Finally, yesterday India has won against Bangladesh. Even though it was not a very convincing win, there was enough to rejoice about. I could see some good points in yesterday's match.
1. Almost all players got into twenties. This was a big change from the world cup. In world cup, our great blue tigers drew up ducks and eggs. And some did that in both matches that would have counted for India. But this time, they had all starts. It is sad that they all threw away those starts, but nevertheless, something is better than nothing.
2. Dhoni is back in runs: Even though the wicket keeper has not been upto the mark in worldcup, and his shot selection has been very poor, yesterday, to have scored 91 runs, he must be back in his usual form. There are two important things to notice here:
i) He stood out there for long. and ii) Even after injury, he did not choose to retire hurt. Neither did he threw away his wicket.
These are signals of a batsman's maturity, and I am happy that he is coming of age.
3. Sreesanth and Dinesh Karthick are back: I think this is worth rejoicing. I feel that these two, along with Dhoni, and possibly VRV Singh and RP Singh, may well become the back bone of the Indian side, and it is good to see that one of the Chappell prodogies is peforming as he had predicted.
The match actually was won by the people whom Chappell had supported or about whom he had predicted to have a good career.
Let us see what turn the second one dayer takes.
There is good news for Indian sport on the hockey front also! They are into semis of Azlan Shah Hockey tournament, defeating Argentina! It was a big achievement for a team that has found it tough to even reach the knock out stages of any major tournament in the last 4/5 years.
This week has gone well for Indian sports. I hope this spirit continues. I'd like to bitch about the apathy of the government in promoting sports, but I'd save that for another day, for another post. (Sparing you for now ;-) )
Hare Krishna.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Thursday, May 3, 2007
Liverpool Vs. Milan
Soon the UEFA champions league will draw to an end on 23rd of this month. With it will come to end one hell of a time for football fans across the world. What a tale it has been, and what twists it has shown us. Lyon playes beautifully in league, only to be ousted by Roma, which eventually was brushed aside by ManU, which was simply outclassed by Milan. Inter lost to Valencia, the spanish charmer, which turn was chucked out by Chelsea, which was outclassed by Liverpool, yet again (more about it later!).
Milan has showed time and again that they are still a force to reckon with on the CL.
What I feel worth noticing here is that English football is good. However, a major feature of english football is a lot of physical play. Moreover, english football maybe good, but it is still to match the standards of Italian football (Two years ago, I would have said the same thing about germal football, but alas, I cant do that anymore). In defence, they are years behind Italian football.
Football is not only a sport, but the kind of football that teams play, also shows the culture of the countries. Just by looking at the teams, one can tell that English people are very physical and aggressive people. At the same time, spanish are easy-going, entertaining and people who would love food, wine and music. Italians, on the other hand, come out to be shy and defensive, yet firm people. French seem mild-mannered and talented people with a lot of flair. Same with portugese. Germans, on the other hand, are very methodical, disciplined and highly organized.
Going by above mentioned criteria, Liverpool has lesser flair than Milan. I feel that it is true. So, would that mean that Milan are a better favorites than Liverpool?
Possibly not. Personally, I would be supporting Milan. However, I feel that Liverpool has a better chance. Why? Because of two people: Rafael Benitez and Steven Gerrard.
Rafael Benitez has time and again proved that even though he may not be an expert in English Premier League, but when it comes to UEFA CL, he has the goods. Ever since he has taken over from Gerard Houllier, Liverpool has become 'that big team' from 'the small team that may make it big'. Someone said about him: "Not only was he a brilliant coach but he is a very sharp, savvy businessman. He knows what he wants and how to get it."
Gerrard... what do I say! I leave it to you. :) .
One the other side are Ancelotti and Kaka. The tactical subtleness of Ancelotti and overwhelming talent of Kaka has undone Bayern and ManU already.
Personally, I like both teams. I love Milan and Liverpool are a team whom I consider as the side best organized (in Europe at least).
What may eventually make the difference is the experience of Steven Gerrard over Kaka. But as I said, 'may'. You never know about Maldini, Inzaghi, Nesta and Gattuso either. The stars that Milan carries have been baptized as 'UEFA Men' since long. And Liverpool would also be out to prove that 2005 was not a fluke.
It is going to very interesting and I am as excited as ever!
Hare Krishna.
Milan has showed time and again that they are still a force to reckon with on the CL.
What I feel worth noticing here is that English football is good. However, a major feature of english football is a lot of physical play. Moreover, english football maybe good, but it is still to match the standards of Italian football (Two years ago, I would have said the same thing about germal football, but alas, I cant do that anymore). In defence, they are years behind Italian football.
Football is not only a sport, but the kind of football that teams play, also shows the culture of the countries. Just by looking at the teams, one can tell that English people are very physical and aggressive people. At the same time, spanish are easy-going, entertaining and people who would love food, wine and music. Italians, on the other hand, come out to be shy and defensive, yet firm people. French seem mild-mannered and talented people with a lot of flair. Same with portugese. Germans, on the other hand, are very methodical, disciplined and highly organized.
Going by above mentioned criteria, Liverpool has lesser flair than Milan. I feel that it is true. So, would that mean that Milan are a better favorites than Liverpool?
Possibly not. Personally, I would be supporting Milan. However, I feel that Liverpool has a better chance. Why? Because of two people: Rafael Benitez and Steven Gerrard.
Rafael Benitez has time and again proved that even though he may not be an expert in English Premier League, but when it comes to UEFA CL, he has the goods. Ever since he has taken over from Gerard Houllier, Liverpool has become 'that big team' from 'the small team that may make it big'. Someone said about him: "Not only was he a brilliant coach but he is a very sharp, savvy businessman. He knows what he wants and how to get it."
Gerrard... what do I say! I leave it to you. :) .
One the other side are Ancelotti and Kaka. The tactical subtleness of Ancelotti and overwhelming talent of Kaka has undone Bayern and ManU already.
Personally, I like both teams. I love Milan and Liverpool are a team whom I consider as the side best organized (in Europe at least).
What may eventually make the difference is the experience of Steven Gerrard over Kaka. But as I said, 'may'. You never know about Maldini, Inzaghi, Nesta and Gattuso either. The stars that Milan carries have been baptized as 'UEFA Men' since long. And Liverpool would also be out to prove that 2005 was not a fluke.
It is going to very interesting and I am as excited as ever!
Hare Krishna.
Monday, April 16, 2007
Indians living abroad and home societies
A lot of people in western countries blame indians for not socializing enough. More so, they are actually blamed that they either dont come out or stick to their own kind. Lately there have been a lot of such accusations, and so much so, that either Indians are sometimes not considered a part of home country or they are feared and suspected. The suspicion and hesitancy in accepting them in mainstream society has been more and more pronounced in European countries. It is particularly acute in more advanced countries like Germany, UK, etc. (even though france seems to be an exception).
Most of these accusations are a result of a big misunderstanding from the home society. There are two points to consider before jumping to such conclusions.
Firstly, Indian social structures are different. Indians are a very soft breed of social creatures. Intially, there is a lot of "over the surface" interactions with the home society. This is just to understand what are the values and the underlying ethos of the home country's society. Once it is established that the home country principles are more or less in coherence with the principles inherent in the society of which Indians have been a part of, only then, Indians will try to become a free part of mainstream society. This is not to be construed as resistance to new social norms. This reluctance on part of Indians happens only when there are some contradictive ideologies or ethics could be felt. Given a neutral or a new idelogy that does not contradict with existing Indian philosphies, rarely would an Indian avoid socializing.
This dilemma is more pronounced in cultures where pre-marital physical relationship is not a taboo. In Indian society, it is still very taboo. Not only that, it is also discouraged. So, Indian parents are very apprehensive of home youth. On surface, this looks like resistence to new culture, whereas the resistance is of a different nature and cannot be generalized to entire society as whole.
Secondly, in advanced countries, most of the Indians that have moved there under work visas or permits. It goes to say that these permits are for limited time periods and sooner or later the worker will be back in India, looking for another job or that person may be an extension of the permit (which cannot be guarenteedly renewed). So, the primary thrust of such Indians is to save as much as they can. Socializing always definitely involved give and take, and would certainly involve certain expenditure as a part of social activities. Most Indians, esp. families, dont want that. Infact, they are there to earn and save as much as they can.
Finally, I would feel that it is unjustified for home countries to be apprehensive of Indians arriving in home countries. Their skill and hard working nature will only bring revenue and profits to the organizations that employ them. By filling those positions economically, they are generating some other jobs at some place else.
Most of these accusations are a result of a big misunderstanding from the home society. There are two points to consider before jumping to such conclusions.
Firstly, Indian social structures are different. Indians are a very soft breed of social creatures. Intially, there is a lot of "over the surface" interactions with the home society. This is just to understand what are the values and the underlying ethos of the home country's society. Once it is established that the home country principles are more or less in coherence with the principles inherent in the society of which Indians have been a part of, only then, Indians will try to become a free part of mainstream society. This is not to be construed as resistance to new social norms. This reluctance on part of Indians happens only when there are some contradictive ideologies or ethics could be felt. Given a neutral or a new idelogy that does not contradict with existing Indian philosphies, rarely would an Indian avoid socializing.
This dilemma is more pronounced in cultures where pre-marital physical relationship is not a taboo. In Indian society, it is still very taboo. Not only that, it is also discouraged. So, Indian parents are very apprehensive of home youth. On surface, this looks like resistence to new culture, whereas the resistance is of a different nature and cannot be generalized to entire society as whole.
Secondly, in advanced countries, most of the Indians that have moved there under work visas or permits. It goes to say that these permits are for limited time periods and sooner or later the worker will be back in India, looking for another job or that person may be an extension of the permit (which cannot be guarenteedly renewed). So, the primary thrust of such Indians is to save as much as they can. Socializing always definitely involved give and take, and would certainly involve certain expenditure as a part of social activities. Most Indians, esp. families, dont want that. Infact, they are there to earn and save as much as they can.
Finally, I would feel that it is unjustified for home countries to be apprehensive of Indians arriving in home countries. Their skill and hard working nature will only bring revenue and profits to the organizations that employ them. By filling those positions economically, they are generating some other jobs at some place else.
Friday, April 13, 2007
Appalled!
I am totally appalled by the "Independent Evaluation of Performance by Consulting Groups" hired by the publishers of the benchmarks. I have seen this happen with MQ, Databases and Application Servers, and what not!!
There are certain ignorant sections in the online community that follows this and also defends these reports. I am a little tired of all the hype that surrounds this performance benchmarking.
It is like asking which one is faster, a Porsche or a Lamborghini. Of course, these two vehicles have varied maximum speeds, but a lot depends on speed under what conditions and most importantly, in whose hands!
So, with all the software, it depends on the production conditions, and code/maturity level of developers.
So, give me a break, and STOP this madness!
There are certain ignorant sections in the online community that follows this and also defends these reports. I am a little tired of all the hype that surrounds this performance benchmarking.
It is like asking which one is faster, a Porsche or a Lamborghini. Of course, these two vehicles have varied maximum speeds, but a lot depends on speed under what conditions and most importantly, in whose hands!
So, with all the software, it depends on the production conditions, and code/maturity level of developers.
So, give me a break, and STOP this madness!
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Amazing UEFA CL!
Yesterday, in an eventful day for UEFA CL, Chelsea defeated Valencia in Mestella. This is the first time an English club has defeated Valencia in the home ground. And one of the rare occasions that will leave a lasting impression on the minds of valencia home crowd and players. I did not get a chance to see the game, and looking forward to seeing it. Even though I am a little biased against Chelsea, but I have lot of respect for them.
And as I had thought, ManU have routed Roma. Roma was making their first appearance in UEFA finals, and it was pretty much predictable that they may be knocked out of the tournament, but they have made it good to reach this far. At least, they made farther than Inter. Ironically, the only Italian team in contention in UEFA league is Milan, which is far behind either in Serie A.
It will be interesting to see which wins, Ottmar Hitsfeld's discipline and organization or Carlos Ancelotti's flair and tactical acumen.
Liverpool is more or less through (even though they would do well to get some players rested). However, Rafael Benitez's side should not get complacent. Challenge in such situation is to be confident and still come out with a reasonable side of reserve players who can get some match practice.
It seems that it will be semi-finals dominated by clubs from English Premier League. After Mestella, I am tempted to think that Chelsea have finally broken their big match jinx and are on the path for a significant silverware, probably first in their history. If they do, Mourinho and Ibramovic are set to become Chelsea legends. It will be probably third CL medal for Mourinho. I marvel how this guy keeps his players motivated for success. However I may hate his flamboyance, I will still admit that he has a knack of turning things around.
So, the line up for semis:
Chelsea - ManU
Liverpool - ????????
Will it be Bayern's organization or Milan's flair?
Let us meet tomorrow to share the news.
Hare Krishna.
And as I had thought, ManU have routed Roma. Roma was making their first appearance in UEFA finals, and it was pretty much predictable that they may be knocked out of the tournament, but they have made it good to reach this far. At least, they made farther than Inter. Ironically, the only Italian team in contention in UEFA league is Milan, which is far behind either in Serie A.
It will be interesting to see which wins, Ottmar Hitsfeld's discipline and organization or Carlos Ancelotti's flair and tactical acumen.
Liverpool is more or less through (even though they would do well to get some players rested). However, Rafael Benitez's side should not get complacent. Challenge in such situation is to be confident and still come out with a reasonable side of reserve players who can get some match practice.
It seems that it will be semi-finals dominated by clubs from English Premier League. After Mestella, I am tempted to think that Chelsea have finally broken their big match jinx and are on the path for a significant silverware, probably first in their history. If they do, Mourinho and Ibramovic are set to become Chelsea legends. It will be probably third CL medal for Mourinho. I marvel how this guy keeps his players motivated for success. However I may hate his flamboyance, I will still admit that he has a knack of turning things around.
So, the line up for semis:
Chelsea - ManU
Liverpool - ????????
Will it be Bayern's organization or Milan's flair?
Let us meet tomorrow to share the news.
Hare Krishna.
Monday, April 9, 2007
Indian cricket board!
Last week, Indian cricket board made a landmark decision. Performance based incentives for players, almost entirely. The lost team takes only 100K for a match, takes 400K for a victory.
For a series victory abroad, it takes 40M!!
Graded contracts are removed. No-one is grade A contract or grade B contract. Every contract is valid at the same grade of remuneration (that is what should have been done a long time back).
Another side, the number of endorsements per player is a maximum of 3. Hmmm ... a little controversial, but I would like to wait and see how this works out rather than jump the gun. Former players, and a major %age of fans, think that it will not impact earnings.
Guru Greg has been retainede, although as the "head" of National Cricket Academy. "Coach" designation has been abolished. But, new designations like "Fielding Coach" and "Bowling coach" has been introduced. Manager will be more or less the "Coach(-in-Chief)".
So, what is the message that BCCI wants to convey?
There are certain important points:
1. For players: We have money, but it will be given only if you play well. Forget endorsements, if you play well, you wont need them to roll in money.
2. For players: We have money, and whoever performs, gets it. Doesnt matter if it is a senior or a novice.
3. For Ex-players: We have money, if you think you can produce results, it is yours to take, just make sure that team wins.
4. For Greg: We liked your propositions, and they seem true. We respect you and we have money to pay you. Can you help us more at the grooming level, so that we can be assured of a technically better pool of players.
5. For (Senior) Players: Dont think team needs you. Perform or perish.
6. For fans: We know that you want team to win. and are tired of watching these people in every commercial. Well ... we will give you a break.
Out of 6 points above, BCCI says that it has money in about 4 points!
All in all, it is a stance to appease every section associated with cricket. But it is full of half measures. It hasn't transformed Indian cricket totally, yet it has not let things remain as they used to be.
It will be interesting to see how it turns out!
Hare Krishna.
For a series victory abroad, it takes 40M!!
Graded contracts are removed. No-one is grade A contract or grade B contract. Every contract is valid at the same grade of remuneration (that is what should have been done a long time back).
Another side, the number of endorsements per player is a maximum of 3. Hmmm ... a little controversial, but I would like to wait and see how this works out rather than jump the gun. Former players, and a major %age of fans, think that it will not impact earnings.
Guru Greg has been retainede, although as the "head" of National Cricket Academy. "Coach" designation has been abolished. But, new designations like "Fielding Coach" and "Bowling coach" has been introduced. Manager will be more or less the "Coach(-in-Chief)".
So, what is the message that BCCI wants to convey?
There are certain important points:
1. For players: We have money, but it will be given only if you play well. Forget endorsements, if you play well, you wont need them to roll in money.
2. For players: We have money, and whoever performs, gets it. Doesnt matter if it is a senior or a novice.
3. For Ex-players: We have money, if you think you can produce results, it is yours to take, just make sure that team wins.
4. For Greg: We liked your propositions, and they seem true. We respect you and we have money to pay you. Can you help us more at the grooming level, so that we can be assured of a technically better pool of players.
5. For (Senior) Players: Dont think team needs you. Perform or perish.
6. For fans: We know that you want team to win. and are tired of watching these people in every commercial. Well ... we will give you a break.
Out of 6 points above, BCCI says that it has money in about 4 points!
All in all, it is a stance to appease every section associated with cricket. But it is full of half measures. It hasn't transformed Indian cricket totally, yet it has not let things remain as they used to be.
It will be interesting to see how it turns out!
Hare Krishna.
Thursday, April 5, 2007
Kris Srikanth: An idiot
I think that Kris Srik(k)anth and Sunil Gavaskar are the two biggest idiots in Indian cricket right now. Everytime you ask them a question, they give you back their opinion. There are two things in cricket: 1) Fact. 2) Opinion.
If you ask these two cricketers about anything, these two guys are totally adept at mixing these two, and give you a confused answer, where you will struggle to figure out what portion is day-dreaming and which portion is a fact.
And the latest example of a joke is from the on-going debate of coach.
I dont know what they think when they are against a foreign coach in the sub-continent. Do they want to say that John Wright has not done good enough as Indian coach, or that Dave Whatmore is inferior as a coach to _______ (fill it with any Sri Lankan name). Or that Bangladesh should really opt for either of them as a coach rather than Dave Whatmore himself.
Or do they want to tell the world that we are simply jealous that all that we expected for ourselves was being handed over to 'foreigners' and we are outraged with jealosy?
I am inclined to think that latter is the case.
They say that foreign coaches are not good for India when asked who should be a coach. Why cant they simply answer the question rather than bring in an opinion. By some mysterious stroke of luck, do they explain why they think so? No, you have to find the answer to great people's great words yourself. And when you solve this mystery, please make sure you explain it as a comment on my blog ('cas i am still scratching my head).
Again, who should be a coach? Answer: We have a lot of talent in India. Again, an opinion!
Let us try again, what should be done to improve Indian team's performance?
They have to be more committed. (How? No answer! Find yourself.)
They have to try harder. (How? No answer! Find yourself.)
You can simply keep them asking how, and they will give you endlessly pointless answers.
They drool over Australian style of play, but they are simply uninterested in accepting Greg Chappell's methods. Well, if you are not shocked by Australian cricket, then accept their methodology until you have a better one!
Again, they will answer "it will not work in India". How? Go find yourself!.
So, you mean to say that India will never play like Australia or South Africa?
I think for a moment, they should shut their mouth. They should think, and then talk something. It really sucks to see that former Indian cricketers are simply jealous and Xenophobic. It is a pity that these people are looking to lead Indian cricket.
Captain Vengsarkar, by any stroke of luck if you happen to read this blog, then please accept my humble apologies for putting forth idiocy of your former colleagues and call back Greg Chappell. What is the worst that can happen? You will lose another world cup series and come back in first round. But you can be sure that everyone who comes back will be under 25. Then, you just hand them some reasonable international experience. By the time the world cup after that comes, you would have greatly enhanced your chances of winning that one(i.e. if by some stroke of luck, you dont win the first one).
And yes, I feel that Sachin should retire or strengthen the bench. It is time for someone younger to play and learn the game.
If you ask these two cricketers about anything, these two guys are totally adept at mixing these two, and give you a confused answer, where you will struggle to figure out what portion is day-dreaming and which portion is a fact.
And the latest example of a joke is from the on-going debate of coach.
I dont know what they think when they are against a foreign coach in the sub-continent. Do they want to say that John Wright has not done good enough as Indian coach, or that Dave Whatmore is inferior as a coach to _______ (fill it with any Sri Lankan name). Or that Bangladesh should really opt for either of them as a coach rather than Dave Whatmore himself.
Or do they want to tell the world that we are simply jealous that all that we expected for ourselves was being handed over to 'foreigners' and we are outraged with jealosy?
I am inclined to think that latter is the case.
They say that foreign coaches are not good for India when asked who should be a coach. Why cant they simply answer the question rather than bring in an opinion. By some mysterious stroke of luck, do they explain why they think so? No, you have to find the answer to great people's great words yourself. And when you solve this mystery, please make sure you explain it as a comment on my blog ('cas i am still scratching my head).
Again, who should be a coach? Answer: We have a lot of talent in India. Again, an opinion!
Let us try again, what should be done to improve Indian team's performance?
They have to be more committed. (How? No answer! Find yourself.)
They have to try harder. (How? No answer! Find yourself.)
You can simply keep them asking how, and they will give you endlessly pointless answers.
They drool over Australian style of play, but they are simply uninterested in accepting Greg Chappell's methods. Well, if you are not shocked by Australian cricket, then accept their methodology until you have a better one!
Again, they will answer "it will not work in India". How? Go find yourself!.
So, you mean to say that India will never play like Australia or South Africa?
I think for a moment, they should shut their mouth. They should think, and then talk something. It really sucks to see that former Indian cricketers are simply jealous and Xenophobic. It is a pity that these people are looking to lead Indian cricket.
Captain Vengsarkar, by any stroke of luck if you happen to read this blog, then please accept my humble apologies for putting forth idiocy of your former colleagues and call back Greg Chappell. What is the worst that can happen? You will lose another world cup series and come back in first round. But you can be sure that everyone who comes back will be under 25. Then, you just hand them some reasonable international experience. By the time the world cup after that comes, you would have greatly enhanced your chances of winning that one(i.e. if by some stroke of luck, you dont win the first one).
And yes, I feel that Sachin should retire or strengthen the bench. It is time for someone younger to play and learn the game.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)