Gilly's Gilli-Danda

Adam Gilchrist's autobiography has been out. Read the cricinfo report here. Well, the opening is just as his batting: exhilarating. What else can you say about someone who can destroy a bowling attack of {Donald, Ntini, Nel} combo (See here). Gilchrist's book talks about Shane Warne, Slater, etc. The main thing we are concerned about are those that involve Sachin Tendulkar. He has supposedly said couple of things about Tendulkar.

1. He questioned Tendulkar's evidence in favor of Harbhajan Singh whether Bhajji called Symonds a 'Monkey'.
2. He has also said Tendulkar was "hard to find for a changing-room handshake after Indian was beaten"

I agree with Gilly on the first point. Tendulkar essentially lied to protect his teammate Bhajji, from what could have been the end of his career. What Gilchrist has said is only the partial truth. The whole truth is the fact that Symonds (and few othe Aussie players) picked on Harbhajan, when Bhaji was just minding his own business. Symonds had no business to talk to Harbhajan since they already had plenty in the plate.....previous episodes. It was nothing, but a set-up to make Harbhajan say that particular word. Well, Bhaji, not so cunning in anything other than off-spin bowling(slap), fell in the trap. I don't understand what else Gilchrist expected from Tendulkar. That Australian team was the most despicable ever, and Gilly wants to play Gilli-Danda with Bhajji's career. May be he wanted to hear Tendulkar's kiddish voice saying,"Gilly bhai is right, Harbhajan said that word". In that case, why can't Gilly come clean about the whole episode - the aussie trap for Bhajji, and what was said by Symonds, Hayden and the punter. Considering all these, Gilly should either keep his mouth shut or say the whole truth.

The second comment is very close to get a thumps-up from me; but not quite there. Gilchrist basically says that Indians shouldn't be complaining that Aussies didn't offer handshake with Kumble/Sharma after the Syndney test - because Tendulkar and Bhajji hide themselves whenever India loses. Personally I believe the teams that lose are better left alone, by their own choice to reflect upon the loss. So, the winning team shouldn't complain if the team that lost the match is not available for a handshake. On the contrary, the more serious issue is that when a team wins a match, and celebrates so much so that they forget to offer handshakes to the losing team members - In my book, the second scenario is more serious sportsmanship than the first. Well, it is no wonder Gilly complains about this since he often ended up in the winning team. For him, it might look strange when Tendulkar or Bhajji is so disappointed and wanting to have some time alone, because Gilchrist didn't have to do that often. For Gilly to be talking about loss, it is like a life-long rich man talking about hunger. Well, Gilly, you've got it wrong again. I wish Gilly didn't retire that early - may be he'll have some those moments when he wants to get into the cold shower just to avoid handshakes from Indians after Aussies get thrashed. Gilly has made a good decision on his retirement timing!!!

In my own experience, I encountered only one team that actually acted so disgracefully on the cricket field. When we were chasing, we lost many wickets too soon and were at the brink of defeat with our 11th man batting. That opposition team members realizing that we didn't not have any chance to win, crowded the batsman, every one of them and started a big bantering on that batsman - they just humiliated that 11th man. As you might know, the history repeats itself; The same team got thrashed - really thrashed by our team with in a matter of 1 month. When that happened, all of them tucked their tails between their legs; When their stumps were shattered, they ran like rats, and finally ended up in the hole. After that match, I refused to handshake with any one from that team. Cricket is a sport - I understand when players occasionally cross the limit..but the captain has to reign in. There are certain occasions when some captains/team members are better categorized as rats - not gentlemen. Handshakes are unnecessary in such cases.

I am not sure what Gilchrist perceives himself or his teammates to be.

- Brownstone Cricketer.

PS: Gilli-Danda is an India sport - popular among youth rather than adults.

The Sydney Saga and the Spirit of Cricket

If it is not a law, what is it then? I mean, 'Spirit of Cricket'. Is there a set of rules that govern the spirit of cricket? Well, it is not hard to realize that only lack of such rules create the notion of spirit of cricket. Otherwise, they would be simply be termed 'laws of cricket'.

After that Sydney test between Austraila and India, this topic has gained lots of attention. Especially after Kumble uttered (i.e., repeated) those historically important words, "only one team played in the spirit of the game". I was told this remark evoked plenty of claps from journalists in that press room. In contrast to the Indian captain, Pointing was adamant that he or his Australian team did nothing wrong to deserve such a comment from Kumble. Oops, Ponting had committed a mistake of his life right there. He is simply the best batsman in terms of attacking the opposition, scoring quick runs, and importantly, winning matches. With just sticking to his one view, and blinded by his team's heavy success, he obviously couldn't see the other side of the argument. I believe Australia will struggle with this 'spirit of cricket' for more years to come, considering the fact that MJ Clarke (the street cheat cricketer of next era) will be captaining Australia.

Overall, it was a reality check. Australia was never blamed before for their win-or-nothing attitude, and that match showcased their sickening on-field actions beautifully for everyone to see. In retrospect, I feel that India's loss was a good thing. Otherwise, I am sure the rest of the events would've unfolded quite differently to what we have seen.

So, the main question is what is 'spirit of cricket (SOC)'. The answer is not simple. If you start listing things that are against the SOC, believe me, the list is endless. And similarly, you can't list all that are for the SOC. Personally, I feel that whenever someone uses a statement, "by the laws of cricket..." as the ONLY ONE defense for the actions done on a cricket field, then most likely the spirit of cricket is thrown to gutter, and that player is left with only laws to defend himself.

Consider the famous underarm incident. The rule was not in place to call the underarm ball a no-ball. Gregg "Evil" Chappell knew about this, and used it well for his team's victory. At the end of the day, Gregg could have simply said, "By law, it was a legal ball", and end the argument. There was nothing else to justify that ugly, and dirty trick. Same thing applies to the body line series.

Second recent incident that I could recall dates back to 1999, India-Pakistan test @ Calcutta. India was chasing ~270 in the 4th innings. Sachin hit 3 runs of Shohaib, and got runout only because Shohaib (unintentionally) pushed him out of the crease while backing up the throw. Pakistan team appealed, and Sachin was rightly given out, technically speaking. However, Pakistan captain Wasim Akram didn't have the decency to recall Sachin, which I found to be against the spirit of cricket. How Akram could have defended himself? Use the phrase, "by laws of cricket, Sachin was out...blah blah". It was highly inappropriate gesture from Akram. [ He should have simply recalled Sachin. I am sure Sachin would've got out immediately. OR he would've scored a century, and got a back pain, and got out. Eventually India would've lost, and Sachin would have picked up his another man-of-the-match-India-lost award].

Now, to the critical question: If a batsman does not walk, is that against the 'spirit of cricket'? Of course not. It is the umpires duty to judge the appeal, and decide. After that Sydeny test, there were many articles (most from Indian press) saying, "Ponting, MJ Clarke , Symonds all stood their ground when they were clearly out. How could any one trust their word on catches?". I found this silly. Consider this: In a recent ODI between India and Australie, Sachin nicked a ball from Clark, and he stood his ground. Eventually he was not given out. He didn't walk, does that mean Sachin is a liar? Probably not. Walking and not-walking should never be used in the context of 'Spirit of cricket'. It is the choice of the batsmen, and it is mainly individual one. Sometimes, it is even dependent on the opposition team [who would want to walk against Australia?] or score.

'Spirit of cricket' has to do with what people do when things they do are not against the laws, but anyone playing cricket in good spirit wouldn't do that.

Delaying things to avoid a defeat (Pakistan did it against England, but Eng won anyway), throwing the ball at the batsman while pretending to run him out, sledging using personal matters, deliberately running down on the pitch to help spinners (you get warned though), slow things down purposefully, bowling well wide of the off-stumps consistently to reduce the run-rate in tests, starting the run-up before batsman is ready (MJ Clarke's top ball)......plenty you can add.

Coming back to the Sydney test, it is clear that Pointing conned Kumble somehow to have an agreement that the close catches would be decided by the fielding captain & his fielders. How naive of Kumble to trust those dirty characters (read Australian team) in cricket? It is of course not thief's mistake if he steals your money. This only came to strike Kumble when Ponting appealed for his grounded catch of Dhoni, and MJ Clarke claimed a catch he clearly grounded. By rule, Kumble had to accept those decisions because he had agreed with Ponting to trust the fielder's call. However, this was against the spirit of cricket because MJ Carke or Ponting could have easily preferred to ask the third umpire. Instead, their greed for win blinded their eyes, and to say, "they acted as cons" is very much appropriate. However, if you ask me, I find Kumble as the guilty party. Leaving the door open for thieves, and then shouting for justice is childish.

Nevertheless, Kumble should be congratulated for leading the team bravely after that fiasco. He has once again shown what a great cricketer he is.

- Brownstone Cricketer.

Dissecting Dravid's brain: If such a thing exists ....

WARNING: Let me warn you first if you are a Dravid fan: Don't read further. Either you'll feel depressed to see some blatant truths about Dravid's brain or unwantedly get high BP about this article. Either way, it's not good for health. For the rest of the thinking population, you have the green signal to go ahead & enjoy this.

Dravid's batting in the first test of Aus 2007 series is a study of a unread book. The problem is that the book is blank as his brain. It is not hard to write a book of no shots, and indeed it is empty. What is cricket without actually hitting the ball? That innings reminded some acute observers, including myself, those olden days when Dravid was well known for his half-an-inch-outside-offstump-well-left, and the-not-a-penny-worth-rock-solid-defense. Dravid, the name itself sparked emotions from the innocuous cricket balls since only he took care of them properly, by simply not hitting them. The likes of Pollock, Donald, and Akthar had to think twice to bowl at him....just to not waste their energy in runups: anyhow, he was going to beautifully (as described by the Sunny-another-darvid-Gavaskar) leave lot of balls. why run so long...!

Somehow he transformed himself to a better player, and remained in both the ODI and the Test team. Those periods were his golden era. He played the balls on their merit, and scoring runs was back on his priority list. And now, suddenly he is back to his old & useless self.

Any batsman, at the start of his innings , defends few balls to get set, and then starts playing his shorts. Sometimes, when a wicket falls or a particular bowler is bowling a testing over, it is okay to defend few more balls. Dravid's mind somehow gets the idea that every ball by an australian bowler is a threat to his wicket, and he is the last wicket OR has it got a wrong idea that runs are measured by how many minutes he stays at the wicket?? OR has it taken his nick 'wall' literally?

The pure joy for hate-dravid-as-captain-club people is to watch him captain the side during an ODI in the first 15 overs. Since there's a freedom of placing catching fielders anywhere in that 15 yard circle, he's usually confused like hell. He'll remove the 2nd slip, and the next ball would fly through 2nd slip for 4. So immediately he'll move the short cover to 2nd slip, and the next ball would go down as chance at cover......overall, he simply didn't have any gameplan as captain. Now, by playing like a brain-dead batsman, sweat-like-crazy-for-scorning-5-runs-in-11-overs, eat-balls-like-kumbakarna, score-20-runs-play-30-overs....he has shown that he can't have a gameplan as a batsman too. Let no one say 'Dravid is a class act' as he's only fit for closet (something else fits here nicely, but this blog is a neat place you know).

Looking at this in any angle, it is hard to fathom what was his mind upto. Only he'll know. Till then his batting remains an empty book. Simply nothing!

THREE CHEERS TO VIRTUAL REALITY

14 runs were needed off the last over. This was a match befitting of a final. Yagna was given the task of bowling the last over. Punjabi Pride was definitely hanging in there hoping that they could pull of a dramatic victory. I must admit I was a little nervous and was biting my nails when Yagna started running in to bowl the last over. Yagna was slightly off color and had bowled his fair share off wides in the game. But he delivered when it mattered the most; five good balls yielded only seven runs. Seven runs off the last ball. What a fitting climax to the tournament. Six to tie the match. I had a word with Chintan asking him what would happen if the match ended in a tie. A bowl out was what he said with a chuckle. I was pretty sure that we would win the match, but being a pessimist the thought of a bowl out crossed my mind. Yagna ran up to bowl the last ball, hearts in my mouth. It was a good length delivery, and the batsman wildly swung his bat, but connected only the few mosquitos flying around. Sreeram safely collected the ball, and removed the bails, just in case batsmen attempted a run. No run was scored on that last ball and we had silenced the Punjabi Pride!! We were champions again. Wow…

Dead, buried and written off a few weeks back, playing spirited cricket when it mattered the most, the Virtual Reality bounced back from the ignominy of being dumped out of the tournament even before the knock out stages began to convincingly beat Team Waqas and PUCC in the quarters and semis and then defeat Punjabi in a close encounter.

Earlier Appu won the toss and elected to bat. It was good that we won the toss as he had batted well in the semis and quarters running impressive scores when it mattered the most.Appu and Yagna started off. Yagna was soon run out (for the umpteenth time). Bharath joined Appu at the middle. Bharath was in irresistible form, striking the ball brilliantly. His six being the pick of his shots left us wonderstruck. This was the best we had seen him bat. The innings quickly picked up momentum Appu at the other end started off slowly with a few delicate slices. Appu was all elegance, shifting gears with an effortless six and an amazing flick which brought him a boundary. Runs started to flow, as Punjabi Pride wilted under the onslaught. The bowling looked sub standard, the fielding looked ragged as the two of them made merry at their expense. Their partnership of about 75 finally ended when Bharath was run out. The two of them were playing so well that a run out was the only way they could have got out. A soon visibly tired Appu soon followed him back, after a well made 42. The two had propelled us to a total with which we could not lose. Punjabi Pride were in run containment mode, their fielding once again let them when Moorthy and Jaggu ran four runs off the last bowl. From our point of view it was a fitting end to our innings. We finished at 102. We were definitely in pole position at the end of the first innings. It was up to us to bowl and more importantly field well.

We knew that Punjabi Pride had nothing to lose and will definite
ly come out fighting. That is exactly what happened.Jay and aditya looked comfortable against both Moorthy and Jaggu. Though runs were not coming a t very fast rate, they played sensibly keeping wickets in hand. Jaggu was looking slightly off colour. They were up to 38 when there was Appu decided to have a bowl. It was a crucial time in the match. It was evenly matched probably we were slightly ahead at that time. The change soon worked as Appu and Sriram combined together to remove Aditya. Yagna then had a bowl. It was definitely not Yagna’s best performance with the ball .He was inconsistent initially with his line sliding down the leg a couple of times. We got a lucky break when Ronak tried pulling a short one from Yag only ended up with a top edge which came straight to me. Unfortunately for him, I held on to the catch. Jay was batting well threatening to take away the match from us. His run out was probably the turning point.Vishesh and Qasim tried hard to make a match of it. The reqd run rate was climbing. Moorthy in his second spell cleaned their stumps. His aggressive reaction to Qasim’s dismal was a result of both anger (at being hit for a boundary the previous ball) and relief. We were on our way to winning the Indoor league for the third consecutive time.

From being written off after the first couple of weeks to the winning the Indoor league again, we had proved our doubters wrong.

Three cheers to Virtual reality.

Hip hip Hurray

VR wins the PUCC cup for the third time!

Virtual Reality are the PUCC Indoor League Fall 2007 Champions ! VR beat Punjabi Pride in a pulsating finals on Nov 10, 2007 to become the champions for the third consecutive time.

Here is the first article, one of many more to come!

Success Tastes like Doodh Pedha the Third Time Over

By Bharath Chandrasekaran

Virtually out and
Reality looking bleak
After a season start from hell
The team finally began to gel
The result- a final against PCYell

Having chosen to bat
Yagna and Appu open
Soon Yagna wanted a run,
But defiant Appu refused to give in

Our red-hot, in-form, run-getter
Had fallen in a manner of dismissal,
Only slightly less dismal
than leaving the ball well alone
for it to shatter furniture

In walked Bharath amid the tension
Whoz immeasurable contributions
this season have only benefitted
the other team's fortunes

But then he set the armory alight
Surprising the bowler and himself,
With a second-over six
That went beyond the reach
Of a flummoxed long-on fielder

Appu on the other end,
Was driving like a Beemer,
Not a length ball or a beamer,
was spared,as all fielders could do was fend

To be continued.....next week...same time same place

Virtual Reality Team

The complete team !!! ( with the championship trophies)


Front-Left & clockwise direction: Karthik, Yagna, Bharath, Ananth( honorary member), Moorthy, Krish (center), Sreeram, Jaggu, Ashwin, Harish, Kaushik ).

Mr. Chapal...oh sorry, Chappell