Of wet blankets, and other matters
Prem Panicker
Wash-out in Antigua
If there is one thing more boring than waiting, for three, days, for a ground to be readied so that the players scheduled to play a Test can go through the motions, then I would love to know what that is.
What amazes me is this reminder - if I needed reminding - that cricket boards are not much into forward thinking and contingency planning. True, the rains that have reduced the Recreation Ground outfield in St John's, Antigua, to the sort of marsh wherein the Loch Ness monster would have felt more at home than an international cricketer is unseasonal, and unexpected. But rain disruptions, per se, are not new to the game, and I would have thought that the various cricket boards, and the ICC, would after all these years have some sort of fixed system in place to cope.
But no, we are still reduced to sitting by while umpires gingerly walk along the outfield, careful not to get their shoes muddy, while helicopters hover overhead in a futile attempt to dry the playing area off, Test cricketers loll by the poolside of their hotels and the paying spectator anasthetises himself with music and alchohol, not necessarily in that order.
Meanwhile, what do the organisers and the boards do? After three days play has been washed out, they wake up to the fact that matters are slipping away from their hands. And come up with a solution - let the teams play two one-day internationals, they suggest.
Not official ones, mind you, but masala matches. The Indian tour management no sooner heard the suggestion, than they rejected it outright - and quite right, too, in my book.
Why should a touring team in the middle of a tough tour, having just got themselves into the frame of mind to play Test cricket, undo all the hard work by going out there and indulging in a meaningless slam-bam exercise? Reams have been written about how one-day cricket has taught the modern batsman bad habits and, in the process, rendered him a misfit in the Test arena. Pundits have waxed eloquent about the need to seperate Tests and one-day cricket, to play the Tests first and the one-day games later, in order to allow the cricketers to adapt from one style of play to the other without ruining their game. So where lies the sense in proposing two masala games with one Test still to go in the series?
Think of the spectator, you will suggest - the poor bloke has paid money to watch cricket, and deserves something in return.
Sure, he does. In fact, as far as I am concerned, the spectator's interests come first - he is, after all, the guy who with his hard-earned money paid at the turnstiles is responsible for the monetary well-being of boards and players alike, it is he who draws the advertising, he who in every sense makes the game possible.
But does he want masala matches at this juncture? I don't know - to my mind, it is akin to a situation where a child in the throes of hunger cries for food, and we console him with a lollipop.
Said spectator, let us not forget, has paid to see Test cricket. On day one, when he woke up, he would have been looking forward to the excitement inherent in a situation where the home side, 1-0 up in the five Test series with two games to go, would be looking to make the lead impregnable by going for another win, while the touring side, anxious to redeem itself and level the stakes, would be equally keen on pulling one back and making the scoreline even.
And that - not meaningless masala - is what the spectator wants, and deserves to get.
So what is the solution? Simple - three days having been lost anyway, use day four as well to ensure that man and machine power are harnessed to make the ground absolutely shipshape. And then begin the Test on Tuesday April 8 (the fifth day, as originally scheduled) and play all five days, the revised schedule having the Test end on April 12.
This ensures that a meaningful (to both sides) Test is played, that the interest in the series is built to fever pitch, that the whole point of having a five-Test series is not lost, and most important, that the spectator gets exactly what he paid good money to get.
Luckily, the existing schedule permits of such revision. As it stands, India is expected to play a four day practise game at Guyana between April 11-14, before the fifth Test at the same venue between April 17-21.
Thus, if revised, that four day game can be cancelled. Instead, the teams play the fourth Test between April 8-12, travel to Guyana on April 13, spend the next four days resting and working out in the nets, and play the fifth Test as scheduled.
Arguments against? Love to hear from you...
Dalmiya now certain to head ICC
All those apprehensions have finally proved baseless - as matters stand, Jagmohan Dalmiya, secretary of the Board of Control for Cricket in India, almost certainly be installed as head of the International Cricket Conference this June, heralding in the process a total shift in balance of cricketing power from England to the Asian sub-continent.
Dalmiya will take office as president - not, mind you, chairman, which is the post now occupied by ICC head Sir Clyde Walcott - of the ICC, and serve a three year term beginning mid-June 1997.
Walcott will relinquish his post on June 17, at which point the post of chairman of the ICC will be formally abolished. Immediately thereafter, Dalmiya will be installed as first ever president of the global governing body of the game.
The change in nomenclature is merely cosmetic - president or chairman, call the post what you will, the nature of the post, and the powers enshrined therein, remain the same.
Of course, the devolution of cricketing power from England (and its allies, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa) to the Asian sub-continent was not exactly smooth.
It will be recalled that last year, when Dalmiya made his first bid for power and looked to have secured an overwhelming majority, the ICC introduced via the backdoor a rule that negated the impressive support Dalmiya had built up, and extended the term of incumbent Walcott by another year.
On that occasion, while Dalmiya did make some noises threatening legal action, the BCCI was not entirely behind him. This year, it is - and that made all the difference, as the ICC bigwigs realised that another attempt to manipulate the elections would involve them in a messy and, eventually, losing legal battle.
The ICC then tried another ploy - in the form of a proposal to have the president's post go, by strict rotation, to all nine Test playing nations, and to limit the term of tenure to one year.
India promptly objected - and received the total support of Pakistan and Sri Lanka.
When it appeared that India was firm on its stand, the ICC finally gave way. South Africa moved a resolution giving naming Dalmiya to the post of first president of the ICC, and West Indies seconded it. In return, the losing candidate last year, Malcolm Gray of Australia, was nominated by Pakistan to take over from Dalmiya in the year 2000, and the nomination was seconded by Sri Lanka.
So it is - almost - all over bar the shouting. The BCCI has to formally submit to the ICC its nomination of Dalmiya for the post of ICC president, the deadline being May 31. The BCCI had in fact earlier submitted Dalmiya's nomination, but that was for the now-abolished post of chairman. The change in name of the post, thus, necessitates the re-nomination which, however, is a mere formality.
What is most interesting, however, is that the ICC will now go in for a change of structure that will have the result of providing teeth to its chairman. Unlike in the present constitution of the body, the installation of the first president of the ICC will be accompanied by a restructuring, that will see the president named as head of the Executive Board, to comprise around 14 elected and nominated members. And this means that unlike in the past when the head of the ICC was a glorified figurehead, the president will be actually in a position to bring about change.
And with the game in the turmoil it is in, with inequities proliferating and the ICC apparently helpless to check the trend, this is possibly the best news the game and its afficionadoes could have had, right now.
Oh god, it's cricket again
Funny world, this. On the one hand, we wax eloquent about how increased corporate sponsorship has lead to a proliferation of cricket matches, which in turn has led to a bunch of jaded, tired, injury-struck cricketers trotting from one venue to the other to take on the same opponents, ad nauseum.
And if this weren't enough, comes more sponsorship - this time from, of all places, a godman's ashram.
News is that come November, the birthday of the Sai Baba of Puttaparthi will be marked by a one-day fixture that pits an India XI against a World XI.
The idea originates from Sri Lanka's captain Arjuna Ranatunga, who visited Sai Baba's Prashanti Nilayam Ashram in January 1996, shortly before the Wills World Cup. Subsequently, the godman roped in the services of the likes of Sunil Gavaskar and G R Vishwanath to make the presitigious fixture possible.
Puttaparthi might qualify as an "ashram", but the worldly practitioners of the game of cricket are liable, come November, to find that the facilities are far from ascetic. The godman has his own private airfield, while the enormous numbers of foreign devotees the frizzy-haired Sai Baba attracts has meant a proliferation of five-star hotel facilities in the area - just right to host the comfort-oriented cricket players who will comprise the two teams.
The one question centers around the playing surface - but again, when mind and money marry, such obstacles are easily surmounted. A spokesman of the Sathya Sai Trust indicates that plans are already underway to upgrade the ashram-run Hill view Stadium to international standards. There is also a proposal to form a fund to conduct the tournament, and to convert it into an annual event on the international cricketing calendar.
The teams are yet to be finalised, though it is already more or less certain that India will be represented by its first XI, while the World XI will comprise pretty much the cream of the international cricketing corps.
After all, when god - or, in this case, a godman - summons, can mere mortals stay away?
|
