India's away campaign in 2018

In any other time in Indian cricket, 4 Test wins across consecutive tours to South Africa, England and Australia in a 12 month period, would be hailed without conditions. This is however not any other time in Indian cricket. This is the time of Virat Kohli. The one of a winning mindset. The one who puts team goals before individual milestones. The one who wants his bowlers to bowl fast. The one who doesn't mind losing a Test in the quest for a victory. The one who appears willing to live and die by outcomes of cricket matches an not by the number of 100s he and his mates score. 

Virat Kohli is not your regular Indian great. Winning is a large part of who Virat Kohli is. In order to win, Virat Kohli is willing to put the building blocks needed to seek victories. He batted for the coach he wanted, he pushed his players to be more fit, he invested in fast bowlers, he embraced a no-excuses mindset and he created a team culture that did not honor seniority by default. 

And he talked of winning abroad. 

Some saw the spark and a glimpse of what was in store in his first match as captain in Adelaide 2014. Even as India lost that Test, they lost going for an improbable win. 

Since that Test, Virat Kohli has taken India to number one in Test rankings. India have won pretty much everything in sight at home. Outside India, they have won in Sri Lanka and the West Indies. While winning in West Indies is not as hard as it used to be, winning in Sri Lanka as India did after 22 years was special. 

When it comes to winning in England and South Africa, Virat Kohli's India has not broken new ground and in fact under performed in comparison to some of the previous teams who have won tests and drawn series in South Africa and won Test series in England. While the series win in Australia may go a long way in giving the Kohli-Shastri team some breathing space, overall the combined outcome of the 12 Tests in South Africa, England and Australia is a bit disappointing. 4 wins, 7 losses and 1 draw does no justice to the promise of Virat Kohli from 4 years ago. 

I had expected more.

Even so, when you dissect the Test matches, you can draw some conclusions that may lead to a more optimistic outlook for India in the future.

India now have a Test team that can capitalize when conditions and turn of events are even slightly in their favor. Except for the rain in Sydney, India won all Tests when they batted first and when their bowlers were presented the opportunity to bowl last in helpful bowling conditions. They even delivered under pressure of defending smallish first innings targets set by their batsmen. The 250 in the first innings at Adelaide and 187 in the first innings at Johannesburg come to mind. India now have the bowling to get them back in games when their batsmen fail to provide the first innings cushion. Prior to the 2018 tours, in Tests since January 2000, India had lost 15 tests on the road when their batsmen scored 250 or less in the first innings; 11 of them either by an innings or 10 wickets. 

India's bowling has improved but only compared to their own bowling from previous teams. Both in South Africa and in England the home team out bowled India. Previous pace attacks from India were so abysmal or good only in spurts that an attack that consistently takes 20 wickets seems above any criticism. To win Tests however, you have to out bowl the opposition bowlers consistently. On the tour to South Africa, the home bowlers did not match up to the exploits of the South African pacers and in England the home teams all rounders proved too much for India's bowlers to match in skill and variety. 

On difficult pitches India's batting hasn't been able to produce one of those freakish performances that defy norms and conditions. The pitches on offer have been tough and the fourth innings targets have been tricky. As a collective batting unit, rarely across the 7 losses; all when batting second; have India's batsmen been blown away, any more than the home batsmen have struggled. Batting conditions have been tough across the 3 series. To compare the averages of batsmen in this series with previous performances on more friendly pitches and conclude that India's batting has let themselves down is misleading. The only way India could have won any of those 7 tests they lost is if their bowlers would have out bowled the home team bowlers or their batsmen produced a freak performance. Singling out only one aspect is trying to ignore the context of conditions. 

Winning in Australia is satisfying but the performances across the 3 series which was the most anticipated away season was ultimately humbling. 

Something fishy about the South African pitches

When South Africa toured India in the winter of 2015, the Nagpur Test lasted 247 overs. A little shy of 3 days assuming a 90 over day. The Capetown Test in comparison lasted 230 overs. And yet after the Nagpur Test questions were raised about the the pitch. It clearly seemed like the pitch had played out of character in comparison to previous Tests on the same ground. A combative Ravi Shastri; the architect of the "Hirwani Test"; had argued the right of the home team to make pitches that suit the strength of the home team.

It left a bad taste in the mouth for purists and Ian Chappel, who'd rather not have host captains meddle with pitch preparation. There was no real evidence of that but Ravi Shastri's comments did not help rule that possibility out.

South Africa lost the Nagpur Test by 124 runs. 40 wickets fell and The highest score in 4 innings in that Test was 215 that India scored on the first day. India too struggled to bat on the pitch

The ICC promptly called out Nagpur for the pitch not meeting Test standards. Or something like that.

Take the Capetown Test, the first Test on India's the ongoing tour of  South Africa.

India lost the test by 72 runs. 40 wickets fell and The highest score in 4 innings in that Test was 286 that South Africa scored on the first day. South Africa too struggled to bat on the pitch.

The Capetown pitch too played out of character. Just like in Nagpur, the scores in this Test at Capetown deviated from the norm. Yet the reaction from commentators which included ex-players was that this was a great Test match. No one questioned the pitch. Just that it had "spice". The ICC is unlikely to sanction the pitch.

The shortness of the Test even compared to the short Nagpur Test was perhaps masked by the fact the official 3rd day in Capetown was washed out.  Another factor could have been that India gave a much better account of themselves and thanks to some sparks from Hardik Pandya, and Bhuvaneshwar Kumar did not get blown away, like the South Africans were at Nagpur. Yet another factor that masked its shortness and prevented any questions about the pitch was that the scoring rate at Capetown across the Test, was 3.3 runs per over as compared to only 2.6 runs at Nagpur. So the Capetown Test was indeed more exciting than the Nagpur Test. There was more attractive cricket.

The single biggest factor though I feel that the pitch was never brought into discussion and assumed to be true and sporting was that India did not make an issue out of it. They had promised not to do so because otherwise it would have been hypocritical.

India seemed to have boxed themselves into letting South Africa and popular opinions; which do not always lend kindness to a traveling Indian team; run away with dictating the narrative of the pitches. So much so that in the second Test, they let Morne Morkel get away with setting the narrative that the Centurion pitch was "like playing in the subcontinent". India did not counter. They could not.

The rivalry between South Africa and India has deteriorated to a point that both sides are scared of losing at home to the other and not confident of winning in typical home conditions.

India started it.

I was hoping South Africa would take the high ground which would lead India to follow suit.

India Coach: Kumble has himself to blame

When Anil Kumble was plucked out of nowhere and inserted as coach of India's national team, he was staring at a 13 Test home season and a mildly strenuous tour of the West Indies. 

He was in charge of a team that was already the best in the world in Test cricket. He had friends in high places who had put him as coach in the first place, removing his predecessor Ravi Shastri on what can be called a technicality. In Virat Kohli, he had a captain who had in the previous year and a half showed a willingness to play for wins at all times. A captain who seemed to have developed specific ideas on how to go about doing it. 

A 5 bowler strategy; albeit which was occasionally sacrificed, banking on pace - no more just bowling in the "right areas", a premium on scoring rate; which put Cheteshwar Pujara's spot under pressure early on and lastly fitness by example. Those ideas were already bringing in the results. India's batting had a memorable tour of Australia in 2014/2015 and when India's fast bowlers joined the captain's vision, they won an away Test series in Sri Lanka for the first time in 23 years. 

All Kumble had to do was to understand this blueprint and build a rapport with the captain, his team and treat them as equals. More importantly, treat them like adults. Ravi Shastri before him, tends to do just that. He becomes one of them. This is not to say that this is an ideal strategy for a coach. For another team, for another time, Shastri may just be the wrong man for the job.

It is pretty hard to argue though that this particular Indian team with abundance and variety of skills, a professional approach to fitness led by a captain with definitive ideas on winning and early results that validated his leadership; needed anything more than a catalyst coach. A coach who would focus on removing any roadblocks with the board and help the team execute this blueprint. 

If Anil Kumble now finds himself out of a coaching job, it is quite baffling that he has botched up a very easy assignment. What really irks me about the whole Kumble episode though is that he has managed to walk away with all the sympathy and the media and ex-players have tried to paint Virat Kohli as the "spoilt brat". The people, the experts and the media seem hurt that a legend was treated unfairly. Is being a great leg spinner for your country an insurance against future job firing, without your value even so much as considered.

There are however 2 things one must credit Kumble for. 

One of that is the pitches. Ravi Shastri is a hawk when it comes to over engineered pitches. His only Test has captain and the few Tests with him as the Team director (coach) for home Tests have coincided with pitches that were minefields. There is admittedly no evidence of a coach having an influence over pitches but Ravi Shastri has wholeheartedly defended India's right to engineer minefields, claiming that "everyone else does it too". Under Kumble the pitches have been true and Kumble has a higher sense of spirit of the game than Shastri. The later is more like an Australian; willing to challenge norms if not the rules outright. 

Secondly, he seemed to have played a role in getting Chetashwar Pujara back into the team after he lost his place to what Virat Kohli claimed as an inability "to force the pace". Pujara is a valuable player at a crucial spot and his dropping may be a case of Virat Kohli being too aggressive for the sake of being aggressive. Notice how England have been struggling to win Tests without a solid number 3. 

In sum though, Anil Kumble has probably only himself to blame for his inability to forge a working relationship with Kohli and to get on board with his blueprint. This is after all Kohli's team and the choice of Kohli over Kumble in a situation where the 2 are not on talking terms, is the most logical one. It should have been made without showing Virat Kohli in bad light.

And what of the Cricket Advisory Committee (CAC)?  Their job is actually easier than Kumble's. It also comes with no apparent accountability. How do we know for sure the CAC is doing its job well and what's the consequence of not doing it well? Who is to tell Sachin Tendulkar not to show up for work and face the wrath of crazed fans and a worshiping media? 

This committee exists to advice on the selection of a coach. It is understood by most reasonable people that an advice is kind of a recommendation. On the 2 instances they were tasked with the mundane job of finding a coach; a job most boards and the BCCI themselves carry out without much fanfare; the CAC have raised eyebrows. 

The CAC consists of Sachin Tendulkar, Saurav Ganguly and VVS Laxman. Very important people and big names all. Just because a job is carried out by important people doesn't make the job itself any more important than what it originally is. It was to simply recommend a coach. 

Instead, the first time around they offered the job to Anil Kumble who had not applied for it; removing Shastri because he chose to interview via Skype and the second time around they seemed reluctant to give Virat Kohli, the coach he wanted and when they did offer it to Shastri, they  seemed to sneak in 2 more of their classmates as batting and bowling coaches. 

Leaving their on field exploits from their playing days, aside the CAC have not shown the maturity, the ability to rise above personal friendships, remain on the sidelines and do what's right for Virat Kohli and Team India. There is no bigger conflict of interest in cricket today than the CAC recommending their classmates for important jobs in the day to day functioning of the cricket team. The committee, if needed at all, needs to be more diverse and educated on the basics of cricket administration. Right now its just runs and 100s heavy. 

That leaves Virat Kohli and his role in this episode. So far he has played it with a straight bat, like his new coach would have liked and managed to stay above the immaturity shown by his seniors in using the glory of their playing days to garner sympathy and writing letters leaked to the press playing the victim.

In my books Virat Kohli comes out of this episode the clear winner by simply staying out of it and knowing how to get what he wants to execute his strategy to win Test matches for India. 

Go Green

It is now no longer about skills. Australia have assaulted India's pride. India might think it's about lack of proper judgement on part of their batsmen, Virat Kohli might admonish his fellow batsmen all he wants for not adapting or applying themselves. That is not going to salvage this series.

The desire that Australia have shown to keep the Border-Gavaskar trophy with themselves seems to have shocked the Indian team into a state of immobility. That Australia have not rolled over into submission as they were expected to have left the Indian team without the back to stand up to Australia's spinners.

Before this long Indian home season, Kohli had marked England among the visiting teams as the team to watch out for. Perhaps he was playing mind games with Australia. Either that has backfired or he was simply wrong in his assessment.

Perhaps India are simply mentally tired after a long home season. May be they did underestimate Australia even though they may never admit it. Perhaps it's just a case of Australia being too good for India so far. There was always the possibility of Australia's spin, with top class pace support and the prolific Steve Smith against India would make this a competitive series. No one was counting on Australia producing such a dominant performance.

There is no precedent to a visiting team felling India's famed batsmen under 200 in 3 straight innings. The response then also needs to be something that is unprecedented. Playing to their traditional strengths has been a shocking failure.

They can't seem to get Steve Smith out before he reaches three figures and they can barely last 2 or 3  sessions against Nathan Lyon and Steve O'Keefe. And KL Rahul's optimism about R Ashwin running through Australia on day 2 appears firmly grounded in delusion. Steve Smith himself has scored a comparable number of runs against India in the last 3 innings than the whole of India's batting has scored against Australia. It is beginning to feel like 20 of Steve Smiths 18 Test 100s have come against India.

Unless something remarkable happens tomorrow this is looking like 0-4 for India. Perhaps too early and irresposible to make it a prediction but after all we do know the making of a white wash feels like around this point in a series.

The only way I think India can now salvage this series is to swallow their pride about spin, and try to trip Australia on green tops. Nathan Lyon and Steve O'Keefe who were scoffed at before the tour are now the most fearsome duo of bowlers ever to visit India.
To take them out of the game is India's best option if they lose this test too to Australian spin.

Among the many things so refreshing about Virat Kohli is how he has kept his fast bowlers engaged even in home conditions. It's time to ask them to salvage this series. Results from 3 innings is good enough to conceded that our batsmen can't handle Lyon and O'Keefe. Let's ask Australia to deal with our fast men. Surely they didn't come prepared for that.

An Epic Backfire

One of the most refreshing aspects of Virat Kohli as a sportsman has been his willingness to feed off cricket crazy fans. While those before him at times seemed bogged down by misreading the adulation as "unreasonable expectations" to win every game, Virat Kohli has openly stated that his team will play every game to win and engages with the crowd urging them to egg his team on. 

Those who came before him were willing , for the most part, to grind the opposition down by putting up runs on the board and slowly chipping away at the opposition batsmen and wait for the wicket to naturally deteriorate and go for the kill. This seemed to the Indian Template. Where runs on the board created the pressure in the absence of genuine fast balling and Tests, that appeared to head nowhere suddenly got alive on the last day. 

Most Indian batsmen know how to play on these wickets. When India's own batsmen struggle at home and collapse in consecutive innings one has to wonder if the pitch was a factor. Nathan Lyon is an accomplished spinner and India have lost to him in Adelaide not too long ago. Steve O'Keefe had shown promise in the one Test he played on Australia's recent horror tour of Sri Lanka. Neither are this good though. To knock India out 2 innings in succession in India.

Kohli is the kind of sportsman that most fans of my generation: who grew up watching cricket in the late 70s and 80s, yearned for. A bad ass, no nonsense leader who wants to cleanse Indian teams of their infuriating tendency to seek personal milestones on the road to victory. A trait that has plagued the team for decades. 

However his tendency to seek wins by controlling the pitch curating process is off putting. Not just because it sometimes backfires to humiliate like it did in Pune but it's not how most fans want to see India win.

South Africa - Chokers no more

This was a curious South African team. Confidence misplaced, more words than deeds. Taking themselves too seriously. For a casual observer they gave a sense of someone running in the same place and feeling mighty pleased with themselves.

As a player, AB DeVillers is all action. His performances speak for himself. As a captain he led a South African team who were seduced by themselves. Previous South African teams seduced us, this one was self seduced and we watched in amusement their skipper speak tall, bold words even as they lost almost all their matches to decent teams.

Except Sri Lanka, South Africa failed to beat any serious team.

And yet, they believed they could win the cup. This is quite different from traditional South African teams who others believed in, spoke less, did more but ultimately did not have the self belief.

Before their game with India, in the group stages, South Africa were the favorites. They lost. Before their game with Pakistan, in the group stages, South Africa were the favorites. They lost. Before their semi final game with New Zealand, South Africa were the favorites. They lost.

It took sustained ineptitude to finally get rid of the chokers tag. Nobody can say South Africa choked. This time they were simply not good enough.

Why do we let South Africa seduce us?

I remember the days when South Africa were banned from international cricket. There was a lot of intrigue around them. I had read about people like Clive Rice, about Graham Pollock; that he had a batting average of almost 61... I had read about the exploits of Barry Richards, Mike Procter who bowled off the wrong foot; if I remember my reading correctly... knew a bit about Eddie Barlow, Ali Bacher....

I knew that without South Africa international cricket was missing a formidable team.

I watched with keen interest when India welcomed South Africa back to the international fold and I remember watching on TV Alan Donald charging in and bowling fast in India in a one day game. He was bowling faster than Malcom Marashall I had thought. Later when India became the first team to tour South Africa for a full Test series, I remember Pravin Amre scoring a dour century on debut.

Then came the 1992 world cup. Within a year of South Africa returning back to the international game, they were getting a chance to play the World Cup. Every one was curious as to how would they compare and compete with other international team. Having followed India's games with them, they clearly seemed a stronger side to me.

A lot of buzz around the 1992 world cup was due to South Africa's presence. It seemed like they had the sympathy vote. For what .... I don't know but it seemed to me that people wanted them to do well.

And then Johnty Rhodes flew out Inzamam Ul-Haq....

And the world was seduced.

South Africa brought in a very different brand of cricket to the World Cup. They fielded like no other team had fielded before, they seemed better coached and their cricket seemed rational and unemotional. They didn't smile like the West Indians did, they didn't have nearly as much the passion like the Pakistanis did, they seemed a bit like the Australians, scowling all the time and taking themselves too seriously but more mechanical. They didn't seem to have India's flair or guile. They were as good as any other team and different too.

But ever since that 1992 World Cup they have seduced cricket fans like no other team has.

Since their re-entry they have started every world cup being considered as legitimate favorites. And yet after 26 years of World Cup history behind them, they have yet to win a knockout game in the World Cup. Their exits are a combination of bad luck, foolishness, panic, screwed up rain rules, math errors, tactical blunders and stage fright.

In 1992 silly rain rule left them needing to get 22 runs off one ball, when before the rain they had 18 balls to get them.

In 1996 they came up with a brain dead idea of dropping Alan Donald for the quarter finals and Brian Lara made them pay.

In 1999 they picked Alan Donald for their semifinal against Australia but he had a brain freeze of his own which resulted in his getting run out, the game ending as a tie and Australia progressing on the basis of a previous Super Six match win.

In 2003 they forgot that D/L targets list scores needed to equal and that teams have to score one more than the D/L score listed to win a game. As the rain came down Boucher meekly tapped the last ball before the rain meekly to mid wicket which tied the game when they needed to win it.

In 2007, they were too jittery in the semi finals and the match was effectively over in 10 overs with South Africa 27-5

In 2011 they collapsed chasing a smallish target against another fellow chokers, New Zealand who before that game hadn't won any knock-out game themselves.

This is their 7th attempt. But isn't 6 flops good enough to ask the question why do we let South Africa seduce us every 4 years?

Why for instance before their game against Pakistan, were South Africa considered favorites and no one was giving Pakistan any chance. What is it about South Africa's weakness we are willing to ignore and what is it about Pakistan's strengths which they have demonstrated in almost every world cup barring 2007; that we are unwilling to acknowledge.

Beating Pakistan just isn't the same any more

For those of us who watched "that shot" Javed Miandad deposited into the crowd off a Chetan Sharma full-toss; these 6 wins in the World Cup, starting in Sydney 1992 against Pakistan are sweet revenge.

You know...I want to feel that way but I don't.

Perhaps that sixer has already been avenged or it may never be. Try as I may, I do not believe India has won a one-day game; a final at that; in quite the fashion Javed Miandad did that day in 1986. May be Sachin's attack on Shoaib Akhtar at Centurion in the 2003 World Cup game comes a little close. Both were true assaults on the psyche of respective fans. But I'd have to get into the mind of a Pakistani cricket fan for a little while to know if those knocks are comparable.

But...I don't think "that shot" needs to be avenged any more....

Recent Indian teams, it seems, have the same attitude and skill that we envied about Pakistani teams of the 80s and 90s. Mahendra Singh Dhoni, Shikhar Dhawan, Suresh Raina and Virat Kohli are as Pakistani in the way they clinically chase targets or set them up that they could very well be the Javed Miandad, Ijaz Ahmen, Saleem Malik and Aamir Sohail from a generation ago.

But we don't have a Wasim Akram or a Waqar Younis or even an Aqib Javed....so any comparison to those Pakistani teams that traumatized us can only be a superficial search for a non existent symmetry,

Over the years Pakistan cricket has suffered. They no longer field teams like they used to in the 80s and 90s...even early 2000s. For that 2003 Centurion game, Pakistan had fielded a strong team. It meant something when India chased down that formidable total.

Compared to that game, the 2011 and 2015 wins seem facile.

Before the Adelaide game during the current World Cup it seemed this was Pakistan's best chance to finally win one against India. India had not won anything on the long tour and there were some doubts creeping in my mind if the reason for that was a weakness in the team exploited by Australian conditions.

The manner in which the game unfolded however and the meekness of Pakistan's fight makes that initial gut assessment look foolish.

While there is relief that India has won another game and the streak is still in tact, one cannot ignore the feeling of the win being facile. Moreover, recent trend holds no promises of enthralling contests like the ones in Sharjah 1986 and Centurion 2003.

There is no joy in beating Pakistan anymore because it seems to be happening so often these days and its hard to ignore that recent Pakistan teams are like poorly made Bollywood sequels of relatively decent-er originals.

Having witnessed West Indies's demise in its entirety, I fear that Pakistan cricket is headed the same way. The frequency of a new "fast bowling find" has drastically reduced and there is no batsman that has emerged in the last few years that can come even remotely close to the likes of Virat Kohli or Shikhar Dhawan. 

World Cups in Australia

Mahendra Singh Dhoni has had to resort to - "This is more or less the same team than won the Champions Trophy" and "These guys know how to deliver in ICC tournaments"... He is essentially pleading to keep the faith in his team. You surely can't expect him to say what he really thinks, which could be "How on God's green earth am I going to win anything worthwhile with this team"

A World Cup in Australia always seems enticing for an Indian fan. Memories of getting up early to watch Roger Binny take out David Boon, Azharuddin fielding like an international cricketer pulling off a catch at point and India winning the World Championship of cricket are still fresh. The few times India have done well in Australia somehow mask the routine mauling and disappointments India has been subjected to in Australia.

The last time too, in 1992, India had embarked on what Sanjay Manjrekar called "an endless summer". That world cup had ended in disappointment. Shrikanth holing out to Deepak Patel to that one fielder on long-on to start a must win game against New Zealand, Venkatapathi Raju celebrating too early and getting run-out going for a run that could have tied the game against Australia, rain ruining the game against Sri Lanka and Ian Botham taking out Sachin Tendulkar when he seemed set to take control of the chase...

The lasting images of that World Cup did not include many Indian moments. Inzamam's mauling of New Zealand, Johnty - the airplane, a Wasim Akram special in the final, New Zealand's innovations at the beginning of each innings; batting and bowling... 

That World Cup was also where 2 themes took birth. South Africa's emergence as a side that could find impossible reasons to lose a match they have all but won (The crooked rain rule cost India and South Africa games they should have won) and India never having lost a game to Pakistan at a World Cup.

Given how this Indian team has done so far on the tour, there shouldn't be much optimism to even match the performance from 1992. It seems that the fight India showed in the Test series was false advertisement for the World Cup.

Mahendra Singh Dhoni's credibility

I wonder if anyone truly expected this Indian team to win any of the 2 series that they eventually lost recently. In South Africa and New Zealand. 

That they came close to winning 3 of those Tests, was an over achievement.

Indian teams struggle overseas and only the settled batting line ups with a couple of potent bowlers to exploit the alien conditions have traditionally been able to win games for India outside the sub continent. 

Indian teams have enjoyed brief periods of supremacy outside India. Ajit Wadekars team in 1971, Kapil Dev and his men in 1985 and Ganguly's teams 2003 onwards which won consistently abroad all had great batting line ups with skiful bowlers.

By contrast this team led by Dhoni is a new one. The batsman performed well above expectations and while the bowlers were amazing in patches, they were unable to sustain the advantage.

Hence when experts, including ex-cricketers criticize this team for coming up empty, I am temped to question their expectation and the basis for it. Add to that the attempt to include the colossal failings of India's ageing seniors and count them as losses against Mahindra Singh Dhoni seems rather unjust to me.

The team that refused to chase 90 odd in 15 overs in Domenica in 2011 and lost 8 straight games thereafter, and this team that came close to winning both in South Africa and New Zealand are different teams. The earlier team was humiliated. This one gave an excellent account of themselves. 

Given this teams performance, the right question to ask is, why did we hold on to Sachin and co for so long. Instead this team has been burdened with the disasters of their more eminent predecessors. 

I don't see how you can criticize Mahendra Singh Dhoni for leading a young, still learning team, to 2 away series losses. 

All is not well with Dhoni, though.

That however has little to do with the team's performance in the away series but Dhoni's testimony to the Supreme Court appointed commission that parroted his boss's stance that Gurunath Meiyappan was a mere cricket enthusiast in relation to his role at the IPL team CSK. When contrasted against the Mugdal committee eventual ruling rejecting this notion, India's cricket captain finds his credibility and integrity brought into question.

India's cricket stars can never be expected to truly speak their minds because the cost of doing that is often in millions of dollars. The BCCI is not averse to humiliating even its greatest cricketer in Kapil Dev, so that he falls in line. But surely at some point one of them will realize that their integrity is above the cash that the BCCI throws at them. Or may be not. 

I think Mahendra Singh Dhoni has implicated himself with his testimony into a position where I don't know if any of his on field exploits and bravado are enough to justify his hold over the national team captaincy. 

The BCCI has so far done nothing in response to the Mugdal committe report. Promises of cleaning up the league have remained promises. Perhaps forgotten. They seem unwilling to even impose their own rules. CSK continue to be a part of the league.

The BCCI is a strong politically influential body. However I do not believe they can continue to ignore the Mugdal committee findings. A committee formed by the Supreme Court of India. The only way I can see CSK still be a part of the IPL family and Mahendra Singh Dhoni continuing as India's captain is if the BCCI rewrite its own rules for the IPL to in effect legalize match fixing from retrospective effect. 

The sponsors have given no indication that a clean league is a prerequisite before they associate their brands with the IPL. The people have shown no indication that they pay money to watch sports. They come to the games to socialize and be entertained. They turn on the TV as an alternative to Reality Television. The players have time and again justified their quest for cash. The IPL will sustain, even if matches are fixed or even if there is just a perception that matches are fixed.

So why not make it official. Remove all pretense of wanting a clean league and a clean game. Let every one make money. Change the rules. Delete the clauses under which Gurunath Meiyappan is being pursued. 

Just don't call it sport.

Why criticize the BCCI?

Sachin Tendukar was once accused of ball tampering in South Africa. I personally thought at that time, it was rather unfair. This was the early 2000s. Match referees back then tended to be more lenient towards the western nations and Indians in particular used to be banned for such things as "excessive appealing". Had it been Ricky Ponting in place of Sachin Tendulkar, I doubt if the late Mike Dennes would have bothered to even issue a warning for the same misdemeanor. 

There was a huge uproar as Mike Dennes issued a one match suspension to Sachin and a few other team mates.

That was the first time the BCCI bullied its way to right, what in their eyes was a wrong. 

BCCI refused to honor the ban. ICC, for their part, refused to give "Test" status to the subsequent match. between the 2 sides. India and South Africa played anyway. 

All was well...and the BCCI lived happily ever after... as a bully..

The most blatant act of BCCI bullying was Sydney 2008. After losing a Test fair and square, the BCCI and the Indian players sulked and flexed their financial muscle and threatened to leave the tour mid-way if Steve Buknor was not removed as the umpire. Cricket Australia and the ICC obliged. There are dozens of games every year that teams lose because of bad umpiring. But the BCCI know they have the means to do something about it. 

So, yes.... I do believe the BCCI is a bully.

And now once again, we are being told by most opinion dispensers that the BCCI is bullying again. By wanting more control of the ICC and "forcing" Cricket Australia and the England and Wales Cricket Board to demand more of the ICC revenue.

This time however, I am not entirely certain the BCCI deserves as much of the criticism as they seem to be getting. The BCCI have been pretty clear; as clear as they possibly can; that they would be better off playing cricket in a manner than maximizes their profits and that some of the cricket the ICC wants them to play isn't aligned to their goals. For the BCCI the Future Tours and Program is a hindrance.

The BCCI wants to do what every board is doing. Play the game for higher and higher profits, yet a disproportionate amount of abuse is hurled towards the BCCI only because they are one of the few boards actually succeeding in the pursuit. 

All cricket, every where, from the beginning of time, be it the Ashes, the Pentangular tournaments in pre Independence India, India's tour of Australia in 1977-78 to counter Kerry Packer, the IPL, county cricket, was and is played because at the core it makes or protect money for the people involved. 

From what I understand what the BCCI has proposed is this...

• "We don't need the ICC to tell us whom to visit and host and when. We can manage that perfectly well". In this arrangement, India may never play the likes of Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. Instead they may play a 7 ODI series with Australia. This is already happening today. So what's new.

• "We need more money from the ICC revenue because we help you make more money". This will mean that countries like Sri Lanka, Pakistan and the likes will get even lesser money than they get today.  (N. Srinivasan insists that everyone will get more money in this deal. This is only possible if the pie itself increases substantially) The way I read this is that these boards have failed to properly invest the money they receive from the ICC to make the cricket they play sustainable. As a consequence they are being held accountable and penalized (in a way and in a matter of speaking) by the BCCI, CA and ECB. I am of the opinion that the BCCI is in a better position to use the money more wisely and grow the game and the pie for everyone. However much we would like to believe; a billion people did not watch Sachin Tendulkar bat... and bring "joy to their lives". The Indian market is still a work in progress. Growth potential is immense. Instead of giving the money to Sri Lanka to waste on a Test Series with Bangladesh that no one watches, the BCCI will use it to play cricket that converts more Indians to cricket fans. It is one thing to appreciate and like Test cricket and want to preserve it, its entirely foolish to believe that the BCCI would be okay with wasting money (generated largely due to India's brand) just so that a Test match is played in Bangladesh that 300 people watch. 

• "If you do not agree to our proposal, we will walk away from ICC tournaments". Essentially the BCCI is saying we don't need ICC tournaments. You need India to participate in ICC tournaments. Remember the 2007 World Cup. India crashed out and suddenly all interest in the tournament evaporated. Even in bilateral series's, outside of the ICC ambit, why do you think we don't see a repeat of the 2002 New Zealand tour? Because it does not make financial sense to beat India in a Test in 2 days. You cannot make money in an ICC tournament or a bilateral series, unless India lasts long enough

I won't criticize the BCCI for wanting to do what administrators have always done. Ensure more and more profits. To blame just the BCCI for this unjustified. Criticism by Mike Atherton against the Big 3 for wanting greater control over the ICC is rooted in noble ideals without much understanding of the practicalities as seen by the BCCI. If the BCCI feels that the ICC is limiting its potential to earn revenue and if the ICC can offer no counter incentive; then the current arrangement, where BCCI has more control over the global game; is the most realistic.

Where else have there been examples of organizations giving up control over something as lucrative, for the "greater good"? 

The 'Draw' at the Wanderers

When Faf Du Plessis was brilliantly run out by Ajinkya Rahane with 16 runs still to get at the Wanderers yesterday, I thought India had decisively inched ahead of South Africa. During the entire Test match, while South Africa kept coming back; India for the most part seemed ahead of South Africa. Having been in a position of advantage for a longer duration and having Faf Du Plessis run out with 16 still to get, I thought India would be more disappointed at not having won this Test. 

At the end of the ODI series, however, had anyone offered a draw to India at Wanderers, I am sure India would have gladly accepted. 

South Africa on the other hand after the ODI series, would be very disappointed with a draw at the Wanderers. However, Once India's bowlers, Virat Kohli and Cheteshwar Pujara put India into a position of authority in this Test by the end of the 4th day; South Africa may be more relieved with escaping with a draw. Of course there must be a sense of disappointment at not having enough left to force a win. even while AB De Villiers and Faf Du Plessis put South Africa to striking distance of a win, at no point I felt South Africa could go for a win without taking risks.

Even after tea time when both Faf Du Plessis and AB De Villiers were batting so well, there was far too many runs and quite a bit of time still left for India to bowl South Africa out. South Africa could ill afford taking any risks. By the time the target had reached touching distance, they were just one wicket away from exposing Imran Tahir and a severely handicapped Morne Morkel to India's fast bowlers.

I can understand why South Africa did not go for the win and settled for a draw. Victory for them was never really possible without risking a loss.

Once South Africa started playing for the draw, what surprised me was that India too did not try to force a win. The last overs bowled at Dale Steyn and Vernon Philander didn't have any balls that looked like balls to take a wicket. The bouncers and short balls at Steyn were way too harmless and the intent was to go along with South Africa's desire to draw the game.

Perhaps, India reflected on how far they had come from the ODI series and assessed the draw positively given how heavily underrated they were to even put up a fight against South Africa. 

Ultimately the first Test of the series ended up being engaging affair and through out the Test I was wondering what Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid, VVS Laxman, Gautam Gambhir, and Virendra Sehwag must be thinking. For far too long we were sold the story that only batsmen of that caliber can compete on foreign pitches. In England, Australia and South Africa. Gambhir had us believe that somehow career averages count for runs in matches in progress.

That a young team on their maiden "away" Test arrested the 8 consecutive away losses was in it self uplifting. A win at the Wanderers would have been one of India's greatest away wins. Bigger than Adelaide 2003. 

Why were we holding back these young players and why were we clinging on to players well past their prime who were delivering loss after loss?

Fear of fast bowling

Not that I can ever claim to know this for a fact but anyone who is in the path of a cricket ball hurled at 95, 100 miles per hour is bound to have a moment where questions regarding personal safety crop up. While the ball is coming at your head, these safety questions are being addressed in the mind and an appropriate response; whether to duck, fend, hook, etc is being formulated; for that brief micro second, (the period before a response is finalized) there is bound to be a bit of fear.

I don't care if the batsman is the great Sir Vivian Richards, Sunil Gavaskar or Monty Panesar.

In one of the most candid recollections of India's World Cup win in 1983, Sandip Patil openly talks of the 'fear' of having to face the great West Indian bowlers. So the fear is real, acknowledged by all. And Patil knows a thing or two about giving it back to the fast men. Ask Len Pascoe and Bob Willis.

That facing fast bowling requires overcoming of ones fears is a given. 

Hence, I find comments by David Warner and Dale Steyn openly suggesting that English and Indian batsmen respectively are 'scared' of fast, short pitched bowling extremely distasteful. Because their statements imply 'fear' not as something batsmen are willing to overcome, rather something less manly and cowardly is implied.

Its not like England and India have not played and won games in Australia and South Africa before. These are not teams of untested amateurs. England and India are accomplished teams of proven performers. England have been the best Test Team in the world and India are holders of the Champions Trophy. A trophy they won, not in India, but in England, beating teams like South Africa, England, West Indies, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Many of these teams have world class fast bowlers who weren't bowling spin. This team that won the Champions Trophy is the exact same Indian team that is struggling in South Africa. Shekhar Dhawan, Rohit Sharma Ishant Sharma, et al included 

The ongoing Ashes series has been absorbing to watch. Mitchell Johnson has provided the kind of exhilarating performances not witnessed since the glory days of Wasim Akram. Yes Mitchel Johnson has left the English batsmen gasping for breath. They don't seem to know how to respond to his pace and accuracy. 

However, when Australian batsmen come to India and dance to the tune of Indian spinners does anyone taunt them, suggesting they are "scared"? They are afforded the basic respect that they simply do not have the technical expertise and training to play spin in conditions alien to them. Similarly, lets not question the English team's professionalism. When a David Warner says that he saw "fear" in Trott's eyes, let me assure you the player who falls in people's estimation is not Johnathan Trott, its David Warner. What kind of a player taunts an opponent like that?

When a Steyn says "Indian batsmen are scared" its his standing as a fair competitor that takes a beating. For everyone knows that there is nothing embarrassing about this Indian team. Yes they will struggle against fast bowling. Yes, they will close their eyes, get hit with a ball headed for their skulls, but they have the heart, the smarts, the will, to win Test matches in South Africa. Like the generation before them, these guys will learn to win Test matches in South Africa.

Looking forward to the Test matches in South Africa

The India v South Africa series about to get underway tomorrow is literally the crumbs BCCI has thrown at people who still care for Test Cricket.Its tough to view this series without feeling betrayed and insulted, knowing what happened before it.

One wonders what more levels India will stoop to with the power it has administratively. One wonders what the BCCI has to do for other boards and commentators to develop a voice. A Test series with the West Indies was created out of thin air to say Good Bye to Sachin Tendulkar and another with South Africa which everyone had looked forward to for almost a year was mauled for no apparent reason at all.

It is hard for me to see any positives in the way BCCI functions for the simple reason that given current market forces even a baniya on any street corner of India can run cricket in India and make money. BCCI cannot be judged by monetary yardstick alone. I would rather they be judged on what they are doing to protect the long term viability of Test cricket or say determining the role of technology in the sport or protecting the game from corruption.

On all those fronts the BCCI is failing miserably. With the Sachin Tendulkar retirement circus they showed that a Test Series can be arranged and covered as distastefully as the IPL and with the South African series they have shown they value the traditional format as much as Ravi Shastri, Sunil Gavaskar and Harsha Bhogle value expressing independent unrehearsed opinions. 

Firstly the series starts with the ODIs. The bilateral ODI model has been around since the 70s, but its stopped being exciting for me for a few years now. I would rather we reserve the ODI for ICC tournaments and make the Test phase of a tour longer. Of course this may be both wishful thinking and financially naive but honestly does any one remember the results of these ODI series?

The 2 Tests that follow will be interesting. India, after having lost all 8 away Tests by comfortable margins, none of the greats are going to be missed unless India manage to lose more Tests than scheduled.

Of immense interest to me is how India's batsmen and bowlers both young perform on the first tough assignment since their debuts. Cheteshwar Pujara has been to South Africa before and looked distinctly uncomfortable in the Tests he played. However this time he goes with the confidence of an established top order batsman.

It would be interesting to see what batting order India settle on. Something that brings relief to me is the absence of Suresh Raina from the Test Team. For some reason he seemed to be the chosen one. Marked by Greg Chappell for future greatness and leadership and then courted by Mahendra Singh Dhoni endlessly in Tests.

Both Virat Kohli and Rohit Sharma seem quite capable of batting at #4 but asking Rohit Sharma to bat at #4 makes more sense since it is less disruptive to the batting order. The #6 slot will be contested between Ambati Rayadu and Ajinkya Rahane. India even have an option of including neither and going in with Ravindra Jadeja. With Jadeja in the side, Mahendra Singh Dhoni can bat at #6 and Jadeja can play as a genuine all rounder - bat at #7 and afford India a 5th bowler. However Jadeja might lose out since playing 2 spinners in South Africa may not be wise.

On the bowling side, Zaheer Khan is sure to play in the starting XI. He is one of those selections that are made by the selectors to be in the playing XI. Mohammed Shami after the debut he has had and with his ability to get clean bowled dismissals thanks to his pace and movement, is also an automatic choice I think. It is the third seamer that will require some thinking. .

My vote would go to Bhuvansehwar Kumar but playing Ishant Sharma would also not be a bad move. My gut feel is that Bhuvi, if selected, will do a Sreesanth. Both India's Test wins in South Africa from the last 2 tours were possible because of Sreesanth; and Bhuvi seems to have the crispness, speed and seam positioning needed to get wickets in South Africa.

India has only gains to look forward to from this series. Hence it would have been good had this been a full series. Even if India lose all Tests which I think is the most likely result, it would be looked at as progress. Unless of course the losses are so hugely embarrassing...like the one England experienced at Brisbane.

My team for the tests would be
Murali Vijay, Shikhar (twirler) Dhawan, Cheteshwar Pujara, Rohit Sharma (#ThakYouSachin) , Virat Kohli, Ajinkya Rahane, Mahendra Singh Dhoni, R Ashwin, Bhuvaneshwar Kumar, Zaheer Khan, Mohammen Shami

Rohit Sharma's debut 100

What is common between Venkatapathi Raju, Sunil Joshi, Vijay Dahiya, Hrishikesh Kanitkar, Vijay Bharadwaj and Rohit Sharma?

These batsmen along with 12 others are the entire set of batsmen who have made their debuts for India in the middle order; numbers 3 through 6; since Sachin Tendulkar's debut Test for India in November 1989.

India has traditionally has had very strong middle orders, so I was half expecting this list to be quite elite but its not quite. I was also expecting this list to be much shorter than 18. Sachin's career has spanned 18 new batsmen tried by India in the middle order. 

As expected however, the period between 2001 and 2010 saw only 2 debuts handed out in the middle order. Virendra Sehwag and Vuvraj Singh

For a while I had resigned myself to the possibility that the seniors carrying on for far too long and Rohit's ODI struggles would unnecessarily derail a promising Test career. Thankfully, Rohit Sharma waited patiently and when the opportunity arose, played one of the more memorable debut innings by a middle order batsman.

The best debut innings, certainly given the match situation, since Sachin Tendulkar's debut.

V Raju, who obviously was not selected to play the middle order appears in this list only because he was sent as a night watchman (presumably). This surely must be an exclusive club. To go out for your debut innings as a night watchman. If I am not mistaken, Mohammed Azharuddin was also making his debut as captain and that surely must be a unique occurrence. A rookie captain, sending a rookie as a nightwatchman! V Raju scored 31 in the match and none of the batsmen he was protecting reached double figures. This included Sachin who was out for a duck

This list has only 3 Bombay batsmen. Praveen Amre, Vinod Kambli and Rohit Sharma. Praveen Amre of course scored a 100 on debut and Vinod Kambli's debut knock was followed by a half century and a double hundred batting with Sachin Tendulkar as India humiliated Graham Gooch's team in 1993.

Notable debuts in the middle order since the emergence of Sachin Tendulkar, that can seriously challenge Rohit Sharma's innings includes only two in my opinion...

Virendra Sehwag's 105, coming in at number 6 with India at 68 for 4 at Bloemfontein in South Africa. Sachin Tendulkar also scored a 100 batting along with Sehwag

Cheteshwar Pujara's 72 in the second innings of the Mohali Test in 2010 as India beat Australia comfortably, chasing a tricky 207 in the 4th innings. In fact I would say it was one of the rarest feats by Pujara to score a half century on debut in a successful chase on the last day.

Do the West Indies know their part in Sachin's retirement party?

I don't know if any one has made this clear to the West Indian cricket team. They are supposed to show up, go through the drills, occasionally show their skills, and generally play their parts as in the big fat Sachin Tendulkar retirement party.

In a way they are invited to the party just like one invites 2-bit magicians, tattoo artists, clowns, caricaturists and sketch artists, to a Christmas party or a child's birthday party. They are expected to be part of the noise and celebrations for a while. 

It isn't possible to play a Test match without an opposition and West Indies are invited simply to meet this very basic prerequisite that must be fulfilled to recognize a game of cricket between international teams as a Test Match so Sachin and all of India can have his 200th and then retire

As per the BCCI script, India is supposed to win the series, with Sachin getting his form back and preferably score a double hundred in his last and 200th. The West Indians are supposed to put up a spirited display and lend legitimacy to Sachin's farewell Test Series.

The ICC script had called for Sachin to visit South Africa.... enough said

If all the song and dance and made up excuses of protocols broken by the CSA and unethical behavior of Mr. Haroon Lorgat, was to get a retirement guarantee from Sachin by mutilating the South African tour, then I say its worth it. Its still hard to feel excited about it. 

West Indies however are in ominous form and the ghastly celebrations Indians are likely to indulge in, in the name of Sachin's retirement party, may just provoke the West Indians into giving their best.

India won't mind.

We have been buying the Sachin Tendulkar story for far too long and nothing suggests we won't stop buying it any time soon. 

West Indies A not long back gave an excellent account of themselves in drawing the unofficial Test Series after winning the first Test by a big margin at Bangalore. That series and the general familiarity with Indian conditions after the advent of the IPL, gives the West Indies a decent chance to give India fright.

Mahendra Singh Dhoni can be expected to help the team focus on the business of winning Tests but there is no denying that the series has already deteriorated into a circus that is Sachin's retirement. 

As for Sachin himself, I hope he finds some semblance of form and puts up decent scores. It is rather sad that he never had a voice in many of the events around him throughout his career. He has singularly focused on his performances and his pursuit of excellence as a batsman and no doubt India for a long time were a better team for that. 

Even in his retirement, with so much adulation from the fans, respect from his peers he has stood silent as BCCI severely mutilated the South African series to stage this retirement party. One will never officially know what the reasons were for that, but I cannot shrug off the feeling that Sachin has yet again let himself be used, happy to go along with his now increasingly petty bosses at the BCCI. Surely he has a thing or 2 to say about the way the series was born.

Man dies due to overdose of reading Sachin Tributes

A 42 year old man, in otherwise good health, has died at a local Bombay hospital due to what medical experts agree was an overdose of reading "Sachin Tendulkar tributes"

The man, like 150% of all Indians, was a cricket fan and a one time admirer of Sachin Tendulkar.

Very little is known of this condition, but some experts have suggested that in certain rare conditions, men lack the immunity and are unable, to withstand the stress resulting from reading saccharine sweet articles of tribute about celebrities they have lost respect for. In such men, their sugar levels rise to amounts that can lead to stroke, temporary blindness and in some cases result in death. 

Health authorities fear that there will be an epidemic of sorts with the country preparing itself for life after Sachin Tendulkar's retirement by publishing article after article on Sachin Tendulkar's greatness. Research suggests most of the youngsters under 35 and older generation 50 and above are so far immune to this condition.

It is the 35 to 50 years olds who have been subjected to decades of Sachin worship that are most at risk. Regular exercise, a healthy diet, developing a liking for team sports, and limiting visits to cricket related sites are recommended by most doctors to dodge this condition.

The man who died, doctors say after extensive interviews with family members, first began to show signs of weakened immunity to Sachin praise around 2004. 

"Around the time Sachin scored a double hundred in Sydney without a single cover drive, my husband started getting irritated every time someone unconditionally praised Sachin", said his wife. "It was the death of Sachin as an attacking batman, he would say" she added

His son said, "Before 2004, I loved my dad. All it took for him to be happy was that Sachin put up a good fight. After the Sydney 2004, something died in him. My dad was never the same man again"

One of his friends even recollected an incident at a pub where after reading a routine article on Sachin Tendulkar's greatness on his friends mobile phone, the now deceased man, complained of blindness. Sachin had just skipped the West Indies tour for the IPL and we now know that the lowered immunity led to a sudden increase of blood sugar levels that temporarily blinded the man.

Doctors suggest that the best way to handle symptoms of this disease is to sit the patient down and indulge in some realistic assessment of Sachin Tendulkar's career. Sadly there are very few people who can do that so its best, doctors add, to let the patient die.

BCCI wins!

One of the most exciting administrative tussles between 2 cricket boards; one time close friends; has come to a pulsating end. 

The result?

A 2 Test and 3 ODI series when India tour South Africa in December 2013 and a 100% guarantee that Sachin will retire.

BCCI wins!! 

Highlights of the win

• Sachin Tendulkar's 200th Test will be played in India with a guarantee that he will not pile on any more misery on us after that.
• Haroon Lorgat will be sent on a long leave of absence. Heads of boards the world over now know precisely what their boundaries are if they want to keep their jobs. 

Whether it was because of the need for obscenities as a once great batsman prepares for life after cricket, or it was because Mr. Haroon Lorgat  said or did something that the BCCI did not approve of, who knows. My guess is Sachin and his retirement was just an excuse for the petty BCCI administrators to get back at CSA for disregarding their diktat over Mr. Lorgat .

Part of me says that, if it took this maneuvering to get Sachin to retire, its worth the trouble. One thing Sachin has inadvertently ended up doing, is make the life of his successor and selectors who pick that successor that much easier. One can throw darts and pic anyone who has played a bit a first class cricket in India and not go wrong. Averaging 20 odd and the ability to slow the run rate down to a trickle, is hard not to achieve. Even Maninder Singh can do it, without taking up any time batting at the nets. Plus we will be spared the tamasha of making a routine bowled appear that the ball stayed low. 

A much anticipated Test series between 2 good Test sides is now reduced to a 2 Tester.

The official line given is some misdeeds by Haroon Lorgat  who will be sent on a long leave for the series to go ahead.

I wonder sometimes. Why does the BCCI even bother to cook up some excuses to do what they want to do anyways.

For example if the BCCI wants to scrap the English tour of 2014 and extend the IPL by 10 weeks. What, who and why would anyone stop them? Is there any board, court, sponsor, government or people who can do anything if the BCCI says..."We will not tour England in 2014...because....well just because........"

What's stopping them from doing that?

That they feel the need to cook up excuses to make their decisions sound reasonable and bound by rules and protocols, shows that the BCCI is not yet willing to be an open bully.

That time will come in future

What should Haroon Logart apologize for?

A fresh row has erupted between the BCCI and CSA. This time its over what Haroon Logart should apologize about.

To give our worldwide readers some background...

It has been reported over the course of the year that the BCCI has been proactively attempting to block the appointment of Haroon Logart as CEO of CSA. The public was given to understand that in his previous role as CEO of the ICC, Mr. Logart had rubbed the BCCI thugs the wrong way and given that vindictiveness runs in the blood of even the peons that work in fool proof BCCI offices, a retaliation was expected. And retaliate they did. When CSA ignored BCCI's objections and appointed Mr. Logart as their CEO anyways, the BCCI gave the FTP suggested Indian tour of South Africa a cold shoulder

While accepting his new job as CSA CEO, Mr. Logart had offered to apologize to the BCCI; an offer that BCCI stand-in president Mr. Jagmohan Dalmiya said, would be nice if actually executed.

Following this exchange in the media, the less unreasonable elements in the BCCI had reached out to the less lethargic group of administrators over at CSA to broker a peace and attempt to salvage the tour...

This is when things went out of hand when neither group could agree on what Mr. Haroon Logart should apologize about.

According to our BCCI sources, the BCCI wanted Haroon Logart to apologize for once driving by and having the audacity to peek into a stadium where an ICL game was in progress.

On the other hand CSA wants to offer an apology for the one time Haroon Logart constructed an English sentence that included the words Sachin and retirement. 

In an attempt to come to a common middle, representatives from the England and Wales Cricket club had offered to conjure up a situation that never happened, make Mr Logart apologize for that and end the cold war. It is understood that the ECB suggested that Mr. Haroon Logart apologize for urinating on the Wankhede pitch.

The BCCI representatives failed to agree to this. Urinating in public does not merit an apology they said.

Even when negotiations were seemingly going no where. The BCCI announced that Sri Lanka will be visiting India for a series of 5 T20s right in the middle of December. When prompted, if this meant the South Africa tour was off, N. Srinivasan said, "With the rupee in nose dive and movies ridiculing Tamils making 200 crore, all you are worried about is where Sachin will play his 200th Test?"

Kumar Sangakara: Wants his cake and eat it too

I don't understand why it is important for cricket to feign 'nation's interest' when everything about the game seems business focused and justifiable for cash.

Over the issue of whether Kumar Sangakara should play for his IPL franchise or his home province (Kandurata Maroons), in the upcoming Champions League 2013, last week he was incensed that his board tried to 'frame the argument' in a way that made him appear 'disloyal to his country'. Kumar Sangakara and cricketers even greater than him in stature have always put country second when it comes to financials.

No one should grudge them for that and indeed it would be unreasonable, especially in today's environment, to expect cricketers to forgo their financial future to 'play for national interests' when the national boards themselves are chasing cash at the expense of everything that once was deemed sacred in cricket.

So if Kumar Sangakara stands to lose $140K USD, I think it is quite hypocritical of the Sri Lankan Cricket board to make him play for Kandurata in the name of 'national interest'.

Sri Lankan cricketers have routinely showed up late on foreign tours and padded up in Test Matches with hardly any practice just so they can earn a few more dollars playing late into the IPL. So why these pangs of wanting to appear 'loyal to the nation'?

It seems to me that cricketers want to have their money and want to appear patriotic at the same time. Cricket administrators have outsourced their jobs to Television executives in the need for cash but don't want their nation's cricketers to follow the same principle of cash by allowing them to choose their franchises.

Why cover the blatant dash for cash with a sham of a veil of national interest?

People (the common fan) have moved on. They have already seen the writing and are willing to recognize players for what they have to offer in terms of skill and entertainment value. Kevin Pietersen, Lasith Malinga, Sachin Tendulkar have fans all over the world even when they have, at one time or the other, compromised their nations interests over those of the franchises that offer them more cash.

Its time for cricketers to stop pretending, to stop hiding under the artificial veil of ..... "oh!....my country!".