Former Bosnian star Sergej Barbarez

Guardian reports:

Thirteen Bosnia national team players have threatened to boycott international call-ups unless the heads of the Bosnian Football Association (NFSBIH) resign…

“We will no longer accept call-ups to the national team while these people are performing these functions, hoping that our gesture will mark the first step in the healing of this cancer in our soccer and a new beginning for the national team for which our hearts beat,” the letter said.

Sport should provide equal opportunity to all and then the best should comprise teams at various levels. Ethnic preference is no way to run sport as famous and just retired Bosnian football hero Sergej Barbarez has said.

If the threatened boycott is indeed implemented, there might be some changes but I doubt if there will be major structural changes over all in the way Bosnian football is run as the problems run deep:

The domestic league is also in a poor state, mired in allegations of corruption and match-fixing. The NFSBIH is run on ethnic lines that reflect the delicate balance between the country’s two parts, the Serb Republic and the Muslim-Croat Federation, created after the 1992-95 war.

Root causes of sporting problems are usually not in the sporting realm but they occur as a consequence of problems politically or otherwise in a country as we see in Bosnia. From wikipedia:

Tensions between the three constitutional peoples remain high in BiH and often provoke political disagreements. Each of the three peoples are influential to roughly a same degree in Bosnia with Bosniaks being the most numerous, Serbs having their own entity, and Croats, though politically marginalized, being the strongest economically.

I am immediately reminded of the crisis Zimbabwe cricket finds itself in at the moment. A lot of players have protested and resigned. Zimbabwean cricket remains in a deep hole and not much has improved. I am apprehensive that there will sweeping changes but even if some good can come from the protests and even if small changes are made in the way Bosnian football is run, it would be a successful move.

In any case, it is much better to protest and live a poorer or less priveleged life than a discriminated one.

Fans throng Lords after India’s 1983 world cup win.

Indian cricket had a fair bit of success even before the 1983 world cup. India won consecutive test tours in West Indies and England and the Indian team was greeted with streets full of people when Wadekar’s team returned unlikely heroes in 1971. Even before, Indian cricket occupied national consciousness. CK Nayudu was a hero and his aggressive attractive style drew crowds. In fact Dungarpur, who claims to have watched every Indian test cricketer, claims there was no one like CK, not even Tendulkar came close in attracting people into the stadiums. While that maybe an exaggeration, it embodies how cricket was always in the national realm, though so was hockey with varying popularity for the two sports.

1983 shot up cricket’s popularity in India like nothing else has ever done in history. India, a nation which was coming to terms with the modern world, could hold it’s head high and the common Indian on the street could feel proud to be an Indian. Heroes and great sporting achievements tend to do that to developing nations. The West Indians will tell you how their great cricket team of the 70s and 80s filled them with so much pride for instance. In India, every one started following cricket and even modern day stars who hadn’t taken up cricket that seriously started looking at the sport differently. Tendulkar for example, a die hard McEnroe fan and as much interested in tennis as cricket till that point, says 83 was the turning point for him when he took to pursuing cricket seriously.

1983 victory also brought the 1987 world cup hosting to India (and Pakistan) which fuelled further growth of cricket in the country. Then, of course, there was the 1996 world cup and onwards when one day cricket became a big cash cow. Would all this have really happened had India not won in 1983? Maybe but it could well have been delayed 20 years or so. If we look at it from the financial perspective, from the perspective of the fans, players or Indian cricket history at large, nothing compares to 1983 and in all likelihood, nothing ever will. The impact has been multi-ferrous and that powerful.

In Visitors, I invite one person each month to share perspectives on a sport, a sporting event, sporting aspects or any thing in between. This month, Sportsfreak joins us to speak on John Bracewell’s ways and New Zealand cricket. I know, more cricket, but what can you do? With the Champions Trophy going on, Ashes coming up and then the world cup, cricket is bound to appear more on this blog over the next few months. If you would like to contribute for a future edition of Visitors, do not hesitate to e-mail me.

Greetings Sportsfreaks; it’s been a long time between drinks as they say, but I’m glad to be able to report from the battle front again; this time from India.

This season will truly be one of The Great Campaigns. My good friend Martin Snedden has organised a lot of great challenges for us over the next few months. First, there’s the Champions Trophy, followed by ODI series against Sri Lanka, Australia and England; ending up in a World Cup which is in my favourite touring place; the West Indies.

He certainly is still a very loyal commander-in-chief, although I do wonder if he gets a little over-worked at time. He told me he can easily organise a coaching job at home in England for me next year. The guy obviously forgot I’ve already got a job!

We have had our fair share of bad luck so far, but let me tell you this will not weaken our resolve one little bit. Poor Shane Bond is pretty sure that he’s probably injured, which has come as a blow that we need to overcome. At least we’re used to it so we can certainly take a lot of positives out of this. He’s working very hard with Gilbert Enoka the whole time to get through this problem, and I’m sure he’ll be playing again before the World Cup. Mark my words.

And the fact that we still beat South Africa earlier in the week shows that it was still the correct decision to take him on tour with us anyway. I’m pretty sure that just having him with us puts a lot of fear into opposing teams.

(more…)

It is amazing how much South Africa has slipped over the last few years. When they toured England, it was supposed to be an acid test for Vaughan and people were proclaiming Smith as the new Cronje - some one who was always groomed to be captain and would be a great captain for many years to come. When that series ended, Vaughan came out strong and Smith looked the way poorer captain. England went from strength to strength while South Africa went in just the opposite direction from there on.

South Africa has slipped further in tests specifically with each passing year. From the top two team they have gone to the middle rung and there is the danger of slipping even below teams like India for instance.

So what has gone wrong? For one, replacing Pollock as captain was a big set back. It changed all kinds of equations in the team. Regardless of how players are performing in the recent past, slagging them off in the media like Smith slagged off Klusener is not very wise. Smith has been a poor captain over all whether it is onfield or off it.

The batting has lacked experience and adaptability to play in the subcontinent at times but more crucially, the bowling has gone down drastically which plays a crucial role in whether you win tests or not in the end. Filling Donald’s boots is not the easiest thing to do. Pollock hasn’t been the force he once was, Kallis hasn’t taken enough wickets and Cronje isn’t there to fill in when Kallis has a bad day in the office. Neither are either of McMillan or Klusener there showing the lack of options not having quality all rounders exposes.

The strength of South Africa in the Cronje era was getting more out of the sum than the individual parts. The disappointing part of the Smith era has been getting less than the individual parts. However, the side is young and the bowlers like Ntini and Nel have been developing well and I expect them to do better than they have in the recent past. To make a great or very good side though, you need an assimilation of immense talent or good talent plus great leadership. Do not expect South Africa to keep on under performing though it will take some effort to get them to over perform as well.

The case of Charleroi, a Belgian football club, versus FIFA has opened a can of worms regarding the importance of international football. It is no secret that international football is losing out to club football slowly but steadily. If the landmark case goes in favour of Charleroi, it could hasten the inevitable.

The whole issue of who owns international footballers crops up. A country shouldn’t have less right to it’s footballer than a club and have to compensate the club if a player gets injured playing for the country (of course, that the player wants to play for his country and has not signed agreements with the club restricting his free will is a given). For instance, the country wouldn’t harm the player intentionally as more often than not they would have to use the player in future matches as well.

The bigger problem lies with the lack of competitive matches we see in international football today. A case in point are the Euro qualifiers. A lot of mismatches which could have been avoided if minnows were required to qualify for the qualifiers themselves. Moreover, it would give international football much more respect as you would expect a particular high standard from the matches and not have players playing in their first or second gears.

International football is still a huge draw. People often tune in to football only once in four years during the world cup and newer audiences are attracted to the game. There is little doubt that it is important to football at large. Traditionalists would even argue that international football should always be and be regarded above club football. However, it has to improve it’s stand in the form of public sentiment much more to remain a big force. Here’s hoping that international football lives long and has sound health for many years.

The 2006-07 Irani Trophy match, the traditional opener of Indian domestic cricket season, will end tomorrow in the first session. A third day finish is a shame and shows the lack of depth Indian cricket batting finds itself facing. The argument raised would be that Rohit Sharma was excluded from the Rest of India team. Sharma has played in the Deodhar Trophy team before and despite how big this opportunity would have been for him, he will get his chances in the upcoming Duleep Trophy games. He has only played 2 first class games till now many more chances will come his way for sure.

Balaji, who wasn’t included in the squad initially, and only made the team after Sreesanth was injured found himself selected in the XI ahead of the young Yo Mahesh. Given Balaji has just come back to the game, he would cherish every chance of match practice and even though he struggled with his line in the game which showed he was no where close to international levels required, he has to be given more time.

Praveen Kumar played a rash shot before looking very good. He is an aggressive batsman though he has to improve on his average. The potential exists. Bowling wise, he is at 125-135 which is great for some one whom people are slating as not among the main bowlers. He has played very less so far and will be interesting to see how he develops. Definitely some one who can play at least one day cricket for India down the years.

Wasim Jaffer went back to his main pace bowlers after the good start Uttar Pradesh got when he could have easily gone for Ojha. It was a first day wicket and despite it slowing considerably after the good carry it offered in the first session, the move proved right as Uttar Pradesh folded for 148 runs. V.R.V. Singh was guilty of bowling no balls and not being upto it in the recently concluded challenger series despite getting the man of series award. However, here, he bent his back in humid conditions over after over for nine consecutive overs and bowled consistently at around the same spot which was a sight to see. He didn’t have any wickets to show for it but then cricket isn’t a fair game.

(more…)

In an interview, Tendulkar has said that experiments are good from time to time. However, experiments should not be so much that players do not know their roles in the team. These remarks come at the backdrop of numerous experiments by India over the past 18 months. Coming from a player of Tendulkar’s stature, the words carry weight. Before this, a lot of people - former players and media personnel apart from fans have been critical of the amount of experiments by India but they did not come to much as the players themselves had shown no sign of uncertainty.

The situation now is a bit different. A video clipping has also shown Md. Kaif speaking on the same lines. So do players know what is expected of them in the Champions Trophy at least if not the world cup? Do they even have a hint why they are being asked to perform the roles they are being asked? It is important the team think tank (Dravid and Chappell) answer these questions to the players as it is they who are to perform in the end and if they do not know their roles, they cannot obviously go out there in the middle and perform what is expected of them.

Given the world cup is just six months away, it is important the experiments stop to a large extent now as well. If you cannot decipher who has what role to play in 18 months, how can you do it in 22 months? How many of the current lot are certainties for the world cup? As we come closer to the tournament, we should have more and more players certain of their specific roles and more and more players should be close to certainties in the team so that we have a core group of players from whom we can expect a laudable performance.

The bowling attack has developed and moved from strength to strength but we still find a Sreesanth out of a crucial tournament like a Champions Trophy for example. Is he not in the plans of the team? If he is, would a young player like him not have benefited from a big tournament like the champions trophy? The problem is not if the answer to these questions is a yes or a no but the uncertainty which comes up when these questions crop up. What about Anil Kumble? If his poor fielding didn’t stop him from being a key one day player for all these years, why should it be a problem now? He had a poor run in one dayers after which he was dropped but his test match outings clearly show that he has not lost it. So why should Kumble, the best Indian bowler of the past 15 years, not be in the reckoning?

The batting, traditionally India’s strength, is more of the worrying factor. Sehwag has been poor in the past 24 months and has averaged only 28 this year. Harsha Bhogle has mentioned that only two players look good enough to enter the frame for the team right now apart from those in the team already - Laxman and Ganguly. The lack of options we have is the scary part more than whom we select in the end. That we do not know yet who will bat at which position adds to the problem.

It is not late still. The Indian cricket team consists of a bunch of talented individuals and Tendulkar seems to be finally back in form and some level of physical fitness. It is time we step up before it is too late and we look back at what could have been achieved rather than what was.

Update: Here is the cricinfo report on the topic with views of Dravid, Chappell as well.

My latest obsession is one which will stay with me forever I think. Snooker is awesome would be an understatement. I have played the game a few times in the past but only now have I got all the technical details clear and am aware of the finer rules. A few practical and online games (which also helped understand rules and see how to strategise when you don’t foul every second ball like you do in real life) later, I feel much more confident that I wont lose by 100 points every second game I play.

A bit on the origin of the game from Wikipedia:

The game of billiards dates back to the 15th century but snooker is a more recent invention. In the late 19th century billiards games were popular among British army officers stationed in India, and players used to experiment with variations on the game. Due to the fact that billiards was a two-player game, multi-player variations such as life pool (where different coloured balls were used as cue and/or object balls, depending on the situation or number of players) and pyramid pool (fifteen red balls racked in a triangle where each player received a point per ball potted) became popular. Black pool was a form of pyramid pool that took the black ball from a life pool set so a player could pot a red then the black for more points. The most commonly accepted story is that, at the officers’ mess in Jabalpur some time in 1875, a Colonel Sir Neville Francis Fitzgerald Chamberlain suggested adding coloured balls to black pool so that the variation featured fifteen reds, a yellow, green, pink and black (blue and brown were added some years later).

Snooker is the second most popular game in the UK, behind only to football. It is a game which is made for the television because of the drama, the come back possibility and the surprises which crop up in games. My friends from Britain still speak of one particular game which reached crazy audience numbers. Wikipedia says this about it:

Perhaps the peak of this golden age was the World Championship of 1985, when 18.5 million people (around one third of the population of the UK) watching BBC2 saw Dennis Taylor emerge victorious against Davis after a mammoth struggle. Play had started with the first session on Saturday afternoon, finishing with the potting of the last possible ball (with the exception of a re-spotted black) at 00:20 on Monday morning at the end of a gruelling final Sunday night session. To this day, polls rank the 1985 World Snooker Championship final amongst British television’s most memorable all-time moments.

What I like best about Snooker is that skill is not the key which will guarantee you victory. It is merely a pre-requisite. You need much more beyond skill. You need to use a lot of your mind, foresight to see what your opponents will do and plan ahead. One short sighted shot can mean that your opponent can get a big break and your chances to win the match have gone away. Another apsect I love - the two innings of snooker like the two innings in test cricket. After the red balls have been putted, the coloured balls still remain. So you can still cut a lead by as much as 27 points by potting six balls even if you have had a bad first half of a game.

As you keep playing snooker, you keep learning and you relish discovering the greater depths which exist in the game. In that, it is similar to real tennis. People who still play real tennis keep discovering aspects about the game and the players reach their best at a much later age compared to modern day games as the aspects to learn are simply so many.

Pool is much more popular in various parts of the world but I find snooker much more appealing and having many more tactical nuances to it. That it is my favourite cue sport is a given!