Bollywood Goes Blogging

Bollywood stars seems to have taken to blogging. Leading Bollywood actor Amir Khan now has a blog. His recent post included lines like, “Shahrukh is licking my feet and I am feeding him biscuits every now and then. What more can I ask for?”

Apparently, his dog is named Shahrukh! While one can understand professional tensions between top stars it is sad to see it being voiced in public, and that too in such poor taste. Thankfully Shahrukh Khan has appeared so much more measured in his response.

Amitabh Bachchan (also known as Big B) recently launched his own blog. Big B’s blog is awful to say the least. He has further diluted his brand by launching such a poor blog.

I had suggested earlier that Kollywood should stick to scripts. The same seems to hold true for Bollywood as well. Most Bollywood stars carry around a larger than life image and having a blog (especially a poorly written one) is likely to hurt their image. Besides, it might display an inner side that they might as well keep to themselves (as apparent in the case of Amir Khan). Blogging is a relatively new phenomenon that media experts are still trying to figure out and understand. An entry by Bollywood stars into the world of blogging (with little skill for good writing) definitely sounds premature. In an attempt to sound and appear hip these stars might have done themselves more harm than good.

Shekhar Kapur, who has had his own blog for a while now appears to be an exception to this general rule.

To Talk or Not to Talk: Obama vs. The Rest

TalkSenator’s Obama’s view that as President of the United States he would be willing to talk to so-called enemies of the US seems to have remained a topic of controversy. First it was Senator Clinton who termed it as “naive“. Now we have conservative columnists lamenting that Senator Obama’s gaffe has become policy. There are really two issues here. One, what is Senator Obama’s actual stand on the issue? Second, should the US should be willing to talk to purported problem states?

Firstly, Senator Obama deserves credit for at least being consistent. Just as he has always been against the war in Iraq, this is another issue where he has been very consistent and thankfully, different and bold. When asked about Cuba in an earlier debate he clearly pointed out that he was against the mindset that meeting with the US President was a privilege that had to be earned. It’s heartening to learn that there is at least one candidate in the race who fervently believes in talking to one and all. Clearly, without a doubt there is no ambiguity about Senator Obama’s position on the issue.

Another recent article pointed out that President Kennedy had a similar mindset and ended up having a rough meeting with the Russians where Krushchev lectured him. The ultimately objective when world leaders meet is often world peace among other things. Besides, considering all the harm the US has caused around the world (along with the good) shouldn’t there at least be room for other world leaders to vent their frustrations, anger and disappointment in close doors meetings with the US President? It is only fair that the US President give other world leaders a hearing even if it risked getting a earful. At a minimum it will send the message that the US is willing to listen as opposed to always lecturing the world on freedom and democracy when it suits the US. The widely accepted reality after eight of President Bush is that the US is significantly disliked all around the world and there is plenty of appeasement (yes appeasement!) that the US could indulge in across the globe. The fear that the US President might be lectured to because of the precedent from over 40 years ago is irrelevant and out of place in today’s world.

On a related note, it helps to realize that we are living in an age where the bulk of the US population is extremely active on the Internet and the rest of the world is following suit. The Youtube, Facebook and Google generations live a life of near complete openness and seemingly inherent equality. This generation (and possibly future generations) talks about everything under the sun to everyone on their blogs, forums and emails. They hold mass conversations online, give and take advice from all and sundry from across the planet. It is ironical that is in this day and age US elected representatives and so called thought leaders in the media are debating over who the US President should talk to or not talk to! As Fareed Zakaria points out, “the world has shifted from anti-Americanism to post-Americanism”. It’s about time the US got off its high horse and talked actively to countries around the world while they still want to talk to the US!

How out of tune with the future can John McCain, Hillary Clinton and others get? At a minimum Senator Obama deserves all the credit for at least bringing an independent forward-looking view to the discussion.

John Edwards’ Endorsement: Better Late than Never

Edwards ObamaJohn Edwards’ soon to be endorsement of Senator Obama is a good example of too little too late. It seems obvious that Senator Edwards was waiting to make sure he picks the ultimate likely nominee to back. His fear of backing the wrong candidate probably resulted in him waiting too long to make the call. His endorsement so late in the game comes across as an opportunistic move to do just enough (so as not to be deemed insignificant) as opposed to providing genuine whole-hearted backing. Not surprisingly as the WSJ reported:

People close to Mr. Edwards have said that he sees deep flaws in both Sens. Clinton and Obama. He thinks Sen. Obama lacks the fire to wage war against special interests in Washington, and objects that Sen. Clinton takes money from lobbyists and is part of the inside-the-beltway aristocracy, which he considers to be the problem with American politics.

From the Obama camps’ perspective, this endorsement would have come in handy prior to the West Virginia primary (or to help divert media attention at the height of the Rev Wright controversy) so some of Senator Clinton’s “hard-working white Americans who had not completed college” might have been convinced to switch camps. At the least, he could have helped narrow the embarrassing margin in West Virgina had he campaigned actively for Senator Obama. In any case, despite the delay in making the endorsement, it is a win-win situation for both men. From Senator Obama’s point of view, this is one more step in his claim to unite the Democratic party. As for Senator Edwards, this move was probably just enough for him to remain relevant and perhaps have a role to play in the event of an Obama Presidency.

Harbhajan, Sreesanth Get Off Easy

The BCCI’s quick decision to put “slapgate” to rest by issuing Harbhajan Singh a five ODI ban was as lame as it gets. It has been clearly established for the record that Harbhajan Singh slapped Sreesanth. Moreover, Harbhajan was captaining the Mumbai Indians when this happened! Without a doubt it was an awful on the field act for a sportsman. This is all the more a serious issue because cricket mania in India is at its peak. The game is flush with cash. On the field antics by players (particularly from India) is at an all time high. Yelling, screaming, making faces, using curse words and abusing the opposition seems to be the order of the day. The general perception these days is that if you don’t do any of these on the field you simply aren’t aggressive enough for the sport anymore. Unfortunately, these players are de facto role models that young aspiring sportsmen strive to emulate. Considering these aspects, the punishment meted out to Harbhajan comes across as a complete a joke. It was a perfect opportunity for the BCCI to send the message to all and sundry that such acts will not be taken lightly. A minimum of a one-year ban was in calling to say the least.

There also appears to be evidence to show that Sreesanth instigated the slap by abusing and taunting Harbhajan’s team mates despite a warning from him. It is shameful that Sreesanth got away with a mere warning letter! Both these players are notorious for their on the field behavior and the least the BCCI could do (armed with ample evidence) was to rein them in with a strong punishment. This would have sent a message not only to sports fans and cricketers in India but also to other cricketing bodies around the world that the BCCI is tough and firm when it comes to discipline. Instead the BCCI has chosen to use some meaningless “legalese” to quickly get past this shameful act.

Sudhir Nanavati, the BCCI’s probe commissioner on the incident, explained that though Harbhajan was guilty of a Level 4 offence under ICC rules, the punishment for physical assault prescribed in the Indian board’s rule book fell under a particular clause – 3.2.1, in this case. “It’s still a Level 4 offence, but the prescribed punishment is under this particular clause,” Nanavati told Cricinfo.

The whole point of a punishment is to deter future acts of a similar nature. It remains to be seen what effect this has on Bhajji and Sreesanth’s behavior in the future. It is highly unlikely however that this punishment will do anything at all to deter other hot heads of Indian cricket from staying within the bounds of acceptable on the field behavior.

Charu Sharma’s Firing: Accountability in Cricket?

Royal ChallengersThe firing of Charu Sharma the CEO of Royal Challengers is probably the first and quickest instance of action being taken against cricketing management. There is no question that thus far the Bangalore Royal Challengers have been a dismal flop on the field. None of the young local players have fired. Jacques Kallis who has been persisted with throughout seems completely unfit for T20. Dravid himself is struggling to find his feet in this form of the game. Sunil Joshi who has a history of being a good all rounder is way too over the hill. His sluggishness on the field makes him completely unfit for T20. Misbah, Cameroon White, and Boucher the leading T20 players among the lot haven’t been utilized to the best. In short, the Royal Challengers have been in complete disarray.

Based on the performance so far, it appears as though the basic theory that experienced players can adapt to T20 was flawed. Rahul Dravid and Martin Crowe are the proponents of this theory and ideally one of them should have been taken to task. Charu Sharma on the other hand was just a visible celebrity face to lead the management. Charu Sharma was fired perhaps to send a warning to the rest of the team that poor performance could have serious repercussions (or he might have been the easiest to get rid off given the nature of the contracts). Unfortunately, the Royal Challengers losing streak continues and appears unlikely to turn around despite coach Venkatesh Prasad’s claim that Bangalore should be among the top teams!

The best news about this recent move by Vijay Mallya to fire Charu Sharma is that Corporate India might be bringing in much needed accountability to the world of Indian cricket. Hopefully, some of it will rub off on the BCCI which is badly in need of some professional management.

Karts-N-Golf in Fremont

The Karts N Golf at the border of Fremont and Ardenwood is a nice place. If you are looking to host a birthday party for kids this place is worth considering. There is miniature golf, video games and the car rides. It does tend to get a little windy sometimes. The place is well-hidden unfortunately (just off of Ardenwood Blvd.,) so most people are not aware of its existence!

They also have have baseball batting cages. You can rent helmets and bats.

34805 Ardenwood Blvd., Fremont, CA 94555

A Sad Day for Bay Area Cricket

Around 4.45 pm on Saturday 4/19/2008 Syed Faqeer Ali died while playing cricket in Fremont. He was representing a local team in the Northern California Cricket Association (NCCA) league. He is survived by his wife and 3-year old son.

I have never met or seen Faaqer but have had the privilege of interacting with his Dad, Abid Ali a former Indian Test cricket player. I have very fond memories having played in the same cricket league in the past and naturally I was deeply disturbed to hear this news. My heartfelt condolences to his family.

NCCA is raising funds for Syed’s family. See news report in the Mercury News.

Techie Takes Plunge Into Politics

Ravi Krishna Reddy, formerly bay area based techie has returned to India to take the plunge into politics in India. He is contesting from Jayanagar in Bangalore as an independent candidate. Considering the sorry state of Karnataka politics the entry of some fresh blood can’t do any harm. He has managed to garner some decent press and raise some money, most of it over the internet to support his campaign. As per his bio, he was the former President (2005) of the Kannada Koota of Northern California. If you wish to contribute to his run for office, go here. You can check out some youtube videos of his in Kannada.

IPL: Trends in T20

tactics and strategy

T20 is clearly a new format and the strategies and theories that apply to other forms of the game don’t really belong here. In other words, there are no experts. With the IPL well underway the initial set of matches has shown a number of trends. The jury is still out on whether these trends signify long term patterns, but here are a few observations on what seems to work/not work in this new form of cricket.

Prolonged Stay At The Wicket Without A Healthy Run-rate Doesn’t Help

In 50 over ODIs, staying at the wicket almost always helps because acceleration at the end is possible for several reasons – the field team tires out, the batsmen are well set and seeing the ball well, the mindset is to contain runs rather than to take wickets etc. In T20 on the other hand, staying at the wicket in the hope that a burst at the end would be possible almost never works. This is especially true when batting second. Staying at the crease builds the pressure until sooner or later the batsmen launches one into orbit only to be caught on the boundary. Rahul Dravid’s innings against Delhi and Saurav Ganguly’s innings against Punjab, both being perfect examples of this failed strategy. Sustained consistent scoring is the order of the hour for T20. From the batting teams perspective any thing less than 7 runs in any over at any stage is bad.

Big Hitters Are Key

This might seem obvious. But the true impact of big hitting in T20 hadn’t been fully recognized until the IPL got underway. Matthew Hayden, MS Dhoni, Yusuf Pathan, Andrew Symonds, Mark Boucher, Adam Gilchrist, Virender Sehwag are examples of explosive hitters who had impressive success. Clearly, T20 is the format most suited to big hitters. A quick 20 runs in a handful of deliveries can make all the difference. A big-hitter is a better bet than a stylish technically sound batsmen, all else being equal. Bangalore is struggling because it has no big hitters (barring Taylor and Boucher). Besides, abandoning ones natural style and adjusting to T20 is next to impossible .

Its Best to Lead With Your Best Strikers

The initial 10 overs (when the field restrictions are in place in the first 6) is the best time to launch the best stroke players. No team has batted at a slow run-rate in the first 10 overs and made a big score by making up for it in the second half. Based on the ODI legacy several teams have opened with Dravid, Jaffer, Ganguly, VVS and others and have met with little success. On the other hand Virender Sehwag, Gautam Gambhir, McCullum have at least one explosive match winning innings each all of which started right at top of the innings. In T20 there is no such thing as “later”. Its all about how much one can score now. Saving your best strikers for the end is unlikely to help. Even if they succeed it could end up as too little too late. Abhishek Nayar batting so low in the order might be one reason the Mumbai team has been struggling so badly. Likewise, Bangalore has three huge overheads upfront in the batting order in Rahul Dravid, Wasim Jaffer and Jacque Kallis while Mark Boucher comes in often too late.

Spinners Can More Than Survive

Shane Warne’s has shown that a clever spinner can be a force in T20. Anil Kumble too did the same in his only outing. Muralitharan has put up a decent show as well. Piyush Chawla has shown shades of brilliance too. The more junior spinners have had limited success.

Without a doubt, experience counts when it comes to bowling in T20. The best bowling performances have come from the likes of McGrath, Warne, Murali Karthik and Jayasuriya. In a batsmen dominated game, bowlers can count, provided they have the experience to bowl with guile and control.

Experience and Traditional Good Batting Technique Doesn’t Really Help

Classical test players like Rahul Dravid, Jacque Kallis and Wasim Jaffer have no role in this form of the game. Likewise, Saurav Ganguly and VVS also fall into this category (not to mention their lack of agility as fielders). The short duration of these matches means that batsmen have to strike the ball from the get-go. There is no room to settle down. Observe how Matthew Hayden handled Pollock while Rahul Dravid almost gave him two maidens in a row. The ability to strike the ball fearlessly in the most unconventional ways and run hurriedly between wickets counts far more than traditional technique. In fact, traditional good technique almost always comes in the way of innovative stroke play. Not playing Misbah (who is known for his fighting spirit and creative stroke play) in the Bangalore team is a terrible mistake.

Cheer-leaders Just Don’t Fit In

Scantily clad women dancing to local filmy numbers simply doesn’t fit in to the T20. In fact, it makes a further mockery of an already highly packaged event. Delhi has already dumped this needless distraction. It won’t be in the least bit surprising of the other teams followed suit before the IPL winds to an end. I am surprised that women’s groups in India haven’t protested as yet.