Sports : life magnified

India continues to deliver splendid results in chess. Reports NDTV:

Sahaj Grover created history by winning the gold in the Under-10 section of the World Youth Chess Championships that concluded here.

N Srinath got a bit lucky on the final day and also won the gold medal in the Under-12 section after losing his last round game against So Wesley.

Along with the gold and glory, Sahaj also became the youngest ever Indian to win any World Championship, breaking the 1996 record set by current World Junior Champion P Harikrishna.

But can such amazing talent prosper in the wake of what happened to Humpy a few days ago? When a young boy starts taking chess seriously in the country, he has Vishwanathan Anand as his idol, some one who had no peers to look at. He has done to Chess in India what Tiger Woods has done to golf in the world.

He did not have much to fall back on. At least the scenario is much better than it was back then. The young chess players have to think this way and have to battle on.

The Robinho deal with Real is looking on shaky grounds now. And now they have signed Baptista going one up on Arsenal.

So what does the future hold for one of the most talked about new Brazilian players? Brazil keeps producing amazing talent despite football being a world game and all the money and training being in Europe. At least the world should get a chance to know how good Robinho can be in Europe.

Meanwhile Real is still pretty sure Robinho will end up in Madrid. We have not heard the last of this.

Jason Gillespie has been included in the tour match ahead of the second Ashes test. My gut feeling is Gillespie will cause a huge impact in Ashes 2005 despite his current poor form and will strike hard in the second test. Gillespie is too good to go through such a lean phase for so long.

Bank of Baroda ditching Konery Humpy in the last moment and stripping her off their sponsorship is a shocking latest development. Found out regarding it via an entry in Prem’s blog.

Sponsors in Indian sport only run towards the top cricket stars in the country, a few international stars who have already established themselves. Promising players have to slug it out and worry about money as much as they have to do about enhancing performances.

Tennis players always find it tough and often live by the week, trying to get sponsors to travel, play in challengers all round the world, hire international coaches/trainers and improve ranking points.

Chess players are facing a similar problem. Training and getting ready for international challenges is expensive. Only after honing skills and talent for years does can a sports person aspire to be a champion.

If a company sponsors a player in the formative years, it can reap huge rewards when the player succeeds in the future. Imagine a sponsor who would have helped Sania Mirza’s career during her initial journey in tennis.

Humpy is an extra ordinary talent, having won at various levels of competition internationally. She is the world no. 4 women’s chess player. Surely Bank Of Baroda should have thought better than part ways with her at such a crucial stage in her career.

Humpy is not an also ran and the 20 lakhs she wants, I am sure will be availed some how in the next few days. But it only shows how pathetic the scenario is for sportspersons in the beginning and initial stages of their journey in India. And do not single out cricket. Even cricketers, domestic and upcoming struggle with finances, international training opportunities. Only after players reach the top do the spnsors really come in.

Gary Gilmour is struggling for his life. 54 is no age to die. Here is hoping for the best.

After the PCB agreed to the ECB’s demand of not playing a test in Karachi, the ECB, it appears, are not pleased at having England play at Multan either. The PCB has not succumbed on changing the venue from Multan to Rawalpindi though. Roebuck would be pleased like me to an extent on the stand I think though the displeasure at ECB not wanting to play in Multan would be mixed with it.

It would surprised me if some more unnecessary hassles do not come up before the first ball of the series is bowled.

Allan Border has  been the key figure in the transformation of Australia from the team which was one of the worst in the world in the 80s to the best team in the world. At 50, he can be proud of contributing to Australian cricket in the various capacities he has, from player to selector. Scott writes his thoughts on the man. He also links to a superb article I missed on the man from former player and one of my top 5 current cricket writers, Derek Pringle.

I am lucky that I have been exposed to baseball fairly more than most Indians very early. The first introductions came while playing a video game on media which I loved. It helped me get familiarised with the rules. Then went on to the best sports shop in our city at around the age of 11-12, bought a baseball bat and ball.

In the cubs (the junior form of scouts which I later joined) group in our school, we had cool ‘brothers’ who were adaptive as well. We played baseball a few days, the only time I have had experience of playing the sport in the evenings, in the night camping in school. Great days camping during holidays in school as a kid.

Okay coming back to the topic, the point is I like baseball like I do many other sports. It has got its own appeal, own specific skills required. With cable, internet and more advanced EA sports games, I understood baseball more. I would watch a live baseball game on tv as I would watch most other live sports.

The thing is cricket is unique, has far more variations than any other sport, why just compare with baseball. While every sport looks to eliminate the inconsistencies of nature, like the same court in basketball, switching of court sides in tennis, change of tennis balls after specific number of games, playing indoors - basically bringing in uniformity, cricket does the opposite.

In cricket, you have the pitch which consistently deterioates(Far less now than on uncovered wickets). The ball becomes old. (The changing of balls after 80 overs was not always there), the batsman can face a full toss or a ball on bounce, and millions of other intricacies.

Test cricket - as it originally was spanning a time (if you notice, the earlier innings were counted on minutes, the concept of counting balls only came in after advent of one day cricket), not uniform (australia and england having different rules for eg the aussie 8 ball over) and stuff makes it a unique sport. It is completely contrasting when you compare with other sports.

Now in the past 25-30 years we have had some uniformity but if you watch two simultaneous live test matches, one in australia, one in the subcontinent, you will think you are watching a different game.

Test cricket is from another age. It is less remixed than any other sport. We have the remix in the one dayers and the Martin Crowe Max cricket and now the twenty20 cricket and the double wicket tournaments and the sixes and the super 8s and stuff.

But cricket is more uncertain, has more aspects than any other game.

I LOVE playing basketball and I have had fun playing baseball and football is such a simple beautiful game (it has its own charm) but never can any thing replace the joy of bowling leg spinners for me. Some other craft for some one else may carry the same fondness.

Every sport, every game has its own aspects. Even the recent twenty20 cricket requires specific skills. I refer to it as different as it is so contrasting to the original test cricket. We can enjoy them all.

Basketball is my other love for its own reasons. It carries a passion in me like rugby does in some people. But there is no denying the uniqueness of cricket compared to baseball, tennis, basketball or any other sport.

What are you looking at!?

And another sweet picture can be viewed here.

There is panic in the English camp. Some people are suggesting bringing in Collingwood for Giles. Others want Bell out and Collingwood in. My advice: This is the best side England has got, most of which has aided England become the second best team in the world. Keep the faith and dont chop and change. It would only make the side worse. England may still not manage to win any test with the current side but what can they do? The Aussies are so much better than them!

Regarding the Aussies, I would say Gillespie should be retained. He is valuable, a potent strike bowler. his recent form has not been good but it is only a matter of time before he more than makes up for the lack of form. Please do not bring stock bowler Kasporwicz and change the winning XI.

Every one has an opinion on him. The opinions are in the extreme. Some wrote him off ages ago - rubished him for eternity. Some believe he has class to mark a decent test career. The Australian selectors and I are of the second category of people. Lee managed to make a come back thanks to the larger perspective of the Aussie selectors. Roebuck presents a superb assessment of Lee:

Not so long ago Lee was in such bad form that he could hardly release the ball. No one present during the Sydney Test match against India 18 months ago was confident of ever seeing him bowl for his country again. He was reduced to releasing the ball from a yard behind the popping crease and left nursing embarrassing figures. A bowler’s pain is public. Dismissed batsmen retreat to the rooms. It might have broken a lesser man.

Naturally, it took time to convince the selectors that he was indeed a new man. Last autumn he toured New Zealand and again could not force his way into the team. He arrived in England as fourth seamer but bowled with such gusto that his candidacy had to be taken seriously, especially by a team lacking a cutting edge. Lee did not play at Lord’s because a colleague had lost form. He demanded a place with stirring performances.

Link courtesy: Mike on cricket

After Federer won his third consecutive Wimbledon the early whispers of comparing Sampras and Federer had already begun. Every one ofcourse forgot the great Rod Laver.

Now that Armstrong has retired, there are more greatest debates ensuing. How does Armstrong compare to the other sporting greats? Was he even the greatest cyclist ever to be worthy of comparison with the greatest of greats from other sports?

These exercises are futile because we can never compare eras. The parameters are too dynamic, very different between different eras. But the idea is so interesting, I guess such debates will never stop. Expect Schumacher to be in the mix of such debates once he hangs up his boots more than ever before. Then we will have a Lara vs Viv Richards comparison. Meanwhile Woods vs Nicholas will be a debate which may well go on 50 years or 100 years from now.

In the meanwhile, check out how the cycling great of our era at least has crossed the barriers of nations and religion, headlining in newspapers every where. Newsdesigner.com has composed some of the best front pages featuring Armstrong.

Link courtesy: www.tdfblog.com

I do not understand why a cricket legend like Wasim Akram has to be put into the role of Sports News Reader by ESPN on Spotscenter India. Asking cricketing gyan from an expert is good. Asking him to tell us the latest news is not only underutilising the expert, it is also misutilising him.

Also, I liked the earlier look of the show where 30 minutes of sports news, mainly India centred was presented in English. I would ideally like a 60 minute show, much like Sportcenter USA used to be (whatever I managed to watch while it was broadcast in India before it was stopped 3-4 years ago) but a 30 minute English show was not bad.

The current show in hindi is some thing I am put off with. Not because I am against regional languages. But alternate news shows in hindi was some thing which was a better option according to me. Right now Sportcenter is almost unwatchable. The news ticker which they introduced a few months ago in the English version was a novel addition, much like USA Fox’s Sportsline (which was similar to Sportcenter USA - a one hour show stopped in India a few years ago) but over all the show Sportenter India will be less watched by me, even though I rarely used to watch it, even in English.

Peter Roebuck rights about there being no shame in losing to Australia but ads a statement quite out of place in an article on the Ashes:

They must play cricket in Karachi and anywhere else. The world has shrunk.

I have stated my views on England’s decision not to play in Karachi earlier but it is good to know that my favourite cricket writer shares the same view.

Watching Lance Armstrong and the Australian cricket team one win his record 7th Tour de France, the other demolish England yet another time, you have to wonder what makes champions what they are.

The England cricket team is good. They will give a fight in the Ashes but it will be a surprise if they can manage to win even one test match. One of the commentators said he did not think the feat achieved by Armstrong today will be emulated in his life time at least. That helps us understand Armstrong’s feat just a bit. The true magnitude, one hopes, can be fathomed in due course.

I have read Armstrong’s highly inspirational autubiography It’s not about the bike. I think I may have to read it and other books on Armstrong in due course.

Truly great.

Lesson: You do not announce you are going to call it quits before a series. It could shut the doors closer than you think.

England’s best batsman since Graham Thorpe has had probably the worst exit. It does not damage any of Thorpe’s reputation but it is not the way he would have liked to have ended it. I gave kudos to the English selectors for selecting Pieterson after Thorpe’s declaration to call it quits at the end of the English summer and wrote then:

It may not help in winning the Ashes but it is the perfect attitude. Choose a youngster raring to go rather than a soldier with history of nothing from past Ashes spoils, playing a last battle, having already announced his retirement. I never understand the concept of announcing a retirement before a series or test match or a season or a tournament. It smacks of irresponsibility and shifts, if some times only partly, the attention from the actual battle at hand to a mere soldier. Don’t show a desire to quit before a major battle. There are other players raring to go with more rush in the blood.

Pieterson has grabbed his chance but Atherton, who always gives a logical insight gets it spot on:

If Thorpe wasn’t going to play against Australia he shouldn’t have been playing against Bangladesh. If Ian Bell was to be pencilled in for the Ashes he would have been much further down the road to being a complete, battle-hardened cricketer had he, and not Robert Key, toured South Africa.

Even though Graveney now states that there was no disputing the fact that Pieterson would be playing the first test and not Thorpe now, and calls it more of a media debate, I am very sceptical if the selection was as simple. Thorpe quits saying he was not given any signs by the selectors and Graveney maintains the selectors had not ruled out Thorpe for the future.

What is done is done and the contemplative Thorpe analyses the situation currently far better than he analysed situations a few weeks back:

To be honest, I myself thought that going back to me after having left me out of the first Test would be a backward step. Far better to remove the uncertainty.

The uncertainty has indeed been removed.

On a different note, internet connection comes back to my room which means more consistent blogging from yours truly.

Ian Botham: “I have not seen a more exciting day 1 of the Ashes series than this.”

Sums up the day.

When Ponting chose to bat on what looked like a good batting pitch as far as every one was concerned, every one was certain a score of 350-400 would be par. The English pace bowling quartet had other ideas though. What was most noticeable was the far too man shots Australian batsmen played early on. Yes, Australia bat aggressively and yes, that’s the way they have managed to get so many victories. But even by their standards, the shots played were more than necessary. One would imagine there would be some maturity to play in during the first session of a test match.

Hoggard took Hayden off a beauty and Harmison bowled accurately, on the good length, supported by Flintoff (his bowling impresses you more every time you watch him) and Jones. Despite some late flutter by Warne, Harmison had ensured it was advatage England with Australia wrapped up for 190.

It must be traumatic to be an English fan. McGrath – the cold assassin, the demolition man, the man who has taken wickets at less than 12 a piece at Lord’s, the man who has dismissed 33 English test batsmen before this test, added some more chapters to his legendary story. After 16.1 overs into the England inning and the score at 21/5, it was Australian supporters who were rejoicing. All 5 wickets to McGrath. The age of McGrath? 35. So much for talks that he is past his best!

Pieterson and Jones had a small partnership but then Lee managed to take 2 to cap a memorable come back. He supported McGrath very well. Gillespie, who I reckon will bowl well in the series, didn’t bowl badly but didn’t bowl exceptionally either. The verdict is still out on him. I thought Warne was brought in a few overs too late. Should have been brought in half an early despite the ball being fairly new.

And yes regarding the pitch. It had a lot more variable bounce in the England inning. Alarming for a day 1 pitch. Nothing should be taken away from Harmison and McGrath who both bowled very well. Thoughts of the amazing Kandy test match where Australia battled Sri Lanka not so long ago come fleeting back during this amazing match. The game hinges more on which team manages to score more runs in the second inning. Australia will manage to have a lead of at least 50 runs now keeping aside some inspired batting with the tail by Pieterson. That will be a huge lead considering the low scoring match. But who is to say Australia cant score a 400 in their second inning. A lot of time is left in this match as there was in Kandy.

It is advantage Australia any way the match is looked at.

Greg Chappell is happy with the squad the Indian selectors have selected and so am I. I have already stated about Raina, a promising youngster. But also equally enthusiastic are the selections of Rao and return of J.P.Yadav. The omission of Mongia was surprising but keeping 2007 in mind, maybe the selectors first wanted to go for a younger player to build the squad.

Now the return of Laxman and Nehra’s being in the squad are very positive as far as I am concerned. Laxman is a great talent and deserves another chance in the one dayers. And Nehra has underperformed for most of his international career. This may well be his last chance in the one day squad but it is a chance he deserved. I think he will make the most of it. I guess it is curtains for Agarkar and rigthly so. He has been very inconsistent and I do not see him playing in 2007. But then we can never say any thing where Agarkar is concerned!

The Indian first XI will see a few experimentations in the next six months and then we will know more or less who will play in 2007 and the squad solidification will begin then. Now is the time for squad building. It is important the new players who are tried are given some sort of a run and selected after a lot of pondering first of all. The last season proved the one day squad needs a few churnings if they are to be in contention in the 2007 world cup realisticially. We are seeing the experimentation now.

Okay the Ashes are well and truly underway. There have been bruises, runs, a couple of wickets and blood has also been drawn. Here are some wild predictions. The list was made up in a cricket forum I visit.

Team I’ll be supporting:Australia
Team who I think will take the Ashes home:Australia
Series score:3-0
Top batsmn from either side (most runs):Damien Martyn
Top bowler (most wickets):Jason Gillespie
Top English batsman:Vaughan
Top Australian batsman: Damien Martyn
Top English bowler:Matthew Hoggard
Top Australian bowler:Gillespie
Surprise package for England:Vaughan
Surprise package for Australia:Gillespie
Man of the Series:Gillespie

And…
Biggest Disappointment for England:Strauss
Biggest Disappointment for Australia:Langer
Winner at Lords:Australia
Man of the Match at Lords:Gillespie

So the selection committee for Asia for the Asia vs South Africa.. ooooooooops Asia vs Africa contains one member from each of the 4 Asian test nations who is not a national selector as specified by the ICC.

Harmless clause if you look at it at first glance. But then why were the selectors from the current national selectors for the Tsunami Asia vs Rest of the World match? Why the difference?

ICC is on a mission to wield more power than ever on member nations. So ICC will decide that it should not be one of the national selectors. It should be some one else who is not best for the task in their own nation currently but should pick the team for Asia. ICC stop all this non sense.

All I can say is thank God series like the Ashes are still existent.