Much of a muchness
FROM THE STANDS
S R Khelkoodkar
This was a week for sports that, if you were to look back six months later, you would have difficulty distinguishing from any other week. Aside from some more inconsequential reporting on the forthcoming football World Cup, most stories could easily have been lifted from, say, a February issue.
It is as if sports writers went to a restaurant where they could order their story of choice from a reasonable variety of issues. Some chose to sample new dishes, as it were, but the majority stuck with the tried-and-tested.
"I`ll start with a Ganguly, please." The Telegraph, with an interview of Kiran More, chairman of selectors, seemed very clear about its taste. According to Mr. More, "the decision (to drop Sourav) was based on merit. It was a unanimous decision of the five-member selection committee." Also, said the Telegraph, `[More] said their (Sourav and others who have been dropped) exclusion did not mean that the door was closed on them forever and they could come back to the team provided they gave better performances.` You would not be blamed for thinking this is December 2005.
Not to be outdone, the Hindustan Times ordered similarly, this time via an interview with Raj Singh Dungarpur. According to them, `"Chances of Ganguly making a comeback to the national team are remote since the present bunch of players are performing well as reflected in the success of the team recently," Dungarpur told (sic).`
"A side order of burn-out." Mr Dungarpur had some things to say on the burn-out issue as well. According to the paper, `he admitted that the number of matches had increased over the years resulting in more injuries and stress on the players and suggested a rotation policy to solve the problem. "While hectic scheduling of the cricket calendar is an issue for the International Cricket Council to work out, it is feasible for teams to consider a rotation policy to give adequate rest to players during a series or tournament," he said.`
That`s not all on burn-outs, however, although the other story on the matter at least provided a novel perspective. Of all people, Sir Elton John has views on the issue that were faithfully reported by several newspapers. Said a UNI report in the Hindustan Times, among other places, `Even as authorities governing cricket pay little heed to the burn-out issue, the players have found an unlikely sympathiser in Sir Elton John, who sounded music to their ears by saying that cricketers were playing too many games.`
The rest of the article was about Sir John`s cricket escapades, and had little to do with burn-outs. This, if anything, must surely classify as a colossal waste of space.
Thankfully not everybody chose to accept such bland fare (although I sometimes wonder whether this is truly a reason to be thankful). The Telegraph, as usual, managed to spice things up with a little dose of intrigue and a few pot-shots at the BCCI. `Any visiting team would have raved and ranted had the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) scheduled practice sessions around 30kms from the team hotel. The West Indies Cricket Board (WICB) has done just that, but neither Rahul Dravid nor Greg Chappell can complain.`
Why can`t they complain? `Reason being nobody in the BCCI studied Team India`s schedule in a manner Cricket Australia or the England & Wales Cricket Board would have done. There`s one office-bearer who keeps talking about the millions the BCCI is earning, but he should first ensure that the players` on-tour comforts are looked after. Indeed, Sharad Pawar and his team must get the basics right.`
As if that was not direct enough, `If the mandarins back home can`t push for simple things, they should at least stop bending backwards to oblige touring teams. "Is anybody really bothered about us?" asked one of the stars in a chat with The Telegraph. He answered himself: "No."`
An interesting aftertaste to a dull meal, you have to agree.