. Specifically, he cannot do it against the Aussies. He is limited in that aspect. He needs a stroke player at the other end doing the necessary run scoring. This automatically puts the bowler under pressure, thus providing Dravid with ample opportunity to do some scoring himself, while being great enough to get through tough phases of play.
Jaffer is a player in the mould of Dravid and his position is at No.1. So, instead of grouping them together, let Jaffer stay on top. Yuvraj or Sehwag should play at No.2 and Laxman at No.3. The rest of the ordering is harder. Dravid at No.6 is a waste. He is not going to farm the strike while batting with the tailenders and take on a good attack. But Sachin and Sourav are the ones in form. Pushing either of them to No.6 is controversial. This is a tough problem. There is an answer though. It is called 'flexibility'.
If Jaffer perishes early, Dravid HAS to play above Sachin and Sourav. I know Sachin is very picky about No.4, but Kumble (after reading this post) needs to explain the idea to him and then make him follow directions. On the other hand, if Jaffer stays on, then Dravid can be played at No.6.
At Melbourne the pitch did not help us. The Aussie attack was suited to the pitch. Trouble is, no pitch is going to suit our bowlers more than theirs. On a helpful track, our attack can do some damage, which is what they did on the first day. But hypothetically, if the Aussie batsman faced the Aussie bowlers, they would not score 343 runs in 90 odd overs. They would have scored 250. Throw in the Aussie fielding unit, and the total gets reduced further. Now, 196 does not look too bad, does it? As I indicate, our batsman are still at fault, but not by as much as the scorecard shows. Anyone reading? If so, following?
If Sydney is conducive to strokeplay, we can do better with the bat. The Aussie attack is not about genius. They do not bowl magic deliveries like the Pakistani fast bowlers. What they are masters at, is in the art of choking runs and creating pressure. On a flat track, our batsman are good enough to overcome that challenge. Trouble is, our bowlers fall off the radar on such a track. Kumble apart, that is. So, either we bat first, bat big and put pressure on the Aussie batting lineup or we bat out a high scoring draw.
Perth - even if Munaf, Sreesanth, Zaheer, RP and Kumble were all available and in the form of their lives, the Aussies would score more than a seven batsman lineup of ours would do against Lee, Johnson, Clark and Tait. What I mean is, a hypothetical strongest Indian XII would lose to an Aussie XI at Perth. (Kumble, if you are still reading, I've set myself up perfectly. It is upto you to get the egg on my face. That would make us all happy, wouldn't it?)
Adelaide - too far away to speculate, but if we want to win there, just make sure Adelaide maestro Ajit Agarkar is available for selection!
Jaffer and Dravid will not work against the Aussies. Against say, South Africa, if India moves along at one run per over for the first twenty, it is almost guaranteed that life gets easier from there on. Not against the Aussies. They hunt as a pack and they keep at it for 90 overs a day. No letups. So, stonewalling, as a tactic, is out.
Dravid is not in form, but also, he is not getting any help from the stroke players in the side. Even now, Dravid is capable of batting through the day and making his share of runs. But if the scorecard isn't moving, he cannot do this. Specifically, he cannot do it against the Aussies. He is limited in that aspect. He needs a stroke player at the other end doing the necessary run scoring. This automatically puts the bowler under pressure, thus providing Dravid with ample opportunity to do some scoring himself, while being great enough to get through tough phases of play.
Jaffer is a player in the mould of Dravid and his position is at No.1. So, instead of grouping them together, let Jaffer stay on top. Yuvraj or Sehwag should play at No.2 and Laxman at No.3. The rest of the ordering is harder. Dravid at No.6 is a waste. He is not going to farm the strike while batting with the tailenders and take on a good attack. But Sachin and Sourav are the ones in form. Pushing either of them to No.6 is controversial. This is a tough problem. There is an answer though. It is called 'flexibility'.
If Jaffer perishes early, Dravid HAS to play above Sachin and Sourav. I know Sachin is very picky about No.4, but Kumble (after reading this post) needs to explain the idea to him and then make him follow directions. On the other hand, if Jaffer stays on, then Dravid can be played at No.6.
At Melbourne the pitch did not help us. The Aussie attack was suited to the pitch. Trouble is, no pitch is going to suit our bowlers more than theirs. On a helpful track, our attack can do some damage, which is what they did on the first day. But hypothetically, if the Aussie batsman faced the Aussie bowlers, they would not score 343 runs in 90 odd overs. They would have scored 250. Throw in the Aussie fielding unit, and the total gets reduced further. Now, 196 does not look too bad, does it? As I indicate, our batsman are still at fault, but not by as much as the scorecard shows. Anyone reading? If so, following?
If Sydney is conducive to strokeplay, we can do better with the bat. The Aussie attack is not about genius. They do not bowl magic deliveries like the Pakistani fast bowlers. What they are masters at, is in the art of choking runs and creating pressure. On a flat track, our batsman are good enough to overcome that challenge. Trouble is, our bowlers fall off the radar on such a track. Kumble apart, that is. So, either we bat first, bat big and put pressure on the Aussie batting lineup or we bat out a high scoring draw.
Perth - even if Munaf, Sreesanth, Zaheer, RP and Kumble were all available and in the form of their lives, the Aussies would score more than a seven batsman lineup of ours would do against Lee, Johnson, Clark and Tait. What I mean is, a hypothetical strongest Indian XII would lose to an Aussie XI at Perth. (Kumble, if you are still reading, I've set myself up perfectly. It is upto you to get the egg on my face. That would make us all happy, wouldn't it?)
Adelaide - too far away to speculate, but if we want to win there, just make sure Adelaide maestro Ajit Agarkar is available for selection!
Thursday, December 13, 2007
reviewing and previewing
Mr.Bal always ends up being quicker with regard to putting words on print, however, such is the nature of the internet, that both of us can co-exist in this world, with him being synonymous with cricket, while I remain my anonymous self. Unfortunately though, due to some similarity in thought between the contents of his article and what is to follow in this post of mine, the two or three readers that we share, will have to make up their mind as to whether it is Mr.Bal reading my mind, or me stealing his ideas.
India have completed their series triumph over Pakistan and coming as it has, after triumphs over WI in WI, Eng in Eng and a 1-2 loss to SA in SA, our test squad has certainly come up with performances that match the hype.
Pardon me for not rejoicing in the triumph, but being my critical -only about others- self, let me state that this series showcased some of the flattest test cricket I've witnessed since, of course, the last time India toured Pakistan. I accept complete blame for anguishing over the defeat we suffered on that instance, while not wholly appreciating our victory this time, but once we can get past my faults, lets focus on the cricket that was played and what is to be played soon enough.
Feeling pity for an opponent's troubles can be considered to be sporting. However, an India - Pakistan encounter, fails as a sporting contest when Pakistan's misfortunes make me feel sorry for them. Unfortunately, that is exactly what I felt for them on the opening day of the second test match that was played at Eden Gardens, Kolkatta. Jaffer was the star of that day, but out of the four bowlers he faced, one was visibly sick, another was ailing, and the rest were Tanvir and Kaneria. The pitch, of course, was a sleeping beauty.
With Lara and Warne gone, Akhtar is probably the only character in the game exhibiting prima donna traits. The 'gold fish in a glass bowl' media coverage that he gets as a result of that, makes it too hard to figure out if he is a hero or villain or just another player in the Pakistan cricket team. He is certainly accorded status of hero within the team, for he was included in the side for the second test when he was clearly not fit to play. By that logic, he failed the team. But another viewpoint is that he put his hand up for the team, and did whatever he could to help their cause. In this case, it would be the captain that would have to shoulder the blame for including him in the eleven.
Sami's selection into the test squad, gladdened a lot of Indian hearts, including mine. However, when he bowled at 75 - 80 mph on the opening day, it made me sad. Watching Kaneria, I was dejected, that it was this bowler whom we failed to confront aggressively at the Bangalore test match during Pakistan's previous tour here. Our fourth innings effort in that match against that very same bowler, will sit alongside our fourth day effort at Cape Town, SA earlier this year, in my personal Indian cricket's Hall of Infamy recollections. As for Tanvir, his display clarified that at this point, Pakistan have only three world class fast bowlers in Akhtar, Gul and Asif.
It was a combination of injuries, the pitch and the teams themselves, that the cricket played during this series was insipid. Very few players rose above the show. Ganguly was one of them. He shone like he did during his debut series and never since. It was not just the sheer magnitude of runs he scored. It was also the style and the rate at which he scored.
One of the few intense moments of cricket played in this series was during the post-tea session on the fourth day of the first test match, with India chasing 203 for victory. When we lost Dravid to an absolute corker from Akhtar, the score was 93-3, with 110 further needed. Sachin Tendulkar was at the crease, and was looking solid, but his track record in such scenarios is fairly poor. In fact, in both the instances listed previously, under hall of infamy, he had played the role of anti-hero protagonist. This time though, like I said, he looked comfortable. Still, the runs weren't exactly flowing, and we really needed it to. Enter Ganguly. A few drives and glides and cuts and flicks later, mostly from the blade of Ganguly, India finished the day for no further damage at 171, with Ganguly on 48*. Game over.
The century at Eden Gardens was essentially a personal crusade that Dada was on. That is all there is to say about that.
The Pak bowling attack at Bangalore on the opening day was not a lot than the one from Eden Gardens, particularly after lunch, with Akhtar off to the hospital, but we were 61/4 and Ganguly played the role that Sachin played in the first test, with Yuvraj taking over the reins. But Yuvraj got out at the fag end of the first day and there was still work to be done. If we had folded for 400, and based on how events panned out, it could have been deja-vu all over again. Sourav though, motored on and batted Pakistan out of the match and the series
Kumble, Laxman, Sachin, Jaffer amongst others played significant roles for India in this series. On Pakistan's side, the star was probably Misbah, with Younus, Akhtar and Kamran playing the supporting roles.
Considering the proximity of India's next assignment, I am unable to view our just completed series against Pak as a stand alone fixture. Hence, I have to say that the series that was done and dusted on December 12th, certainly did not prepare us for what we are set to face from December 26th.
Besides being great at every aspect of the game, what the Aussies end up doing is to elevate the standard of their opponents to the very same level from time to time. It is no wonder then, that the only couple of test series defeats that the Aussies have suffered in recent times (and by that, I mean about seven years) are spoken of as all-time great ones. More relevantly, they also have the ability to rise above pitch conditions. It is a guarantee that if this series had been played between Australia and India or for that matter Pakistan, on the very same pitches, the matches would have had results but more importantly, intensity.
Now, that very same, extreme, all day intensity is what we are going to be facing on their soil. There will be no hiding place. Either we stand up and fight, which does not guarantee results though, or fall flat and not just lose 0-4 but also set up statistical records for incompetency. To be fair, considering our track record, we will stand up and fight hard. That is all that we can ask for.
There is no point squealing about our pace attack like I did when we toured England, but a fully fit and in-form Munaf and SreeSanth alongside Zaheer and RP would have been ideal. Now though, lets hope like crazy that none of the selected ones get injured during the tour.
I guess that the talking points prior to the opening day, in order of priority are
1) whether Yuvraj will be in the playing eleven
2) whether Sehwag will be in the playing eleven
3) bowling composition - 2 pace 2 spin or 3 pace 1 spin
The first two problems are fairly good ones to have and they are intertwined. Unfortunately, I am not able to come up with an answer, but thankfully, I am not the one that has to. Anyway, here's some speculation.
Sachin, Sourav and Rahul cannot be dropped in that order of priority - if that isn't an oxymoron. Jaffer can be dropped but should not and will not, since he commands a place as opener through sheer performance. That leaves two spots - one opener and one in the late middle order. Actually, Laxman's form cannot be faulted by any stretch of imagination, but having seen him get injured on the last day at Bangalore, and also due to the simple theory of Indian cricket, wherein, by virtue of being Laxman, you are the one likely to be sacrificed, I would have to say that he might lose out to Yuvraj. However, Kumble has been quite outspoken about Lax's virtues and would probably play him if he is fit. That leaves Yuvi and Sehwag fighting for one spot, though not necessarily the opening spot. Depending on whom they want to play and team composition, that opener spot can either remain that or become a middle order spot. If Sehwag is chosen, he opens with Jaffer and the rest of the batting order remains as it has been for the past ten years.
If Yuvi is chosen though, someone else will have to open. Dravid has opened before and so has Laxman. I don't see Ganguly or Pathan opening, and actually, I don't see Laxman opening either. So, either Kumble and Dravid discuss and decide that he opens, or Yuvraj ends up opening, when clearly, he is much better off in the middle order. As a stand alone idea, Dravid as opener, sounds like the better option, but with him and Jaffer at the crease, I don't see the scoreboard moving at much of a pace, and that is not a good idea against the Aussies.
One more option is to have a sacrificial opener in Pathan, but that takes me to the third issue. The basic question of '2 and 2' or '3 and 1' should hopefully be decided in favor of '3 and 1'. However, irrespective of whether it is two or even three pace bowlers, I wonder if Pathan should be included. Zak is the leader of the attack and based on performance in England, RP is the definite second choice. Now, even if we play 3 pace bowlers, choosing 3 left arm pacers does not sound like a good idea. Whatever his faults might be, and he has quite a few, Ishant is a right-hander and also quite different to the other bowlers in the squad. So, I would hope that the bowling lineup reads Zak, RP, Ishant and Kumble, but fear that Pathan might take the place of RP or Ishant due to his batting ability.
The good thing about all this confusion is that, they are fairly healthy issues to have. For years, we have complained about the lack of bench strength. Now, we have competition for the places in the playing eleven, and one of the two most decent individuals in the side leading it.
Let the good times roll on...
India have completed their series triumph over Pakistan and coming as it has, after triumphs over WI in WI, Eng in Eng and a 1-2 loss to SA in SA, our test squad has certainly come up with performances that match the hype.
Pardon me for not rejoicing in the triumph, but being my critical -only about others- self, let me state that this series showcased some of the flattest test cricket I've witnessed since, of course, the last time India toured Pakistan. I accept complete blame for anguishing over the defeat we suffered on that instance, while not wholly appreciating our victory this time, but once we can get past my faults, lets focus on the cricket that was played and what is to be played soon enough.
Feeling pity for an opponent's troubles can be considered to be sporting. However, an India - Pakistan encounter, fails as a sporting contest when Pakistan's misfortunes make me feel sorry for them. Unfortunately, that is exactly what I felt for them on the opening day of the second test match that was played at Eden Gardens, Kolkatta. Jaffer was the star of that day, but out of the four bowlers he faced, one was visibly sick, another was ailing, and the rest were Tanvir and Kaneria. The pitch, of course, was a sleeping beauty.
With Lara and Warne gone, Akhtar is probably the only character in the game exhibiting prima donna traits. The 'gold fish in a glass bowl' media coverage that he gets as a result of that, makes it too hard to figure out if he is a hero or villain or just another player in the Pakistan cricket team. He is certainly accorded status of hero within the team, for he was included in the side for the second test when he was clearly not fit to play. By that logic, he failed the team. But another viewpoint is that he put his hand up for the team, and did whatever he could to help their cause. In this case, it would be the captain that would have to shoulder the blame for including him in the eleven.
Sami's selection into the test squad, gladdened a lot of Indian hearts, including mine. However, when he bowled at 75 - 80 mph on the opening day, it made me sad. Watching Kaneria, I was dejected, that it was this bowler whom we failed to confront aggressively at the Bangalore test match during Pakistan's previous tour here. Our fourth innings effort in that match against that very same bowler, will sit alongside our fourth day effort at Cape Town, SA earlier this year, in my personal Indian cricket's Hall of Infamy recollections. As for Tanvir, his display clarified that at this point, Pakistan have only three world class fast bowlers in Akhtar, Gul and Asif.
It was a combination of injuries, the pitch and the teams themselves, that the cricket played during this series was insipid. Very few players rose above the show. Ganguly was one of them. He shone like he did during his debut series and never since. It was not just the sheer magnitude of runs he scored. It was also the style and the rate at which he scored.
One of the few intense moments of cricket played in this series was during the post-tea session on the fourth day of the first test match, with India chasing 203 for victory. When we lost Dravid to an absolute corker from Akhtar, the score was 93-3, with 110 further needed. Sachin Tendulkar was at the crease, and was looking solid, but his track record in such scenarios is fairly poor. In fact, in both the instances listed previously, under hall of infamy, he had played the role of anti-hero protagonist. This time though, like I said, he looked comfortable. Still, the runs weren't exactly flowing, and we really needed it to. Enter Ganguly. A few drives and glides and cuts and flicks later, mostly from the blade of Ganguly, India finished the day for no further damage at 171, with Ganguly on 48*. Game over.
The century at Eden Gardens was essentially a personal crusade that Dada was on. That is all there is to say about that.
The Pak bowling attack at Bangalore on the opening day was not a lot than the one from Eden Gardens, particularly after lunch, with Akhtar off to the hospital, but we were 61/4 and Ganguly played the role that Sachin played in the first test, with Yuvraj taking over the reins. But Yuvraj got out at the fag end of the first day and there was still work to be done. If we had folded for 400, and based on how events panned out, it could have been deja-vu all over again. Sourav though, motored on and batted Pakistan out of the match and the series
Kumble, Laxman, Sachin, Jaffer amongst others played significant roles for India in this series. On Pakistan's side, the star was probably Misbah, with Younus, Akhtar and Kamran playing the supporting roles.
Considering the proximity of India's next assignment, I am unable to view our just completed series against Pak as a stand alone fixture. Hence, I have to say that the series that was done and dusted on December 12th, certainly did not prepare us for what we are set to face from December 26th.
Besides being great at every aspect of the game, what the Aussies end up doing is to elevate the standard of their opponents to the very same level from time to time. It is no wonder then, that the only couple of test series defeats that the Aussies have suffered in recent times (and by that, I mean about seven years) are spoken of as all-time great ones. More relevantly, they also have the ability to rise above pitch conditions. It is a guarantee that if this series had been played between Australia and India or for that matter Pakistan, on the very same pitches, the matches would have had results but more importantly, intensity.
Now, that very same, extreme, all day intensity is what we are going to be facing on their soil. There will be no hiding place. Either we stand up and fight, which does not guarantee results though, or fall flat and not just lose 0-4 but also set up statistical records for incompetency. To be fair, considering our track record, we will stand up and fight hard. That is all that we can ask for.
There is no point squealing about our pace attack like I did when we toured England, but a fully fit and in-form Munaf and SreeSanth alongside Zaheer and RP would have been ideal. Now though, lets hope like crazy that none of the selected ones get injured during the tour.
I guess that the talking points prior to the opening day, in order of priority are
1) whether Yuvraj will be in the playing eleven
2) whether Sehwag will be in the playing eleven
3) bowling composition - 2 pace 2 spin or 3 pace 1 spin
The first two problems are fairly good ones to have and they are intertwined. Unfortunately, I am not able to come up with an answer, but thankfully, I am not the one that has to. Anyway, here's some speculation.
Sachin, Sourav and Rahul cannot be dropped in that order of priority - if that isn't an oxymoron. Jaffer can be dropped but should not and will not, since he commands a place as opener through sheer performance. That leaves two spots - one opener and one in the late middle order. Actually, Laxman's form cannot be faulted by any stretch of imagination, but having seen him get injured on the last day at Bangalore, and also due to the simple theory of Indian cricket, wherein, by virtue of being Laxman, you are the one likely to be sacrificed, I would have to say that he might lose out to Yuvraj. However, Kumble has been quite outspoken about Lax's virtues and would probably play him if he is fit. That leaves Yuvi and Sehwag fighting for one spot, though not necessarily the opening spot. Depending on whom they want to play and team composition, that opener spot can either remain that or become a middle order spot. If Sehwag is chosen, he opens with Jaffer and the rest of the batting order remains as it has been for the past ten years.
If Yuvi is chosen though, someone else will have to open. Dravid has opened before and so has Laxman. I don't see Ganguly or Pathan opening, and actually, I don't see Laxman opening either. So, either Kumble and Dravid discuss and decide that he opens, or Yuvraj ends up opening, when clearly, he is much better off in the middle order. As a stand alone idea, Dravid as opener, sounds like the better option, but with him and Jaffer at the crease, I don't see the scoreboard moving at much of a pace, and that is not a good idea against the Aussies.
One more option is to have a sacrificial opener in Pathan, but that takes me to the third issue. The basic question of '2 and 2' or '3 and 1' should hopefully be decided in favor of '3 and 1'. However, irrespective of whether it is two or even three pace bowlers, I wonder if Pathan should be included. Zak is the leader of the attack and based on performance in England, RP is the definite second choice. Now, even if we play 3 pace bowlers, choosing 3 left arm pacers does not sound like a good idea. Whatever his faults might be, and he has quite a few, Ishant is a right-hander and also quite different to the other bowlers in the squad. So, I would hope that the bowling lineup reads Zak, RP, Ishant and Kumble, but fear that Pathan might take the place of RP or Ishant due to his batting ability.
The good thing about all this confusion is that, they are fairly healthy issues to have. For years, we have complained about the lack of bench strength. Now, we have competition for the places in the playing eleven, and one of the two most decent individuals in the side leading it.
Let the good times roll on...
Friday, November 16, 2007
if HE wasn't chasing history
Shorn of the pressure that weighs quite heavily on his shoulder these days, Federer stepped it up against Roddick today. The forehand was fit and firing and the backhand was its versatile self. With 83% of his first serves falling in, they were hardly needed during his service games. But with his opponent not serving "from a tree" during this match, they took over most of the return games he played. As always, they served as very effective point ending weapons from the baseline, but surprisingly, also as genuine approach shots to abet his frequent forays to the net. Once there, he pulled off most of the volleys he had to make with a few of them quite spectacular. On a couple of instances, with Roddick coming in by chipping low, he positioned himself mid-court and delightfully slanted it past the outstretched racket of Andy. That was court craft at its very best.
Attacking the net has not been a part of Federer's gameplan for a long time now. Whether it was the case today because it was an inconsequential match, or whether it forebodes what is to come against Nadal, we will soon find out. He certainly cannot have the same success rate against Nadal. Today, even on those occasions that Roddick had a decent look at a passing shot, he mostly failed. It was apparent that his powerful topspins did not present much of a problem to Federer's volleys. Roddick needed to pass Federer with guile and precision rather than with power, but based on what I saw today, and also recollecting from memory, he does not seem to have that ability.
Nadal though, will be a totally different proposition. First, he will have that extra bit of time to hit his passes, and then, he can hit a loaded, killer angle pass from anywhere on court. Federer knows that very well and will adjust accordingly. But it was good to see him exhibit some rock solid volleying in match conditions. In spite of the aforementioned hazards, it should stand him in good stead for the semifinals.
Speaking of which, it is too bad that it is going to be a 3 set affair, for a Nadal - Federer matchup deserves more, but then, whoever wins will most likely be playing a best of 5 sets match with a right handed version of Nadal the very next day. So, this seems fair.
Attacking the net has not been a part of Federer's gameplan for a long time now. Whether it was the case today because it was an inconsequential match, or whether it forebodes what is to come against Nadal, we will soon find out. He certainly cannot have the same success rate against Nadal. Today, even on those occasions that Roddick had a decent look at a passing shot, he mostly failed. It was apparent that his powerful topspins did not present much of a problem to Federer's volleys. Roddick needed to pass Federer with guile and precision rather than with power, but based on what I saw today, and also recollecting from memory, he does not seem to have that ability.
Nadal though, will be a totally different proposition. First, he will have that extra bit of time to hit his passes, and then, he can hit a loaded, killer angle pass from anywhere on court. Federer knows that very well and will adjust accordingly. But it was good to see him exhibit some rock solid volleying in match conditions. In spite of the aforementioned hazards, it should stand him in good stead for the semifinals.
Speaking of which, it is too bad that it is going to be a 3 set affair, for a Nadal - Federer matchup deserves more, but then, whoever wins will most likely be playing a best of 5 sets match with a right handed version of Nadal the very next day. So, this seems fair.
Monday, November 12, 2007
who will be 'The Master of the Universe'?
Even after Nalbandian disposed Federer for the second time in 10 days, I was backing Gasquet/Murray to clinch the final spot at the year end Masters.
Until this year, I don't remember being caught up in the race for a place at the Masters. But this time, with talents like Berdych, Gasquet, Murray and even Baghdatis in the reckoning, along with the consistent but unexceptional Robredo and Moya, the race got interesting going into Paris.
The draw out there was top heavy with the Masters' contenders. If their fire was doused by Federer and Djokovic as expected, the race wouldn't have picked up steam. But the magician Santoro dismantled Djoko, while Nalbandian tied up his HtoH record with Federer. This pretty much cleared the way for the contenders to secure a place with victory rather than by default. Murray and Gasquet made good progress to setup a shootout amongst themselves. Baghdatis kept the other half interesting. It was all building up nicely.
Nalbandian's surge had come too late this year and as a result, he was not in control of his destiny. Soon enough, other results put paid to his hopes for a place at the Masters. Gasquet clinching a thriller against Murray put him on pole position, and his place was cemented when Baghdatis lost out to Nadal.
At that point, I was extremely happy with the result and was backing Gasquet to go to Shanghai in fine style by clinching the the title of Paris. Much to my disappointment, Nalbandian brushed past him in straight sets. I missed the action, but reports indicate that it was a lopsided match. To confirm his prime form Nalbandian thumped Nadal in the final.
There can't be any complaints with the points race since it rewards consistency through the year, while making reservations for the brilliance of the Slam winners of that year who might have missed out for whatever reason. But its just that the in the light of the events from the last 3 weeks, the Masters without Nalbandian seems like devaluation of quality from a tournament that is meant to be all about quality. I wonder if his shadow will hang over the tournament. Maybe not. Particularly if the matches are exciting. But if Federer picks up the trophy there, questions, will be asked about Nalbandian's absence.
Federer faces some tough questions when he loses. Usually, he gives them a fair weighting and answers thoughtfully. He also gets asked about controversial topics within the sport. And he is not one that is shy to offer an opinion. Quite often, it is hard hitting in his own way (while the whole world seemed to be taken up by Djoko's antics at the US Open, check out what Federer had to say about the same). The reason he hasn't courted too much controversy is because of his stature in the game and the respect and admiration that he elicits even from the ones he slays regularly on court. So, if he wins and is asked about Nalbandian's absence, Federer might even answer that he would have preferred to have defeated him to win the title.
Instead of all that, it would just be great for the fans if one from Messrs 3 to 8 pulled out for a reason that I could not care about any less. Due apologies to the player if and when such an event happens, but if Nalbandian plays, Federer faces a considerable challenge from three players - Nadal, Djokovic, Nalbandian, and it is a long time since anything like that happened in the world of tennis. That ought to make it a fitting finale to another great year.
Update: Who needs Nalby? We've got Gonzo!
Until this year, I don't remember being caught up in the race for a place at the Masters. But this time, with talents like Berdych, Gasquet, Murray and even Baghdatis in the reckoning, along with the consistent but unexceptional Robredo and Moya, the race got interesting going into Paris.
The draw out there was top heavy with the Masters' contenders. If their fire was doused by Federer and Djokovic as expected, the race wouldn't have picked up steam. But the magician Santoro dismantled Djoko, while Nalbandian tied up his HtoH record with Federer. This pretty much cleared the way for the contenders to secure a place with victory rather than by default. Murray and Gasquet made good progress to setup a shootout amongst themselves. Baghdatis kept the other half interesting. It was all building up nicely.
Nalbandian's surge had come too late this year and as a result, he was not in control of his destiny. Soon enough, other results put paid to his hopes for a place at the Masters. Gasquet clinching a thriller against Murray put him on pole position, and his place was cemented when Baghdatis lost out to Nadal.
At that point, I was extremely happy with the result and was backing Gasquet to go to Shanghai in fine style by clinching the the title of Paris. Much to my disappointment, Nalbandian brushed past him in straight sets. I missed the action, but reports indicate that it was a lopsided match. To confirm his prime form Nalbandian thumped Nadal in the final.
There can't be any complaints with the points race since it rewards consistency through the year, while making reservations for the brilliance of the Slam winners of that year who might have missed out for whatever reason. But its just that the in the light of the events from the last 3 weeks, the Masters without Nalbandian seems like devaluation of quality from a tournament that is meant to be all about quality. I wonder if his shadow will hang over the tournament. Maybe not. Particularly if the matches are exciting. But if Federer picks up the trophy there, questions, will be asked about Nalbandian's absence.
Federer faces some tough questions when he loses. Usually, he gives them a fair weighting and answers thoughtfully. He also gets asked about controversial topics within the sport. And he is not one that is shy to offer an opinion. Quite often, it is hard hitting in his own way (while the whole world seemed to be taken up by Djoko's antics at the US Open, check out what Federer had to say about the same). The reason he hasn't courted too much controversy is because of his stature in the game and the respect and admiration that he elicits even from the ones he slays regularly on court. So, if he wins and is asked about Nalbandian's absence, Federer might even answer that he would have preferred to have defeated him to win the title.
Instead of all that, it would just be great for the fans if one from Messrs 3 to 8 pulled out for a reason that I could not care about any less. Due apologies to the player if and when such an event happens, but if Nalbandian plays, Federer faces a considerable challenge from three players - Nadal, Djokovic, Nalbandian, and it is a long time since anything like that happened in the world of tennis. That ought to make it a fitting finale to another great year.
Update: Who needs Nalby? We've got Gonzo!
Daily activities: sleep, work, eat and watch Chennai 600028
They say that the best things in life come unannounced. Partly, this is due the lack of expectation associated with it for there can't be much expected out of something that one doesn't even expect, right? And as a result of a basic human nature that always cherishes an unexpected bonus more than an expected one, the good seems even better in those cases.
In some ways this can skew an objective analysis of whatever it is that happened, but then, who are we kidding? What is objective analysis? It is always one man's viewpoint about something. Always colored. Anyway, critical analysis of this concept is not the idea here. It doesn't matter either, for the only thing that matters is the amount of joy that one one can derive from the specific event. The aforesaid is just meant to reiterate a truism of our lives.
On a regular basis, this truism is perceptible in the activity of movie watching. Watching one after reading/listening to the ranting and raving of a critic/friend almost always has disastrous consequences. It is mighty hard for any movie, even a good one, to live up to sky high expectations. As a result, it might leave the audience feeling flat, while even an average movie can seem very enjoyable simply due to the lack of expectation. It is also a well known fact that sequels suffer at the box office due to excessive expectation from the audience (it is another story that these movies thrive on the very same expectation and manage to rake up the box-office collections during the first weekend itself).
On this note, Chennai 600028 came quite unannounced into my life. I was in India, watching some television, when I chanced upon the bit from the movie, where Gopi is forced to give up his beloved bat to a bunch of schoolboys. People tell me that the background score is from Naayakan, while I firmly maintain that it is from Aboorva Sagodarargal. Whatever it is, that, and the sight of Gopi inconsolably sobbing, got me roaring in laughter. Since the movie was ready to be viewed at home, I promptly did.
To reiterate, the expectation versus quality debate is not what I am going to indulge in, here. Instead, "objectively" looking at it, I believe that the movie is genuine in quality and deserves all the praise that has come its way. A movie with cricket at its heart is a definite variant to the ones churned out by our cine industry. However, themes can do only so much. In fact, they raise expectation. The vital ingredients of a movie needs to be in place for it to be good.
The cast for Chennai 600028 is fresh faced. So is the director, I hear. This movie follows a group of boys belonging to the middle class strata of the Tamil society, through a year of cricket, friendship, romance and the usual. Having decided to focus on their everyday lives, it was important for the acts to be realistic but at the same time interesting. This is a pretty hard challenge to overcome, and not too many films manage to do so. Notably, Shankar's Boys miserably failed in this regard, with its very many over the top excesses and unrealistic scenarios. This one though, has only a few excesses, which are actually injected quite well into the screenplay.
For the portrayal of an everyday situation to work, the script and the screenplay are vital ingredients. The cast too has to do the needful. At their various gatherings in the movie, the primary subjects do a great job of conveying reality to the audience. Further, the ones in the background pleasantly surprised me by delivering some memorable lines and reactions. This appears to have been really well thought out. And the way it has been done is by establishing an identity for each one of the boys. They are not there just to make up the numbers.
The movie centers around Raghu, Arvind, Karthik and Palani. Seenu gets a fair bit of air time. But the others too have their moments. Notable acts of the 'others' include Ezhumalai's belated career related realization, Gopi's affair with his bat and Imran's propensity to initiate fights, which is stated right at the beginning and depicted throughout. Just thinking of those incidents makes me laugh now.
It might be because they are fresh faced, thus devoid of any baggage from the past, or because they are just so darn good, but the cast's on screen chemistry makes the acts of camaraderie, bantering and fist fights really work. Arvind regaling his mates with details of his initial meeting and initial 'contact' with his love interest, Shwetha, are two of my twenty odd favorite scenes from the movie.
The cricket action sequences and the humor are two of the obvious positives. Unlike most Tamil movies, the humor is interwoven with the main screenplay. This lends a nice balance to the various events in the the movie. The minor plots pervading the movie, the language, the gestures, the dialogues and the timely digs, cohesively establish the movie's authentic portrayal. This was the key.
As should be obvious to anyone who has viewed this movie already, the mood is fairly light through the entire duration. Amidst this scenario, the two acts featuring the angry and the apologetic confrontations between Palani and Karthick stand out for the way they have been depicted. Instead of indulging in excessive melodrama that is typical for a tamil movie, the two protagonists let it all out in a very honest manner, with the rest of the group getting into the act with timely actions and comments. In the end, their reconciliation is handled in keeping with the theme of the movie. Well done!
Notice the sheer joy in the above picture? What else but cricket can make a bunch of guys revel in this manner? Must have been an India - Pakistan encounter....
The year was 2004 and India was touring Pakistan for the first time in 15 years. This was the first contest between the two sides since the Kargil war. It is always a great occassion when there is excitement and tension in the air. So it was then. And almost as if scripted, the ODI series went down to the fifth game with the score tied 2-2. Thanks to Laxman, we scored 293, thus setting Pak a fairly difficult chase under the lights. It is worth noting though, that India had chased down the very same target in the previous match at the very same venue. This game though, we had them in early trouble at 58/4. They were behind on the run rate too.
We were around 25 of us, graduate students at the University of Cincinnati., gathered in our living room, way past midnight, eyes glued to the TV. We knew that India was in the driver's seat, but at that point, no one felt the release of tension as yet. All of us bore the scars inflicted by various Inzi and Razzaq and Moin Khan led match winning recovery acts. Here, Inzi was in the center with Razzaq and Moin still to come. So, we just stayed put and kept silent.
Murali Kartik, the man of the moment now, was in the thick of action then. He was bowling a good spell, giving the ball a fair bit of air and gaining some turn as a result. This though made him susceptible to Inzi jumping out of the crease and planting one over the boundary. To be fair, not too many spinners aren't susceptible to that. Anyway, there he was, bowling to Inzi, who had already scored a few boundaries, and worse, looked like he was having a hit in the nets while doing so. To one Kartik delivery, Inzi stepped out and went hard at it.
Eyes strained to follow the arc of the ball. Television cameras always follow the ball's trajectory, but they do not offer the viewer any insight into its position with respect to the playing field (due to camera position and the altitude of the traveling ball). What this does, is to leave the viewer in the dark about the destination of the ball. One can see the ball go high up into the air, seemingly traveling for eternity and then coming down into the hands of a fielder who is well inside the boundary line. Perspective of distance traveled is lost amidst the blue background of the sky.
So, as the ball was flying towards the boundary, we did not know what the result would be. Surely, it did not seem like he hit it perfectly, but this was Inzi, and it seemed like the ball might have the legs to fly over the boundary. Just before it almost did, Sachin Tendulkar, running along the boundary rope, grabbed it at full stretch and set off in celebration towards the rest.
The match wasn't won. We weren't even sure if Sachin had stepped on the boundary line during this piece of action. But we just couldn't hold it anymore. Each one erupted with very original convulsions of arm, leg and body. The roar of relief and joy was quite uniform though. I just wish that someone had taken a picture of us right then. It would have had striking similarities to the one above.
In some ways this can skew an objective analysis of whatever it is that happened, but then, who are we kidding? What is objective analysis? It is always one man's viewpoint about something. Always colored. Anyway, critical analysis of this concept is not the idea here. It doesn't matter either, for the only thing that matters is the amount of joy that one one can derive from the specific event. The aforesaid is just meant to reiterate a truism of our lives.
On a regular basis, this truism is perceptible in the activity of movie watching. Watching one after reading/listening to the ranting and raving of a critic/friend almost always has disastrous consequences. It is mighty hard for any movie, even a good one, to live up to sky high expectations. As a result, it might leave the audience feeling flat, while even an average movie can seem very enjoyable simply due to the lack of expectation. It is also a well known fact that sequels suffer at the box office due to excessive expectation from the audience (it is another story that these movies thrive on the very same expectation and manage to rake up the box-office collections during the first weekend itself).
On this note, Chennai 600028 came quite unannounced into my life. I was in India, watching some television, when I chanced upon the bit from the movie, where Gopi is forced to give up his beloved bat to a bunch of schoolboys. People tell me that the background score is from Naayakan, while I firmly maintain that it is from Aboorva Sagodarargal. Whatever it is, that, and the sight of Gopi inconsolably sobbing, got me roaring in laughter. Since the movie was ready to be viewed at home, I promptly did.
To reiterate, the expectation versus quality debate is not what I am going to indulge in, here. Instead, "objectively" looking at it, I believe that the movie is genuine in quality and deserves all the praise that has come its way. A movie with cricket at its heart is a definite variant to the ones churned out by our cine industry. However, themes can do only so much. In fact, they raise expectation. The vital ingredients of a movie needs to be in place for it to be good.
The cast for Chennai 600028 is fresh faced. So is the director, I hear. This movie follows a group of boys belonging to the middle class strata of the Tamil society, through a year of cricket, friendship, romance and the usual. Having decided to focus on their everyday lives, it was important for the acts to be realistic but at the same time interesting. This is a pretty hard challenge to overcome, and not too many films manage to do so. Notably, Shankar's Boys miserably failed in this regard, with its very many over the top excesses and unrealistic scenarios. This one though, has only a few excesses, which are actually injected quite well into the screenplay.
For the portrayal of an everyday situation to work, the script and the screenplay are vital ingredients. The cast too has to do the needful. At their various gatherings in the movie, the primary subjects do a great job of conveying reality to the audience. Further, the ones in the background pleasantly surprised me by delivering some memorable lines and reactions. This appears to have been really well thought out. And the way it has been done is by establishing an identity for each one of the boys. They are not there just to make up the numbers.
The movie centers around Raghu, Arvind, Karthik and Palani. Seenu gets a fair bit of air time. But the others too have their moments. Notable acts of the 'others' include Ezhumalai's belated career related realization, Gopi's affair with his bat and Imran's propensity to initiate fights, which is stated right at the beginning and depicted throughout. Just thinking of those incidents makes me laugh now.
It might be because they are fresh faced, thus devoid of any baggage from the past, or because they are just so darn good, but the cast's on screen chemistry makes the acts of camaraderie, bantering and fist fights really work. Arvind regaling his mates with details of his initial meeting and initial 'contact' with his love interest, Shwetha, are two of my twenty odd favorite scenes from the movie.
The cricket action sequences and the humor are two of the obvious positives. Unlike most Tamil movies, the humor is interwoven with the main screenplay. This lends a nice balance to the various events in the the movie. The minor plots pervading the movie, the language, the gestures, the dialogues and the timely digs, cohesively establish the movie's authentic portrayal. This was the key.
As should be obvious to anyone who has viewed this movie already, the mood is fairly light through the entire duration. Amidst this scenario, the two acts featuring the angry and the apologetic confrontations between Palani and Karthick stand out for the way they have been depicted. Instead of indulging in excessive melodrama that is typical for a tamil movie, the two protagonists let it all out in a very honest manner, with the rest of the group getting into the act with timely actions and comments. In the end, their reconciliation is handled in keeping with the theme of the movie. Well done!
Notice the sheer joy in the above picture? What else but cricket can make a bunch of guys revel in this manner? Must have been an India - Pakistan encounter....
The year was 2004 and India was touring Pakistan for the first time in 15 years. This was the first contest between the two sides since the Kargil war. It is always a great occassion when there is excitement and tension in the air. So it was then. And almost as if scripted, the ODI series went down to the fifth game with the score tied 2-2. Thanks to Laxman, we scored 293, thus setting Pak a fairly difficult chase under the lights. It is worth noting though, that India had chased down the very same target in the previous match at the very same venue. This game though, we had them in early trouble at 58/4. They were behind on the run rate too.
We were around 25 of us, graduate students at the University of Cincinnati., gathered in our living room, way past midnight, eyes glued to the TV. We knew that India was in the driver's seat, but at that point, no one felt the release of tension as yet. All of us bore the scars inflicted by various Inzi and Razzaq and Moin Khan led match winning recovery acts. Here, Inzi was in the center with Razzaq and Moin still to come. So, we just stayed put and kept silent.
Murali Kartik, the man of the moment now, was in the thick of action then. He was bowling a good spell, giving the ball a fair bit of air and gaining some turn as a result. This though made him susceptible to Inzi jumping out of the crease and planting one over the boundary. To be fair, not too many spinners aren't susceptible to that. Anyway, there he was, bowling to Inzi, who had already scored a few boundaries, and worse, looked like he was having a hit in the nets while doing so. To one Kartik delivery, Inzi stepped out and went hard at it.
Eyes strained to follow the arc of the ball. Television cameras always follow the ball's trajectory, but they do not offer the viewer any insight into its position with respect to the playing field (due to camera position and the altitude of the traveling ball). What this does, is to leave the viewer in the dark about the destination of the ball. One can see the ball go high up into the air, seemingly traveling for eternity and then coming down into the hands of a fielder who is well inside the boundary line. Perspective of distance traveled is lost amidst the blue background of the sky.
So, as the ball was flying towards the boundary, we did not know what the result would be. Surely, it did not seem like he hit it perfectly, but this was Inzi, and it seemed like the ball might have the legs to fly over the boundary. Just before it almost did, Sachin Tendulkar, running along the boundary rope, grabbed it at full stretch and set off in celebration towards the rest.
The match wasn't won. We weren't even sure if Sachin had stepped on the boundary line during this piece of action. But we just couldn't hold it anymore. Each one erupted with very original convulsions of arm, leg and body. The roar of relief and joy was quite uniform though. I just wish that someone had taken a picture of us right then. It would have had striking similarities to the one above.
Thursday, November 01, 2007
Hopefully, it can be resolved
I watched most of Federer's consecutive defeats to Canas earlier this year, all of his loss to Nadal at Roland Garros and some of the action from his loss to Djokovic at Montreal. I also saw him struggle through the Wimbledon final, where he pretty much served his way out of trouble and then played vintage tennis for the final four games. Of course, besides these, I watched most of his Grand Slam matches (thus, victories) and some of the ones he played at the Masters series. Now, 10 or so days after his loss to Nalbandian at Madrid, which I slept through, I am watching the two go head to head in Paris. Nalby is up a double break in the first set.
Nalbandian was a revelation at Wimbledon'02 where he reached the finals from nowhere. Hewitt rolled over him in the championship match, but Nalby's clean hitting off both flanks made people take notice of his talent. Further, it was presumed that he had the game to be a contender on all surfaces, unlike most of his countrymen. Over the next couple of years, he rose to the top echelons of the sport and was a fairly consistent presence at the second week of a Slam.
During this period, with enormous expectation, due to his potential and his impressive record against Federer, I've watched a few of their matches (Not the Masters'05 though), where unfailingly, he produced uninspiring tennis. So much so, that I was inclined to switch channels mid-match. When Nalby plays badly it is so easy for the viewer to get disillusioned since his body language exudes disinterest. Having developed an apathy, I did not care for his semifinal runs at the Australian Open'06 and French Open'06. Soon after, his results nosedived. He fell out of the top 10. This year, he hardly created a ripple. Until Madrid.
Delivering a career verdict with a happy ending - top talent, shone early, struggled for a few years with a few highlights and playing inch perfect tennis now - would be easy, but unfair, since I have hardly followed his career with interest.
Now though, I am watching him, and I can say with assurance that he is hitting the ball as cleanly as anyone, including Federer, can. This is not meant to indicate that he is playing at the level of vintage Federer, for one can lay claim to that only if one can invent new angles for strokeplay every alternate point. But he is probably playing as well as anyone else can play this game. He is yanking Federer around the court and dominating him with his baseline hitting.
Update: Federer down a set and a break. Nalbandian serving for the match.
Like I said, I witnessed most of Federer's losses this year, which isn't a lot anyway. I've also watched his victories. Through all of them, it is noticeable that his forehand topspin is misfiring. Again, I say this with assurance and (I believe) not as a knee jerk reaction.
With everything else in place, Federer can win Slams with a misfiring forehand. That is precisely what he has done. Lest anyone needs reminding, he won 3 Slams this year. But it is when he has his forehand firing that he can dish out those bagel sets at will. On those instances, his opponents haven't a chance. They don't have a place to go to, on court.
I don't have the stats with me, but I do not remember any bagel sets this year. No one needs to remind me of the Federer - Roddick game at the Aus Open. He played that match as well as tennis could be played. But has he bageled anyone this year? He probably did, but I don't remember any. Which means that there weren't too many. This is in complete contrast to his results over the last three years. My sincere apologies Sir Federer, but there are just too many forehands of yours that go long/wide or are completely mis-hit during prolonged rallying. There is just no place for that in your game.
I feel guilty saying this, for this is like asking Sampras to work on his serve, but if Federer intends to fulfill his stated ambition of staying on top when the 2012 London Olympics come up, he better work on his topspin forehand.
Update: Nalbandian wins 6-4 7-6(3)!
Nalbandian was a revelation at Wimbledon'02 where he reached the finals from nowhere. Hewitt rolled over him in the championship match, but Nalby's clean hitting off both flanks made people take notice of his talent. Further, it was presumed that he had the game to be a contender on all surfaces, unlike most of his countrymen. Over the next couple of years, he rose to the top echelons of the sport and was a fairly consistent presence at the second week of a Slam.
During this period, with enormous expectation, due to his potential and his impressive record against Federer, I've watched a few of their matches (Not the Masters'05 though), where unfailingly, he produced uninspiring tennis. So much so, that I was inclined to switch channels mid-match. When Nalby plays badly it is so easy for the viewer to get disillusioned since his body language exudes disinterest. Having developed an apathy, I did not care for his semifinal runs at the Australian Open'06 and French Open'06. Soon after, his results nosedived. He fell out of the top 10. This year, he hardly created a ripple. Until Madrid.
Delivering a career verdict with a happy ending - top talent, shone early, struggled for a few years with a few highlights and playing inch perfect tennis now - would be easy, but unfair, since I have hardly followed his career with interest.
Now though, I am watching him, and I can say with assurance that he is hitting the ball as cleanly as anyone, including Federer, can. This is not meant to indicate that he is playing at the level of vintage Federer, for one can lay claim to that only if one can invent new angles for strokeplay every alternate point. But he is probably playing as well as anyone else can play this game. He is yanking Federer around the court and dominating him with his baseline hitting.
Update: Federer down a set and a break. Nalbandian serving for the match.
Like I said, I witnessed most of Federer's losses this year, which isn't a lot anyway. I've also watched his victories. Through all of them, it is noticeable that his forehand topspin is misfiring. Again, I say this with assurance and (I believe) not as a knee jerk reaction.
With everything else in place, Federer can win Slams with a misfiring forehand. That is precisely what he has done. Lest anyone needs reminding, he won 3 Slams this year. But it is when he has his forehand firing that he can dish out those bagel sets at will. On those instances, his opponents haven't a chance. They don't have a place to go to, on court.
I don't have the stats with me, but I do not remember any bagel sets this year. No one needs to remind me of the Federer - Roddick game at the Aus Open. He played that match as well as tennis could be played. But has he bageled anyone this year? He probably did, but I don't remember any. Which means that there weren't too many. This is in complete contrast to his results over the last three years. My sincere apologies Sir Federer, but there are just too many forehands of yours that go long/wide or are completely mis-hit during prolonged rallying. There is just no place for that in your game.
I feel guilty saying this, for this is like asking Sampras to work on his serve, but if Federer intends to fulfill his stated ambition of staying on top when the 2012 London Olympics come up, he better work on his topspin forehand.
Update: Nalbandian wins 6-4 7-6(3)!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)