Dhoni bik gaya, Bhajji bik gaya, sab bik gaye...par idea chalega kya?

No offence meant with the title. Dhoni and Bhajji are very good players and so are the others on the Indian team (I can say that since Agarkar is not on the team). But what prompted that title is the insane amount of money being shelled out as part of the IPL bidding. Let me clarify that I have absolutely nothing against the millions being traded. After all, it's the free market principle at work here.

What I am worried about here is the future of IPL. Let's cast our minds to the time when an ambitious Subhash Chandra roped in Kapil Dev and formed the rebel ICL. Saying that ICC was shaken out of its slumber is an understatement. BCCI acted quickly to distance itself from the league and ICC, for once, backed BCCI with all its might. But the question arises, why didn't Subhash Chandra think of setting up a power plant? Why didn't he produce a film with Shahrukh Khan and Preity Zinta in the lead? Why cricket? A simple one-line answer is 'because of ICC and BCCI'.

The story goes that way back in 2000, ICC conducted a botched up telecast rights bid, which Zee lost to WSG-Nimbus. One losing a bid and the other winning a bid is perfectly understandable. That is, when you ignore the fact that WSG-Nimbus actually bid $75 million LESS than Zee!! And it didn't end there. In 2004, BCCI sold off its television rights to ESPN-Star even when Zee had placed an equal bid. The reason, or lack of reason, was that Zee had no 'experience' in sports production. Somebody should ask BCCI why Zee was invited at all. Or for that matter, why were Shahrukh and Preity invited to bid for IPL franchises? I forget, Shahrukh has coached a women's hockey team, isn't it? Ohh no, it was in a film, nevermind.

An unjustly done Subhash Chandra went ahead and did the inevitable. And thus ICL was born. The rest is history and I fear that soon, it will be history revisited. BCCI created the lucrative IPL, organized player auctions, got the best names around and now we are sitting and waiting for the first ball to be bowled. It should have been a victory for BCCI but is it? Not yet at least. For one, the economics of IPL are a little unnerving. Additionally, BCCI's face saving act has every making of an ICC party pooper. Malcolm Speed, ICC's Chief Executive, first ruled out a 'window' for IPL. What that means is there is no way any international tour would be rescheduled to allow the auctioned players to participate in the IPL. So, that rules out a good chunk of the auctioned players. Later, ICC softened its stand on the matter by saying that it could allow a window if seven ICC members voted in favour of the move. Easier said than done, considering the international commitments countries have and the contractual obligations with sponsors that may prevent players from participating.

So, everything depends on what stance the ICC takes on this issue. The BCCI is undisputably the most powerful board in world cricket today. But will it be able to arm twist the ICC into bowing to its wishes, as it has successfully done in the past? There are no clear answers but there sure is a nagging fear that we may head into another BCCI-ICC standoff.

Clarification: I have nothing against the IPL. I am looking forward to it just as most cricket lovers around the world are. I just wish the choice of captain were left to the coach or a cricket body. I am not a huge fan of icon players. Other than that, I like the idea. My beef is with the BCCI for the way it functions.

Due credits to Rahul Bhatia's insightful post on the ICL issue. Do read the entire post here. Credits to Cricinfo.com, my favourite cricket portal.

My reaction to Amit's post on the ongoing cricket controversy

I started out writing a comment but midway, I realized that it's too long a comment. So here is my reaction to Amit's post.

About strong protests

India lodged a ‘strong protest’ when Mike Deness banned Sachin Tendulkar for ball tampering. Nothing happened.

Steve Bucknor mocked Rahul Dravid on the field by pretending to tamper the ball at SCG. India lodged a ‘strong protest’. Nothing happened.

Umpire Darrell Hair has often been biased against Asian teams and so many ‘strong protests’ were lodged. Nothing happened.

Finally, the Pakistan cricket team walked off the ground midway through a match and that’s when the ICC woke up and banned Hair.

Do we still believe in ‘strong protests’?

I rest my case.

About sportsmanship in the modern game

I don’t want to comment much here since I do agree that sportsmanship is a dying virtue. However, it should not die.

Amit asks in his post,

“However, is suspending the entire tour and jeopardizing an otherwise excellent cricketing relationship the answer?”

It’s not. And that’s exactly why sportsmanship should not die. And grassed catches should not be claimed.

P.S: Do read the mail that Arpit forwarded everyone this morning. That says what sportsmanship is and why it’s important.

India’s decision to abandon the tour of Australia – a case of emotional hysteria?

Cricket evokes passions in India, and the ongoing India – Australia series has been no exception. Touted as one most competitive series of recent times, it has unfortunately been in the news for all the wrong reasons. The SCG test has elicited strong emotions from the Indians, and expectedly so. However, is suspending the entire tour and jeopardizing an otherwise excellent cricketing relationship the answer? At the expense of sounding a bit unpatriotic, I would disagree.

True, the umpiring was atrocious. India deserved a draw at the very least. If matters were not bad enough, the racism charges leveled against Harbhajan Singh must have absolutely shattered the team’s spirit. It reminds me of Al Pacino’s famous monologue in Scent of a Woman, wherein in response to the headmasters strong and severely biased disciplinary action against young Charlie, Pacino retorts by saying that the action is akin to executing Charlie’s soul. Racism is a serious charge, but what is more surprising is the judgment itself. Media reports have suggested that there wasn’t any independent evidence (third party eyewitness such as the umpires themselves, video or audio footage) to prove these charges, and yet the match referee handed out a 3-match ban on mere hearsay. Reports also suggest that the referee decided to accept the word of Clarke and Hayden against that of Sachin Tendulkar. These events, if true are enraging. How often have we seen the Asian countries being victimized in sport? Nevertheless, I strongly disagree with the decision to suspend (and possible abandon) the tour.

I feel that in the recent past, such threats from Asian countries have become an emotional corollary to ugly incidents on the field. Remember, Ranatunga’s strong reaction ensuing Murali being labeled a chucker in Australia. Obviously, I’m not stating that the Indian team should take these allegations lightly. Yes, they did the right thing in lodging a strong protest. However, the thought of suspension seems more of an emotional outburst (and far too myopic) rather than a practical protest. Would the ICC bow to India’s threats of pulling out? I think not. Would such a reaction bring about a change in ICC’s governing policies? I think not. Would they even think of replacing Bucknor for the next test? Probably not. On the contrary, I think abandoning the tour would weaken India’s stature in world cricket. Modern cricket administration will not change dramatically for the better, overnight. What is required is a long and sustained fight against the ICC’s policies, especially those that pertain to a match referee or umpire’s accountability. Knee-jerk reactions will create a media hype, only to fizzle out with time.

I feel the best way to combat this issue is to continue playing, and playing hard. The team should probably wear armbands or something in protest. And most importantly, continue to fight the ban and the umpiring decisions legally. The BCCI needs to be proactive in supporting Harbhajan and other team members. They must take the ICC on, but only within the realm of a legal framework. Let the cricketers do what they do best — play cricket!

Finally, a thought on the spirit of the Australians. Yes, they are no angels. But then, sportsman spirit died a long time back. The late 1980s saw a surge in on-field aggression from the Australians. Ball tampering concerns plagued the late 1980s and early 1990s. The late 1990s and early 2000s can easily be termed as the era of match fixing. Sportsman spirit is dead! The sport is now dominated by “Gamesmanship”, and the Aussies are masters at that.

I’m sure many of you disagree with me. I’d be interested in reading your views. Keep them coming.