Because Cricket Is the Greatest Teacher and Leveler!

Because Cricket Is the Greatest Teacher and Leveler

People often ask why I love cricket? Why it means so much more to me than just a sport.

My answer never changes: because cricket is the greatest teacher and leveler.

Every lesson of resilience, humility, teamwork, leadership that I’ve learned in over four decades of being associated with this game: first as a player for well over two decades, now as a selector, and hopefully someday as a coach, has come from this wonderful game. No sport writes better fairy tales or teaches grace in victory and composure in defeat like cricket.

It’s the one game that truly equalizes. It demands physical and mental toughness, but unlike football or rugby, where power and physical stature often dictate success, cricket allows skill, temperament, and timing to triumph over size and strength. A 155 cm batter can make a 190 cm bowler almost double their size, look helpless. The mind is the ultimate weapon. It is where calmness, adaptability, and timing decide who wins.

Yesterday, the world saw that truth.

From a country where the birth of a daughter was once met with silence, emerged a team that rewrote history. India’s women beat the mighty Australians in the semi-finals and then the valiant South Africans in the finals, to become World Champions. From a nation where girls are told to stay within boundaries even today, has come a team, that has broken them all.

They proved that strength isn’t measured in muscles or decibels, it’s measured in heart. Courage can be quiet, resilient and even invisible until truly tested, where self belief is the strongest muscle them of all.

And what better sub-plot to the whole story than the coach, Amol Muzumdar who in his prime was a goliath of the game in the domestic circuit, with over 11 000 first-class runs, never got given an India cap? This was his moment too, for hardly any of his peers probably ever got their arounds around a world cup trophy.

And then there was Shafali Verma, initially not picked in the side, chilling at home, egging her other team mates on, getting a last minute call to play the semi final and final, because Pratika Rawal the Indian opener was ruled out for the last two games due to injury. 

Cricket humbles the mighty, exalts the humble, and reminds us that the only thing truly out of reach is the one we stop reaching for.

So when people ask again, “Why cricket?”

The answer is simple - Because cricket is the greatest teacher and leveler.

#Cricket #TeamIndia #WorldChampions #WomenInSports #Leadership #Inspiration

Lord’s: The Home of Cricket and England’s Greatest Sporting Legacy

Given all the debate, there is, especially in India, on why it should not be only Lords that should host the finals of the World Test Championship, I make this humble submission as a fan of many things English. 

There are many places in the world where cricket is played, but none quite like Lord’s. It isn’t just a stadium—it’s a shrine. A cathedral of sport. For generations, the hallowed turf of Lord’s has hosted the game at its purest and most dignified. If cricket is a gentleman’s game, then this is where its soul resides.

The English can be credited with a few lasting contributions to the world: the English language, the tradition of afternoon tea, a certain cultural elegance—and, of course, the game of cricket. For those who may scoff at that statement, I say this: give up your shirts, trousers, jackets, and ties first. Much of the modern world still leans on the very legacy many are quick to critique.

To call the British heartless conquerors is, in my view, a convenient oversimplification. Many rulers from the land that was ancient India spent huge reserves of their courage and energy fighting amongst themselves. Don’t take my word for it — read up on the Marathas and their sweeping campaigns all the way to Bengal. Plunder and conquest were not unfamiliar themes in India's own history. If anything, the British were guilty of "Thinking BIG" — perhaps more bolder and certainly more conniving — than anyone else of their time. But I digress.

In my opinion, cricket, football, and rugby stand as the greatest sporting contributions the British have made to the world. These aren’t just games — they are metaphors for life: strategy, endurance, community, and passion. Football and Rugby were designed for winter’s grit and grind. One was for the gentleman, the other for the hooligan, one is told. Though these days, given the fan following and how the sport is actually played, you could be forgiven for wondering which was for who.

But cricket — ah, cricket — was made for summer. For long shadows on emerald lawns, for drifting clouds and lazy afternoons, punctuated by the polite clap of a sun-hatted crowd. It is a game that allows the world to slow down and observe grace in motion.

And nowhere captures the soul of summer cricket better than Lord’s. From the iconic red-brick Pavilion to the quirky slope of the pitch, from the hushed reverence of the Long Room to the rising cheer of the crowd—it is not merely a cricket ground. It is history. It is memory. It is ritual. It is beauty—layered over centuries, and still unfolding.

Lord’s is not just the home of cricket. It is where the spirit of the game lives, breathes, and belongs, now and forever! 

There's Nothing Wicked in the Wicket!

Its the end of day 2 and I have been hearing all this talk about this not being a good test wicket, so I decided to go through all the dismissals again and watch the highlights of both days before I conclude this is usually happens when batsmen come underprepared for the challenges they might expect in a certain country or conditions.

The easiest way out in such times is to blame the conditions than to reflect on ones own ability to counter them. To be fair, no English player has made such a comment and its more the middle of the road players who probably need some attention and find recourse in such banter. No less than Graeme Swann and Shane Warne have come out in full support of the pitches and the prerogative of the host team to prepare what suits them to win.

The Indians have been travelling to England for ages to bat on green tops that suited English fast bowlers who could swing and seam the ball with deadly outcomes. India have lost numerous series in England to England and dare I say on most occasions it was their batting that failed them.

Even now as India's record overseas starts to get better it is not just because the batsmen have become better at playing in conditions alien to them but also because India have a pace attack (and bench) as good as if not better than most countries. When was the last time England won two series down under, back to back? I rest my case.

Let me add another perspective. It was the same England that won the 5 test series against India in India in 2014 despite being 1-0 down at the end of the first two test's. It was thanks to the likes of Alastair Cook, Joe Root Ian Bell and a terrific player of spin, the now forgotten Gary Ballance who were ready to grind their way through and pile up a mountain of runs for their, as it turns out, deadly pair of Monty Panesar and Graeme Swann to rip through the Indian batsmen. The same wickets were not a problem then. Hey, the wicket was not a problem in the first test even

If we observe carefully, two batsmen have fallen to premeditated sweeps. The Dan Lawrence dismissal is a classic example of poor technique. He is a tall man who lunged forward to a ball that pitched at least 4-5 feet in front of his bat...the kind you should be going back to. Yes it kicked up from the rough but the technique itself was wrong and he played the wrong length. On a wicket where the ball has a tendency to jump, you keep your elbows and hands relaxed and play as much as possible on the backfoot. You only go forward to a ball that you can absolutely smother. It is something you learn growing up in conditions that support spinners, just as much as you learn to leave seaming deliveries growing up playing in England. A bad wicket is not one where the ball jumps up from time to time, but where you cannot tell if the next one is going to stay ankle high or go for the throat. The Chennai wicket has done nothing of that sort, as is evident from the way the Indians have batted in the second inning, thus far. Numerous wickets in this test have fallen to poor shots and full credit to the bowlers for inducing them. Virat Kohli trying to cover drive an off spinner in the 3rd ball of his inning, leaving a gap as wide as Marina Beach is a classic example to show that even the best can make mistakes. What really makes them the best however, is their ability to learn from those very mistakes. Whether England learn from their batting mistakes in this test or make an even bigger one by not addressing them by paying undue attention to the sound bytes about the wicket, only time will tell.

Winning The Right Way - 25th March 2019

The IPL has kicked off and as always we are in for a display of the most amazing cricket skills, tricks and athleticism from the world’s best players on show.  

The league always evokes immense passion from all of its fans, no matter which team they are supporting. 

Kings XI Punjab were at the center of high drama this week, in their opening game against Rajasthan Royals on the 25^th of March. 

Their captain Ravichandran Ashwin dismissed an dangerous looking Jos Butler who was batting on 69 and all signs looked like he would win the game for the Royals.

Ashwin did so by “Mankading” him out which is a term used to describe the bowler running out a batsman at the non-strikers end. 

The analysis paralysis aside, there are the laws of cricket and there is what players have been known to call the “code of conduct” or the “spirit of cricket”. 

MCC have stated that Ashwin has not violated the spirit of cricket in any way, but I am going to respectfully disagree. The spirit of the game is what you cannot put down on paper in the first place. 

So for them to even suggest whether or not it is in violation is transgressing onto the domain of the ambiguous.

It is a fact that the rules allow for Ashwin to run Butler out if he finds him out of the crease at any point in time of his delivery before the final point of delivery. It is also fact that he is not required to warn Butler or caution him. 

It is also fact that this is not the first time that Jos Butler has been run out this way. He was run out similarly in 2014 by Sachithra Senanayake in a one day international against Srilanka. You would think the man would have learned by now!

But then there is what I personally like to call a code of conduct that players impose by themselves upon themselves.

It is what separates the greatest from other champions who believe in winning at any cost.

That unwritten code of conduct would have had a bowler “warn” Butler that some part of him or his bat needs to be grounded in the crease until the ball is released.  

That is what Courtney Walsh did in the semi-final of the 1986 when a place in the semi-final was on the line. He could have run out the non-striker in the final over of the game and his team would have won. Instead he chose to caution the batsman, got hit the next ball costing his team the game, leading to their exit from the world cup. 

Walsh lost the game on that day but won hearts of almost everyone the world over. 

Ashwin has a following of die-hard fans who have jumped to his defense, but I doubt his actions would be adding to that list in great numbers, at least for now. 

There is a price we all pay for winning at all costs. What the price in this case will be, only time will tell. 

When Sport & Politics Collide - 08 March 2019

In an article dated July 20, 2018 last year I had asked a question, “Can Cricket Learn from Football?” 

The gist of it was about the evolution of the game of cricket from one that centers around a few countries and their respective boards controlling the game to suit them than the real globalization of it. 

Cricket as it stands today, is at the cusp of becoming a global game, involving leagues across many nations. This in turn brings the risk of a significantly lesser opportunity for inter-country ties.

I personally don’t have a problem with that, after all, there is only that many times I can watch India play Australia in a span of 6 months, be it in India or down under. 

The ICC seems to be taking a step in that direction by offering to put forward a more uniform policy for T20 leagues across the globe citing the proliferation of private leagues in member countries as a primary cause for concern. 

This concern is particularly valid for countries who struggle to get their top players to represent the country especially from a monetary standpoint. 

A working committee of the ICC consisting of BCCI CEO Rahul Johri, Kevin Roberts (Australia), Thabang Moroe (South Africa), Johnny Grave (West Indies), Tony Brian (Scotland) and Tony Irish (FICA) has been put together to work on concerns from member nations with regards to the matter. 

The ICC seems to hold the view that these leagues might be poorly resourced and lack the structure that might make them sustainable from a long term perspective, which in turn may not support the investment into or the growth and development of the game. 

Additionally the challenges it would present around corruption, failed leagues or the non-payments of stakeholders could further damage cricket’s global reputation.

The ICC claims to recognize the importance of these leagues and see’s the need to have them if staged in “partnership with members” and is those last three words that put the whole idea on a slippery slope. 

The BCCI treasurer Anirudh Chaudhary, in a recent statement, took a firm position of not allowing any kind of intervention by the ICC in India’s domestic T20 competition. Using verbiage like “minimum criteria” and “defined framework” the ICC were being nothing but “good with words” he claimed.

“They see that for their purposes, BCCI as an organization in this period of transition is not the force that it was” he further added calling it an intrusion of the BCCI’s sovereignty. 

Chaudhary may not be wrong in what he says. The ICC could do well by staying out of the affairs of countries such as India, England and Australia who probably contribute 80-90% of all cricketing revenue generated. 

None of these countries need it’s “engagement” to run their domestic cricket or their leagues.  Instead, the game would be well served if they focused their attention on boards that are challenged from an infrastructure or financial standpoint. 

ICC Chief Executive Dave Richardson may try and allay concerns by saying the ICC are not looking to interfere in the IPL, as much as he wants. But I doubt the BCCI or any major board would see their participation in it any other way.

The timing of the ICC communications on the subject of “monitoring” T20 leagues worldwide could not have come at a more awkward time given their recent exchanges with the BCCI.

Post the gruesome terrorist attacks on an Indian military convoy in Pulwama, which cost the lives of more than 40 CRPF servicemen, the Chief of the Committee of Administrators (CoA) of the BCCI Vinodh Rai, is known to have asked its CEO Rahul Johri to write a letter to the ICC asking them and other cricketing nations to “severe ties” with countries from where “terrorism emanates”.   

His colleague Diana Eduljee however disagreed with this approach, putting her, not for the first time at logger heads with Rai, making the CoA look disjointed and dysfunctional, yet again.  

I do not believe India or any country for that matter has the right to ask for the dismissal of another country from a global tournament. 

The only option for any nation is to take a stand and exercise their right to boycott playing that other nation OR in extreme cases, not participate in the tournament at all. The latter of course would have severe sporting and financial implications for BCCI and ICC respectively. 

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) recently suspended all Indian applications to host future events and urged international sports federations to not stage competitions in the country after two Pakistani shooters were denied visa’s to participate in the world championship to be hosted in Delhi. 

That said, the cricketing world is different and India has enormous clout over the ICC. 

It would be a brave man in the ICC who decides to consider banning India as a likely host for future events or even as a future participant if they do not chose to play all their opponents without reservation. 

The ICC should know because they have already been down the of “warning” the BCCI once, last December, with the possibility of the Indian board losing the rights to host the 2023 world Cup and 2021 Champions Trophy.

At the center of that dispute was the matter amounting to $23 Mln that the ICC claimed from the BCCI after the government of India did not waive off taxes as promised for the 2016 World T20 in India. 

They had given the BCCI a deadline of December 31, 2018 which has come and gone, but the matter remains unresolved and “under discussion”. 

On the subject of whether or not India should play in the world cup or play and yet forfeit the game against Pakistan, not just in the league but in the semi’s or the final even?  The BCCI have finally done the right thing by leaving that entire decision to the government of India to decide. 

After all, as the headline of a recent article by Suresh Menon in the Hindu read “What makes cricketing sense may not be desirable politically”.

Unfair To Call Pujara "Cheater"

(Similar to my article published in Tabla Singapore Jan 31, 2019)

On Feb 20, 1985, India and Pakistan started their campaign in the third match of the Benson & Hedges World Championship of cricket at the Melbourne Cricket Ground.

India had stunned the whole world by winning the Prudential World Cup in England, less than two years ago, their fans were hopeful of an encore.

They had then managed to not only stop the West Indian juggernaut from making it three world cups in a row but had given a glimpse into their limited overs prowess by beating the Caribbean side  twice in that world cup. 

They also beat Australia once, Zimbabwe twice and the hosts England in the semi-final.

But their form thereafter been quite indifferent to say the least and nobody gave them even an outside chance of doing well at the Benson & Hedges World Championship of Cricket. 

Pakistan was bundled out for 183, a paltry total one would think, but then no total is small when you have the Imran Khan in full flight. Soon enough he had India reeling at 27/3.

Indian stalwart Sunil Gavaskar had decided to bat at No. 5 in this tournament with the objective of lending the middle order some stability and he joined M. Azharuddin who carried on the sublime form of his debut against England less than 3 months ago.

Early in his innings, Gavaskar edged a ball from Rashid Khan to wicket keeper Anil Dalpat. Up went the bowler, keeper and almost every Pakistani at the ground.

But the umpire did not hear it. He probably was the only one on that day who didn’t. More importantly he was the only one whose opinion mattered.

Gavaskar, a batsman with a reputation for walking, stood his ground. He went on to score 54, putting on 132 runs with Azharuddin for the fourth wicket and taking India safely towards a win. 

He later admitted there were two teams he never walked against, Pakistan and (Mumbai Club Side) Mafatlal, his biggest rivals.

The debate of whether to walk or not is probably as old as the game itself. Stories of the great W G Grace and his absolute hatred for walking make for very interesting reading.

Sure a lot more batsmen walked in past, when the game was not as “professional” or the primary livelihood of players. Today, there is a lot on the line. Success is worth a lot more than the reputation garnered for being honest.

It was disappointing to see the crowds at the Chinnaswamy stadium in Bengaluru on Jan 27 booing Cheteshwar Pujara with chants of “cheater…cheater” during the Ranji Trophy semi final. 

India's most prolific batsman during the recent test series against Australia was clearly out, edging a catch to wicket-keeper Srinivas Sarath off the bowling of R Vinay Kumar. But umpire Saiyed Khalid ruled not out and Pujara did not walk. In the first innings too, apparently, he was out caught behind and he had not walked. 

I have debated these incidents with numerous friends across multiple social media platforms. Needless to say, most of them were from Bengaluru or supported the Karnataka side and felt Pujara should have walked, both times!

My stand on the issue of walking is simple. It is entirely up to the batsman. 

The umpires job is to determine if the batsman is out or not out. I have no recollection of any opponent ever calling me back when i was given out wrongly.

It was good to see commentator Harsha Bhogle make a very similar point when decoded the Pujara episode on Cricbuzz. He asked if Karnataka captain Manish Pandey would have recalled a batsmen who was unfairly given out caught behind. 

In fact one has to go back to the one off Jubilee Test between India and England at Mumbai's Wankhede Stadium in February 1980 to witness such magnanimity from a captain. 

England were 58/5 in response to India’s first innings total of 242 and umpire Hanumantha Rao, gave Bob Talyor out caught behind off the bowling of Kapil Dev.

But India's captain GR Vishwanath indicated Taylor was not out and recalled the batsman

Taylor went on to score 43 of 180 balls and featured in a partnership of 171 runs with man of the match Ian Botham who scored 114. England got a lead of 54 in the first innings and went on to win the test by 10 wickets.

For all their displeasure at the poo umpiring, Karnataka benefited just as much in their Elite Group A match against Vidarbha last November.

As many as 5 “dubious” decisions went their way, prompting Vidarbha to raise the issue of poor umpiring with the Indian cricket board. 

Karnataka scraped through that game with a draw, but their luck ran out in the semi-final. Vidarbha are now preparing to play Saurashtra in the final. 

The game is the greatest leveler and it is bigger than any individual or team.

Noted West Indian umpire Steve Bucknor retired with an appeal of his own. “Leave the decision making in the hands of the on field officials”. 

He wasn't suggesting that technology should not be involved. Such was his understanding of the pressures of umpiring that he felt the umpires should be allowed to check with a third umpire as long as it helped them arrive at the right decision.

“I have nothing against experiment’s and we know when decisions are tight. Umpires can make mistakes, and these decisions can be costly” he said.

To take walking any indication of a cricketer’s integrity is an unfair proposition. A sportsman acquire's his  reputation by the way he plays the game over an entire career and not what he does on one afternoon. 

The most consistent of “walkers” have been involved in the most horrible of appeals, when fielding.

Australian Adam Gilchrist appealed with his team mates when the ball came off Sachin’s shoulder during a DLF cup match with India in Kuala Lumpur in 2006. 

English umpire Mark Benson realized his mistake and recalled the batsman, much to the angst of Australian captain Ricky Ponting. 

Australia not only went on to win the match but the tournament, which tells you how good a team they were.

The advent of technology has made the game as fair as possible.

The challenge now for the authorities is to get the technology in as deep into the system as possible - to ensure players have fair outcomes across all levels.

It's time for the spectators to stop judging sportsmen or writing them off as cheats and instead focus on admiring their skills. 

After all, times change and so do our opinions.

Setting High Standards!

As Published in #TablaSingapore on January 18, 2019

It seems like ages ago when the video of the Indian cricket team celebrating their first Test series win in Australia at their hotel lobby was going viral over social media. The young man in that video, with Calypso-like dance moves, was Hardik Pandya.

Seven days later, and the Indian all-rounder is the face that probably nobody wants to see.

The world no longer moves in days, hours or minutes. It moves at the speed of the Internet. There is very little margin for error and almost no hope for a redemption – not a quick one anyway.

On the Indian TV show Coffee with Karan, Pandya not only managed to sound borderline racist but he was also unabashedly misogynist, adding how his family was “proud of him”.

Opener Lokesh Rahul has not had much else to do lately than to play sidekick, both on and off the field. He made up for the absence of a live audience by applauding Pandya and his parents, calling them the coolest one could ever meet.

There is something about bullying, racism, misogyny and sexual abuse that represent the lowest ebb of human conscientiousness, and, almost always, where one raises its head, the others are not far behind.

Working with some of the best leaders in Asia for over two decades, the one thing I have found them to have in common is a zero threshold for tolerance when dealing with any of these, regardless of age, experience, educational or social background and even the gender of the perpetrator.

The Australian Prime Minister Malcom Turnbull had called #Sandpapergate (the ball-tampering scandal involving the Australian team during the third Test against South Africa in Cape Town in March last year) a disgrace.

A senior business leader in Sydney responded to my comment on the sentence meted out to the players involved (captain Steve Smith and vice-captain David Warner were suspended from playing for Australia for 12 months and opener Cameron Bancroft for nine months) as being too harsh by saying: “We want to keep the bar high and the message unambiguous. Australians will not stand for cheating.”

Big words, I had thought to myself. But then how else can a group of people achieve greatness if not by setting themselves the highest standards and the most audacious goals?
There is no law against what Pandya said on the show, or maybe there is. I am no legal expert. To me the more important element is how a society responds to racism and misogyny even in its most passive form.

For me, when a player representing his country talks openly about how women are objects or trophies that he has accumulated, it reflects poorly not just on him but his team-mates and everything his team stands for. Parents who applaud such dialogues and behaviour reflect on the larger society they represent.

What started as a show-cause notice has now become a personal mission for Diana Eduljee, the only female in the Indian board’s committee of administrators. One can sense her need to stand up for her gender, given how it was belittled by Pandya’s raunchy comments.

Good luck to her in trying to get anywhere in what is otherwise a severely male-infested domain.

I was glad to read, however, the comments by India’s captain Virat Kohli, who made it absolutely clear that the remarks by Pandya and Rahul were theirs alone and not a reflection on the side’s thinking.

There has been a remarkable transformation in Kohli’s persona, particularly in the way he communicates, over the past two months. He now speaks like a man who knows himself and every member of the side as well.

He talks like leaders would about culture being the driver of actions and integrity being the cornerstone of their efforts.The results are beginning to show. This is just the start he says and he sounds convincing.

There is no room for prima donnas or people obsessed with their own performances in this Indian side. They are showing glimpses of becoming very much like the Australian sides of the ‘90s and early 2000s especially in one-day cricket, where Kohli has a win ratio of close to 75 per cent as captain.

But he is not happy with this being the case for a season or a year. He wants it to be sustained for a long time. He has set the bar high, very high. All teams suffer a slide from time to time. What separates good teams from great ones is how quickly they get back up and start marching again.

The first one-dayer against Australia last Saturday saw an Indian side that looked rusty. It was a slow track at Sydney and credit must be given to the Australians for putting up a very disciplined batting effort – 288 proved to be a more-than-adequate total.

Rohit Sharma welcomed the arrival of his baby girl with a splendid 133 and put on 137 runs for the fifth wicket with M.S. Dhoni. But it is always a tough task chasing a big score when you are three wickets down with four runs on the board.

Dhoni looked woefully out of sorts getting to 51 from 96 balls. One could see that he lacked match practice as were the cases with Bhuvaneswar Kumar and Khaleel Ahmed with the new ball earlier in the day. Left-arm spinner Kuldeep Yadav was the pick of the bowlers, taking 2 for 54 from his 10 overs.

Having lost the first one-dayer by 34 runs, the Indians faced a must-win situation going into the second one on Tuesday in Adelaide, which is fast becoming a popular hunting ground for the Indians.

Bhuvi dismissed Australian captain and opener Aaron Finch yet again, bowling him through the gates for six to kick of proceedings for India. Any signs of rustiness were gone.

He then bowled what I thought was the over of the match – when he got rid of the dangerous Glenn Maxwell and the well-set Shaun Marsh with the third and fifth ball of the 48th over.

That one over proved to be the difference in chasing a score of 325 versus 299, which India eventually rattled up in 49.2 overs.

No butterflies this time round for the Indian batsmen as Shikhar Dhawan and Rohit got India off to a flier. There were partnerships ( 47, 54, 59, 82 and 57*) for every wicket as India finished on 299-4.

This Indian batting line-up has two of the best finishers in limited-overs cricket in Kohli and Dhoni. Both average a staggering 99.04 and 99.85 in 72 and 77 successful run chases respectively.

Dhoni has two and Kohli 21 centuries in such chases, but that is more an outcome of where they bat. Kohli played one of his most sublime innings to bring up his 39th one-day hundred. Needless to say, he was immensely disappointed to not be there at the end.

Dhoni did what he does best, by batting till the end. He found terrific support from Dinesh Karthik, who is fast developing a reputation as a finisher too.

Together they remained calm and collected, as they knocked off the remaining runs in an unbroken 57 run partnership to set up a series decider today in Melbourne.

It was a clinical performance by an Indian side who responded to their captain’s call for setting high standards and achieving greatness both on and off the field.

Hopefully, those aspiring to play for India, will now understand what it will take to rank among them.