What would have been my first blog...

This would have been my first blog. But for some strange reason I did not post it.
Written on 8-August-2009.
Read on....


This being my first blog, I wanted to write it on something I enjoy talking about. What better topic than discuss my idol for a lifetime - Sachin Tendulkar.

Sachin has die hard fans all around the world. Fans who adore him for various reasons; the matches he has won for India, the records he holds, the centuries he has scored, the sixes he has hit and for the smile he brings on every Indian's face. The aesthetically sound ones appreciate his classy stroke play, his exquisite balance and his irrefutable technique.

But I adore him for an entirely different reason. I adore him for the person that he is. For the passion he brings to the game and his desire to keep winning and improving.

I was not a great fan of Sachin to start with. I still remember the arguments we had during the sixth and seventh standards at Modern School. It was during the 1996 world cup. Sachin was one of the best batsman at that time. Srinath and Hemanth used to support him to the core. I was always like, "What if he hits through the line and over the ropes ? That doesn't make him great." But over time after following cricket religiously and having observed him for a decade and half now, I am proud to call myself a Sachin fan.

There have been some key moments that will forever stick in my memory. The first one is the test match against Australia at Chennai in 1998. More than the mauling of Shane Warne on a warm afternoon in March, it was the preparation for tackling him that I admire. Not many batsman are comfortable with Warney going around the wickets on a fourth day pitch. But Sachin had prepared for that. He practised with Sivaramakrishnan bowling around the legs in the nets. And the way he jumped out to slog warne over the mid-wicket. It was a delight to watch him play that day. The wily Warney got nightmares !!!!

One more key moment is the back to back centuries at Sharjah. For those who say Sachin plays for records and centuries, go see the match again. The man didn't raise the bat for his century and went for a win even after India had qualified for the finals. In a team game, Sachin won the game on his own.

Then comes 2003 World Cup. By that time I had become a big Sachin fan. India had started the campaign poorly. Loss to Australia and a difficult win against Holland. It was a crisis situation and we needed someone to stand up and take responsibility. When the captain didn't, Sachin Tendulkar did. The way he played during the rest of the World Cup is something out of the world. I loved to see the best pakistan bowling attack being torn apart. People generally complain and pin point Sachin's failure as a Captain, saying he doesn't have leadership abilities. One was able to see the best display of leadership qualities of Sachin during that World Cup. He may not have a sharp tongue to tackle the press or get under the skin of opposition captains but he can lead by example and inspire the team to perform better. No wonder during the 90's and early 2000's everyone said, "the performance of the Indian team depends on performance of Sachin".

(refer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-7jL7o8kYs&feature=related for comments from Harsha Bhogle.)

UDRS

As I wait for the Man U Vs Chelsea match to kick-off, I stumbled upon a program where the cricketing experts were discussing the merits and demerits of the Umpire Decision Review System. The Ian Bell referral incident has stirred quite a controversy. After following the discussion, I am fairly convinced that the UDRS is beneficial and has to become a permanent feature in the sport.

However, in its current form of implementation in the WC, the system is a joke. The turning down of the referral is no excuse for India tie-ing the match, but, MSD was totally right in saying, "I think the adulteration of the technology with the human thinking that was the reason why we didn't get that wicket. I hope next time it will be technology or human intentions". The biggest demerit of the system is that one does not know how much to trust its merits !!!

In the recent incident, the argument in favor of the decision is that, the hawk-eye is not accurate for distances greater than 2.5 m and hence cannot be relied upon. It seems fairly logical. But my question is this : How was Billy Bowden in a better position than the third umpire to make a sensible decision ? The third umpire has the slow motion videos, side wise camera angle (to judge the height of the impact and the distance from stump) to his advantage to make a sensible decision. All Billy had was an image in the mind to rely upon.

As such without the hot spot and the snicko, the UDRS is not potent. The complex rules makes it all the more confusing. It defies all common sense. The purpose of the review system is that the players are not convinced with the field umpires decision and want a new pair of eyes to look at it. Turning down the referral and asking the field umpire to make a decision is like asking an accused to be his own judge or an author to review his own work. We all know what the outcome is going to be.

It is surprising that the ICC did not think this through. Or maybe, was it intended to be a controversial thing? Bring in an clearly un-defined variable into the game, draft a set of complex rules, use it to confuse the players and stir up a controversy.

Going ahead the ICC has to take a clear stand. Either trust the decisions of on-field umpires and live with the minor errors that they can make. Or use technology that you are sure of.

"I know its good but am not sure if I can trust it" will not work., especially in the big stage like a World Cup.