Thursday, November 02, 2006

My take on Malcom speed and his old fashioned views

"I have an old-fashioned view," said Speed when asked if the BCCI were using their superior monetary position to flex
their muscle. "I judge sports organisations on the basis of three things: 1. How the team performs. 2. How the board looks after its stake-holders in terms of facilities on the grounds, and 3. How well they use resources like population to
produce great cricketers"

Lets see what we can argue about what Speed said.

How team performs?
Agreed that Team India has not had a decent outing at the Champions trophy, but they were joint winners in the earlier
version and have been finalists twice. If we dig deep and search, cricketing rules have been made to favour England,
Australia and other teams like them. A lot of crap has been spoken about pitches and they playing even and having bounce. Why should a pitch always suit fast bowling? Because, Australia, England, New Zealand can't find a decent spinner (except Shane Warne) to bowl on turning tracks? India being a tropical country, people tend to sweat a lot and loose salts. Fast bowling being physically strenuous and needs a lot more stamina than spin, Indian has had bad bowling attacks. Diet also plays a major role. Indians tradiationally have been vegetarions. Meat eating generates a lot of heat and may not be suitable for people in tropical countries like India. So, do rules need to be altered to suit subcontinental teams and have a level playing field?

2. How the board looks after its stake-holders in terms of facilities on the grounds.BCCI lacks in taking care of its players and this remains an area where a lot of work needs to be done. ICC is showing one flaw of their opponent to cover their own flaws. Why could not Sri. Speed concentrate on the marketing of game when the main issue is that?

3. How well they use resources like population to produce great cricketersI was reading another blog( about this and will quote it here. "The population debate reared its ugly head once more. New Zealand's cricket board may not be overflowing with dollars, but it can hardly be described as cash-strapped. Being a small country and producing so many world-class athletes is indeed a major achievement, but to hold India, a developing nation, to the same standards as that of a developed nation seems a tad unfair. Firstly, sport is woven into the very fabric of Australian and New Zealand - most definitely not the case in India, where there is a greater focus on education. Moreover, New Zealand has excellent training facilities not just for its professionals, but also for the general public. If I wish, I can walk down to the nearest park at any time of the day and practice my bowling in the nets - an impossible scenario in India's major cities, where parks are hard to come by, let alone nets.
That is not to say India lacks top-class training facilities - it's just that the opportunity cost of being able to use them is far higher than it would be in New Zealand, which is why fewer children (as a proportion of the population) join cricket clubs. Breeding a sporting culture is essential to a country's sporting success, and India still lacks that on a large scale. If anything, that makes the efforts of India's sportspeople even more commendable. They managed to rise
in spite of the system, not because of it, often for scant reward. Given the infrastructure, Indian sport could finally tap into its vast resource of sportspeople and come to dominate international sport. Unfortunately such a scenario will remain a pipe dream for at least the forseeable future. In the meantime, population cannot be seen as a determining factor when comparing the sporting results of two nations, especially those as disparate as India and New Zealand. If
anything, cultural factors and infrastructure have a far greater bearing than population."
My take: India being a still developing nation, people tend to concentrate on earning a decent standard of living and
this right now, is only possible through education and not sports. The British plundered India for 3 centuries and took
all our riches and have left us as an impoverished nation. For a nation at its Nadir in 1947, India has done amazingly
well in the last 60 years to have come to where it is today. 20-40 years down the lane, India will be able to dominate
the world ideologically and culturally. Once the social security system is set where people need not worry about where
their next meal will come from, India will start being a force in sports.

I hope Sri. Speed will take care of what he blabbers and use his head and not his skin while talking.

No comments: