It has been over three years since Troy Justice was appointed the NBA’s Senior Director, Basketball Operations, India. Brisk and energetic, his brief includes travelling round the country, interacting with players and coaches alike and devising newer methods to take hoops to an all-new level. Sportstar caught up with him on the sidelines of a private function in Chennai as he shed light on the basketball scene in the country, its further development and what the future holds.
Excerpts:
Question: What is the primary objective of NBA in India?
Answer: It’s exciting for the NBA to be here. India is a priority country. The objective is to grow basketball at the grassroots. The aim is to get more kids bouncing basketballs. It is to give eight-year-olds and nine-year-olds enough opportunities to play and participate.
How do you assess the overall scenario in India?
The basketball level has grown since the first time I was here. I go to the national tournaments and the national camps. The candidate pool for the nationals is getting wider with each passing day. We have players now in India who are being observed and seen on the global scale. The Indian women recently won the FIBA Asia 3x3 Championship in Doha, which is a good sign.
How have the player’s skills developed since you came here first?
We are seeing very organised basketball being played right now. When I first came, it was very freelance, like taking the first available shot, shooting as against passing and moving. With more training sessions taking place across the country and with emphasis on specific skills, the players have started to play a better defence. Also, the offensive set-plays are being well thought out. So what we are actually seeing is the coaching grow and with that the players’ skills.
How important is coaching development?
It is very important and we have been focussing on it. In the past three and half years we have conducted about 450 training clinics for players and coaches. We have had 21 NBA / WBNBA players who have come down to India since 2008, to interact with them — eight-time NBA All-Star Chris Bosh (Miami Heats) being the latest.
Seventeen-year-old Satnam Singh Bhamara is considered a prodigy and is touted to do to India what Yao Ming did to China in creating a basketball wave. How is he coming along at the IMG Academy in Bradenton, Florida? And do you think we need more such young players to give basketball a fillip?
Yeah, absolutely. Satnam has made huge progress. He is getting stronger. At last year’s FIBA Asia under-16 championships, he averaged the most points in the tournament. He is now capable of standing up and hitting a 15-foot jumper, an 18-foot jumper. He is learning fast. There is one more boy named Palpreet Singh. He is of the same age as Satnam. A 6-foot-10 athletic shot blocker — a very talented player.
In the U.S., college basketball is the feeder for the NBA. How crucial do you think it is to develop such a system in schools here?
Schools are critical. They are the backbone for developing basketball at the grassroots level. That’s why we are focussing on schools. Our junior NBA curriculum is used to develop things at schools. Earlier the kids start, the better they will be.
Coming to the present, other countries are obviously ahead of India. What do you think will be a realistic time-frame for India to catch-up with the rest?
Great things take time. They require a lot of hard work. We understand where we are now and we all know about the potential that exists. It’s unlimited. It’s a matter of working everyday and over a course of time it adds up to a huge improvement. It’s actually hard to identify a timeframe. It depends upon the work that’s put in.
Honestly I believe we are not that far off. In the next five years you are going to see incredible growth — both at the grassroots and national levels.
What is the NBA planning in the days ahead?
Every three months or six months we have something new to offer. Our coaching programmes continue to go to newer places every year. From last year we have our NBA 3X which will continue to grow. The national winners will play in the world tour, which will give them much needed international exposure. If they win there they get will enter the FIBA World 3X Championships. So we are looking forward to all these.
http://www.sportstaronnet.com/stories/20130727505104200.htm
March 14, 2013. At the unofficially dubbed ‘Fifth Slam,’ the Indian Wells Masters, Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal, once ranked No. 1 and No. 2 in the world, were about to spar in what was their 29th career meeting.
But the stage was one of the unlikeliest. The two were now No. 2 and No. 5 in the world. Nadal was on a comeback trail after a knee injury that had kept him out for more than seven months and Federer was on the lookout for his first title of the year. The most telling of facts was that it was the quarterfinals — the earliest the duo had met since their first ever meeting nine years ago.
“In the past, this match used to be a final,” said Federer on the eve of the tie. “Now it’s a quarterfinal,” he added. Nadal went on to beat Federer in two lopsided sets — 6-4, 6-2 — and later clinched the title too.
Yet, this match, one which pales in significance when compared to all the rip-roaring treats the duo had dished out over the past decade, might well prove to be the turning point in the Nadal-Federer rivalry which has characterised much of the current era. An indication that, riding on the exploits of the other half of the ‘Big Four’ — Andy Murray and Novak Djokovic — the world of tennis might after all move past theirs.
A cursory look at the stats would prompt one to term this rivalry as cock-eyed. Nadal has won 20 matches to Federer’s 10, 13 matches to two on clay and one match to two on grass. The most vital of platforms on which success is measured, the Grand Slam finals, Nadal has beaten Federer in six of the eight they have contested in. Still, how is it that the two shaped, defined and built the kind of narrative that left a lump in one’s throat every time it unfolded?
“Variety is the spice of life,” said the legendary commentator John Barrett. “Diversity is what makes tennis such a wonderful sport.” A sneak peek into history will add credence to this. The Pete Sampras-Andre Agassi rivalry was the one that defined the 1990s. Yet, Sampras had a 20-14 overall advantage and was 6-3 in the Grand Slams. But it was the difference in playing styles, serve and volley versus baseline tennis, that made it engrossing — the 2001 U.S. Open quarterfinal, which was decided in favour of Sampras after four tie-breaker sets, standing as a testimony. Similarly with Bjorn Borg and John McEnroe — ice and fire — the 1980 and 1981 Wimbledon finals being the epitome of their contests.
It was this contrast, a pre-requisite to make any sport enchanting and captivating, that made the rivalries great. Also, the spectacle of great match-ups irrespective of skewed numbers added lustre. With Nadal and Federer, this started when the former, aged just 17, stunned Federer 6-3, 6-3 on a Miami hardcourt way back in 2004 and has been memorable since then.
Both have thrilled people, albeit differently. One so elegant and fluid that his best tennis looked so effortless even while making the seemingly impossible possible and the other all muscles and explosive, whose best tennis looked not like a gift, but a product of an endless reservoir of self-confidence and will. One’s delightful one-handed backhand versus the other’s double-fisted bullet. One even reduced to tears by the other, not once but twice.
The duo’s rollicking contests in turn developed an insatiable hunger in the fans for more. That they could cater to this set of audience for the good part of a decade was in itself extremely impressive. The 2006 Rome Masters final, a five-hour, five-set marathon that forced both players to pull out of the tournament that followed in Hamburg and led the ATP to reduce all Masters finals to best-of-three sets, the five-set 2007 Wimbledon final, the marathon Australian Open semifinal in 2012 all contributed to the glorious ebb and flow of the games between the two — be it on clay, grass or hard courts.
What made this rivalry even better was the sense of purpose that both players attached to it. While one was described, in many quarters, as the greatest player of all-time and was constantly on the prowl to prove the same, the other was in continuous pursuit of becoming the most complete player. The glorious 2008 Wimbledon final, a match described by many as the greatest ever, which ended in semi-darkness after Nadal outclassed Federer over five sets, was the quintessence of the Nadal-Federer double act.
The secret of the level of competitiveness between the two reaching such dizzying heights was in the way each fed off the other. Would Federer have had the motivation to go beyond the magic number of 14 majors but for Nadal? Would he still aspire to put the record straight on clay even after winning the French Open? Would Nadal have been so focussed on becoming the complete player that he has become but for Federer? In effect each was the measuring stick for the other; a kind of gold standard that each became for the other, a clear case of one lifting the other.
But as the truism goes, nothing can go on forever. Federer’s age and Nadal’s knees have both led us into questioning the durability of this great rivalry. Federer’s defeat in the second-round at Wimbledon, breaking a streak of 36 Grand Slam quarterfinals on the trot, and Nadal’s first round exit, a first for him, have raised pertinent questions on its mortality.
Rivalries can sure be revived. Chris Evert led Martina Navratilova 20-4 from 1973 to 1978, but from 1982 to 1985 Navratilova won 13 matches in a row. The two met again in the French Open finals of 1985 and 1986 with Evert winning both. But Evert was just two years older than Navratilova. Come August, Federer will be five years elder to Nadal and the latter’s dodgy knees will make it equally daunting for him.
After this Wimbledon, Federer will move out of the top 10 for the first time in over a decade and Nadal will slot into the top four. They may never be ranked one and two again. A look at their past will no doubt provide enough evidence to suggest how enduring their excellence has been till now, but at this late stage it’s highly doubtful if fans can ever relive the tension of a Grand Slam final between the two. They might still meet, may be not as finalists but just as contenders a round or two earlier.
* * *
Great match-ups
John McEnroe vs. Bjorn Borg – Their 14 meetings occurred from 1978 to 1981. The years 1980 and 1981 were particularly memorable as they met in four finals — two each at Wimbledon and the U.S. Open. Borg escaped in five sets in the 1980 Wimbledon final, but McEnroe won the next three.
Pete Sampras vs. Andre Agassi – In perhaps the greatest of all American rivalries, Sampras got the better of Agassi in 20 of their 34 meetings, stretching from 1989 to 2002. The two met in five Grand Slam finals, with Sampras winning four. Their last meeting was at the 2002 U.S. Open final which Sampras won for his 14th Grand Slam title.
Martina Navratilova vs. Chris Evert – The two played a staggering 80 times including 22 times in Grand Slams stretching from 1975 to 1988. Fourteen of those matches were finals, with Navratilova taking the title 10 times.
John McEnroe vs. Jimmy Connors – They clashed 34 times, with McEnroe holding a 20-14 edge. In majors, McEnroe held a 4-3 edge with six of those meetings coming in semifinals. Their lone meeting in a Grand Slam final was at the 1982 Wimbledon final, with Connors winning in five sets.
Boris Becker vs. Stefan Edberg – Out of 35 meetings, Becker won 25 but lost three of their four Grand Slam matches. The two contested three finals at Wimbledon from 1988-90 with Edberg winning two (1988 and 1990).
Ivan Lendl vs. John McEnroe – They met in an Open Era record 36 times. Ten of those were in a Grand Slam, out of which three were finals. Lendl held 21-15, 7-3 and 2-1 advantages respectively. Their most memorable match was the 1984 French Open final in which Lendl rallied from two sets down to win.
Steffi Graf vs. Monica Seles – Of the 15 matches they played, Graf won 10. They split the six Grand Slam finals that they contested. In 1991 and 1992, Seles won the Australian, French and U.S. Open titles. Only Graf’s victories at Wimbledon prevented Seles from winning back-to-back Grand Slams. The great rivalry was brutally cut short when a self-professed fan of Graf stabbed Seles on court in 1993.
http://www.sportstaronnet.com/tss3628/stories/20130713502100400.htm
One of India’s foremost tennis players, Vijay Amritraj is now on his 44th consecutive visit to the Championships at Wimbledon. In an exclusive telephonic chat with The Hindu from California, he shared his views on his memories of Wimbledon, the evolution of the grass-court game, the current crop of players and Indian participation.
Excerpts:
Question: What are you fond memories of Wimbledon?
Answer: My early days were all about making a mark and wanting to play at Wimbledon, to do well and to win. I reached the quarterfinals twice [1973 & 81]. Perhaps my only regret was not winning the singles title. I think I was good enough to have won it at least once. It was a place where I wanted to play not just for myself but for the country. Wherever I went, Indians always wished me luck for Wimbledon, irrespective of what time of the year it was. So, it was very special.
How do you think grass court tennis has evolved over the years?
The grass itself is not like what I played on in the 1970s. It’s of a completely different texture and much slower. The game as a result is being played completely from the baseline. If you look back at the last leg of the faster courts, in which [Boris] Becker, [Stefan] Edberg and subsequently [Pete] Sampras played, it was still down to a big serve-and-volley game. But with the racquets getting more and more powerful, the balls and the courts were slowed down worldwide. It made a big difference to the style of play.
What then is the future of serve-and-volley tennis?
Serve-and-volley tennis that we know is history. It doesn’t have an immediate future. Even if you get a guy to play it today, say Milos Raonic who is probably the closest that we can get with his huge serve, it still comes down to whether he can do the same on his second serve, which is tough.
Bjorn Borg won French Open and Wimbledon back-to-back thrice. Is it easier now with the courts homogenising?
To me, Borg’s achievement will always be unique. He won on slow clay and came to Wimbledon without playing any grass court tournament. He won on fast grass not just against [John] McEnroe and [Jimmy] Connors, but against many other players like Mark Edmondson, Ilie Nastase, Raul Ramirez and others who could serve and volley really well and push him to the limit.
Now with the Wimbledon courts being much slower and the ball not dying fast, it gives an opportunity for someone like Nadal to play the groundstrokes from eight feet behind the baseline.
Is the 2013 edition perhaps the most interesting in recent years – with Nadal’s spectacular comeback, Djokovic still the number one, Murray having a good tune-up and Federer always in with a chance?
Absolutely. Strangely enough, when Federer was dominating Wimbledon, we always felt ‘let’s see who is going to be playing for second place?’ But now that’s the way we feel about women’s tennis, with Serena. It’s very hard to bet against Serena at Wimbledon. To be honest, it’s like watching Nadal play on clay – you are always looking at second place.
But in the men’s draw, you are looking at four guys who are favourites. Barring any unforeseen blip in the form during the fortnight, these four should be there towards the end of the second week. The draw is going to be interesting especially if Nadal is seeded fifth he could run into any of the other three in the quarterfinals.
On the chances of others, especially the second rung of players.
Let's not rule them out. Outsiders, like [Jo-Wilfred] Tsonga, [Tomas] Berdych and [Marian] Cilic They are all dangerous floaters who can do some damage but might not win it.
The grass season will be extended by a week next year. Will it help if we can get a Masters in?
It will be very helpful. Certainly providing a week more between French and Wimbledon will be of great help.
With Somdev Devvarman bowing out of the qualifying, there will be no participation in the singles. Your views.
It’s disappointing. We can continue to have representation in doubles, which is great for us to keep our name up there. But at the end of the day singles is where we need focus. We need see how to have players in the top 100 on a regular basis, for them to compete in Grand Slams and cause upsets along the way to put India back on the tennis map.
An edited version of the interview can be found here:
http://www.thehindu.com/sport/tennis/serve-and-volley-is-history-says-vijay-amritraj/article4827526.ece
In the world of sports debates — most debates for that matter — that pit two different eras or two different but equally matched individuals to measure up to each other, there is always a yearning for the bygone era on the old timers’ part. The younger generation, meanwhile, swears by what it watches and experiences in this ‘truly professional’ age.
Even as the belief that sport was much better-off then, with diverse characters throwing up interesting match-ups, and existed as a more humane art form dominates the outlook of the seniors, for the juniors the current ‘one-dimensional’ course it has taken, where emphasis is more or less on ‘winning at all costs’, is what matters.
There has rarely been a ray of convergence between these two schools of thought until say a Roger Federer arrived. But what happened in Paris on a gloomy, rainy Sunday afternoon that was June 9, settled once for all the debate about who the greatest-ever clay court player was.
Rafael Nadal is no artist vis-à-vis Federer, but when it comes to red dirt, he is simply matchless. As the legendary Bjorn Borg said recently, “There’s no-one better than him on this surface. People don’t realise this — maybe the public has been spoilt to a certain extent. Rafa’s (Nadal) quite simply an artist when it comes to clay.”
Artistry need not always be aesthetically appealing through delightful shot-making, but can also involve grafting, defending and counter-punching. On clay it’s more about the other three and along with these it has taken Nadal eight titles each at Roland Garros, Barcelona and Monte Carlo, seven in Rome, three in Madrid, an 81-match winning run (previous best was Guillermo Vilas’s 53 in 1977), a 13-2 record over Roger Federer and 13-3 over Novak Djokovic to get to being called the ‘greatest’ dirt-baller ever.
The broad contours of his achievement on clay that led to this tag were drawn in 2011 when he drew level with Borg’s six titles in Paris. The latter won these six in eight attempts from 1973 to 1981. One of the reasons that has until now tilted the debate in Borg’s favour is the fact he retired when he was only 26 and the accomplishments came in such a small time-span. However, Nadal turned 27 only earlier this month and already has two more titles than Borg and a 59-1 record in Paris.
Borg, without any disrespect to any of his feats, was largely unthreatened in that era. True, there were players such as Vilas and Adriano Panatta, both former French Open champions, the latter the man to have beaten Borg the most on clay — five times — Ilie Nastase and Jimmy Connors. But none could match the current levels of competition presented by Djokovic and Federer that Nadal is always up against.
Though Nadal possesses head-to-heads that look as one-sided as it can get against Federer and Djokovic, they are by no means duds on the surface. The Swiss, since 2005, has reached two semi-finals, five finals and won once in Paris.
Djokovic, even if yet to win the French Open, is widely believed to actually possess the game that can dethrone Nadal. And he showed this in last year’s final, this year’s semi-final and perhaps in the only stretch when Nadal seemed beatable — in the tune up to the 2011 French Open.
Borg also won those titles when John McEnroe was yet to happen — though he was hardly a force on clay except once — and before the next era of great dirt ballers took shape, particularly Mats Wilander and Ivan Lendl, both of whom have three wins and two final defeats each against their names.
At the turn of the millennium, the 2001 Wimbledon champion, Goran Ivanisevic, summing up the depth in men’s tennis and the homogenous nature of most surfaces, said, “In tennis now, you don’t have any favourites. It doesn’t matter if it’s clay or grass or hard court. Anybody can beat anybody.” For Nadal, to dominate a single surface, in this sort of an era is simply mind-boggling.
But regardless of all the above facts, it was always considered safer not to compare eras and settle for status quo. But Nadal’s injury after last year’s Wimbledon, his subsequent seven-month layoff and his stupendous comeback since then lent a certain context to his latest feat that tilted the balance in his favour.
There was an air of uncertainty leading up to Paris this year. True, Nadal had had a sensational run of six titles from eight outings. But still doubts persisted whether his knees would hold up in a best-of-five set match. He was also beaten by Djokovic in the Monte Carlo final. Even in the first week in Paris, he looked far from convincing and as modest as he always is, went on to question his own chances.
But the response to this was from a different Nadal. Usually on the defensive when playing Djokovic, he decided to go for broke in the semi-final. Down a break in the final set, his desire to hit deep and go for the lines showed clear signs of his aggression and his relentless drive to master his recent nemesis and etch his name in history. Nadal after the victory said: “Five months ago nobody of my team dreamed about a comeback like this. Because we thought that it’s going to be impossible. But here we are today, and that’s really fantastic and incredible. I’m just enjoying a lot all these emotions since I came back.”
“It’s completely 100 percent settled now,” said Wilander when asked to compare Nadal with his compatriot Borg. “He’s more perfect than Borg.”
The tag of the ‘greatest’ wasn’t just spoken about with respect to Nadal at this French Open. Serena Williams marched towards her own — of that of all-time. She is just two shy of Chris Evert’s and Navratilova’s 18 and four of Steffi Graf’s 22 Grand Slam titles. Margaret Court has 24.
But what has been incredible is that both Nadal and Serena, at 27 and 31, seem far from finished. However, the caveat for Serena is always her motivation levels and for Nadal, his knees. But for now, it’s time to forget the question marks and put exclamations to their incredible wins.
http://www.tssonnet.com/tss3625/stories/20130622501100500.htm
This is the Ashes year. Every little noise that emanates in the lead-up to the bi-yearly cricketing extravaganza will be probed by both the media and fans — more so by the English — to locate something that could echo through the series. Every on-field or off-field activity will have an Ashes context attached to it.
So when England met New Zealand over five consecutive Tests (three away and two at home) one could hope for a lot of nitpicking.
That there is a competition scheduled prior to the Ashes which is next only to the World Cup and will present England with a chance to win its first ever global 50-over tournament seems to have been completely forgotten. Even to the extent that some are not happy with the ace off-spinner, Graeme Swann — who returned to the squad for the two-Test series at home after an elbow surgery — being included in the Champions Trophy squad. The reason being that he is more important to the Test team. Understandably so, particularly when the Barmy Army sniffs a genuine chance of an Ashes victory.
Adding credence to this were England’s many pluses that emerged from the home series. The tremendous bowling of James Anderson and Stuart Broad in the first Test, Swann’s form and the accompanying fitness that helped him to a 10-wicket haul in the second, Steven Finn’s return to his fiery self, and the batting of Joe Root, captain Alastair Cook and Jonny Bairstow.
But there were some things that would throw up a few worrisome faces as well and principal among them were Nick Compton’s form and Cook’s captaincy.
From the heights of being named one of the five Wisden Cricketers of the Year, Compton seems to have lost an enormous amount of goodwill generated for a year or so. So much so that his two hundreds in Dunedin and Wellington not so long ago no longer seem to occupy public memory.
His four innings in the two Tests have brought him 39 runs. Coupled with Root’s and Bairstow’s impressive form in the middle-order and Kevin Pietersen’s impending return from knee injury, Compton seems to be on shaky ground.
“He’s struggled in these few Tests, certainly,” said coach Andy Flower. “The Ashes is quite a long way away. Let’s allow the dust to settle on this series. Then we’ll chat about the line-up and the conditions and the opposition.
“He’s got to go away, get back into form and score some heavy runs for Somerset. He goes back into a couple of one-day games. Hopefully, the one-day games will be good for him. He can go out and enjoy hitting the ball. That will be the catalyst for him going into the first-class game feeling confident.”
The option of promoting Root to open the innings also seems to be on the cards. But both Cook and Flower did admit that ringing in a change at such an important slot would constitute ‘a risk’ and Compton has exactly 12 innings before the Ashes starts to make this a no-option.
Captain Cook, as always, excelled with the bat scoring his 25th hundred. He now averages 71 as a captain. This does bring in extra confidence to try some new things and make bolder moves. However, his decision at Headingly not to enforce the follow-on against a side, as one journalist put it, ‘which had lost 20 wickets in 66.1 overs in its previous two Test innings’ was baffling.
Then he delayed his declaration until after lunch on Day Four in spite of England being ahead by more than 400 runs and the weathermen forecasting that the fifth day could be severely curtailed by rain. It was proved right too. Only 45 minutes play was possible before lunch and it was only at 3 p.m. that play resumed. But it was long enough for England to secure victory by 247 runs after picking up the final four wickets.
“The result definitely vindicates the decision,” Cook said after the match. “There is absolutely no doubt about that at all. To win by 250 runs is a good win and in just over three days cricket effectively, it is an outstanding performance. You are judged as a captain on results. In this game we have won by 247 runs.” Fair point. But come the Ashes, similar decisions will be dissected much more minutely should the result be in any way unfavourable.
England went to New Zealand in March fancying its chances and hoping for an impressive run-up to the Ashes. But a resolute New Zealand, amidst all the ignominy surrounding its ranking, continued to punch above its weight and was in with a chance to secure a series victory till the final delivery of the final Test in Auckland.
A false start for the English ended with a bang — a 2-0 series victory in the return leg at home. However, it was not without holes, but the only respite is that they are not gaping enough and England has decent options to fill them up.
http://www.tssonnet.com/tss3624/stories/20130615501401100.htm
‘The Big Rip’, a cosmological hypothesis first published in 2003, said that the size of the ‘observable universe’ is continually shrinking. V. S. Troitkii of the Radiophysical Research Institute in Russia even said that light once travelled a million times faster than it does now and this implies that the universe is shrinking.
True or otherwise, it’s for the scientific community to discover. But, for today’s tech-savvy man the unmistakable evidence of a shrinking universe — not in the literal sense — is seen in the virtual world of social media. A greeting for your most adored celebrity or an appreciation for your favourite sportsman, either seem just 140 characters away. Even for lashing out at someone — and ultimately losing it — being twitter-happy seems to be the way.
Of late, these ‘twitterati’ have seamlessly moulded into the persona of ‘crickerati’ and vice-versa. For fans, this has either resulted in something entirely comical or utterly distasteful. Two such instances took place in this year’s IPL.
First S. Sreesanth, now in the dock for some of his other antics, tweeted his way into trouble by saying that the incident where Harbhajan Singh allegedly slapped him five years ago never happened. Australian David Warner, in the immediate aftermath of the spot-fixing scandal expose, launched an astonishing attack against two of Australia’s senior cricket writers, Robert Craddock and Malcolm Conn. He took exception to an article written by the former about corruption in the IPL and was enraged to see his photo published next to the article in the print edition of News Ltd.
But why was Twitter the chosen one in these cases? For some time now this has been the pattern. Kevin Pietersen did it. So did Virat Kohli. This is an age where fans’ access to sportspeople, at least in India, is near-zero. On the players’ part, even if they intend to interact, it is generally impossible to do it in person.
It is here that Twitter as a platform comes as a win-win for both. In a world of niches where fans are really keen on only certain famous people and always harbour hopes of finding ways to talk to them, Twitter makes it extremely simple. On the other hand, for the celebrities it acts as a promotional tool. A case in point is Serena Williams, who dedicates an hour every week to interact with her fans on Twitter in what is called ‘Serena Friday’.
But the flipside is that Twitter has bred a culture akin to being trigger-happy. You shoot and then think — words in this case — as there is always an option to delete your tweets later. A visit to Sreesanth’s and Warner’s handles now won’t display any of their rants. Apologising later seems to be the norm, but they make sure they are heard.
The fact that the tweets go viral in a matter of minutes doesn’t seem to strike them. The platform might be more personal than other social media networks, but its consequences are often far reaching. Ask Sreesanth and Warner now, they would readily attest to this.
The primary reason why the sports bodies and heads allow a life for the players on social media is to interact with fans constructively. Cricket Australia chief James Sutherland, even after the Warner incident, insisted that social media remained a key tool to engage with fans.
Where others have resorted to gagging the players from being active on these platforms during tours, Sutherland said, “Part of our strategy is to put the fans first and for them to have a closer and better relationship with our players.”
But at a time when opinions are made and reputations broken in a flash, a social media policy seems to be the way forward. Sutherland did admit that as days pass by it would be appropriate to have one. As Andrew Strauss said after the Kevin Pietersen fiasco, “It does a really good publicising job but players can find themselves in hot water occasionally. There’s a line they need to tread.”
http://www.tssonnet.com/tss3623/stories/20130608508606100.htm
The roles of batsmen batting at Nos. 5, 6 and 7 in a T20 game are at best precarious. Those towering personalities who bat above you get the first taste of the wicket. If good, they relish it and you, after arriving late, are expected to accelerate from the foundation laid. If dicey, you are in the firing line a tad too soon and are expected to clear the wreck and consolidate. In short it’s a double-edged sword.
It is in this context — and positions — that one needs to look at the importance of Suresh Raina. For sometime now, Raina has been one among the batsmen who have carved a niche for themselves in the game’s shorter formats. In T20, where success can be the result of many factors, he has been a constant in Chennai Super Kings’ (CSK) IPL exploits for all six years. In ODIs, he and skipper M. S. Dhoni have developed into one of the foremost ‘finishers.’
Let us forget for the moment his record in whites where he is considered an also-ran. What makes Raina such an important entity when he turns out in coloured clothing?
“I saw him first at the National Cricket Academy,” recalled Rahul Dravid, his first international captain, in an interview to the Sunday Guardian. “I think he was with the Under-19s. They were playing some practice match and I’d just finished training. There was something about the way he batted. He was obviously a young talented kid and when he first came into the side a month later, you knew there was something different about him. He had the stroke-making ability and it seemed natural to back him.”
Stats, which are so often accused of giving a skewed picture, don’t seem to lie in Raina’s case. The numbers — 4068 runs from 159 ODIs at an average of 36.98 — may not be all that flattering, but given the slot where he bats, they are truly phenomenal.
Ever since he made his ODI debut in 2005 he has consistently bailed his team out during tricky chases. As early as in his eighth innings, he hit an unbeaten 81 to help India recover from 92 for five while chasing 227 against England. In a tri-series final against Sri Lanka, he helped India post 245 after it was reduced to 60-5.
Raina has also revelled in high pressure situations. In the 2011 World Cup quarterfinal against Australia, he scored a crucial unbeaten 34 when India was 187-5 chasing 260.
In matches where India has chased and won, he averages 73.10 from 56 matches, a minimum of 1000 runs and 50 matches being the consideration. Only Michael Clarke, Michael Bevan and Dhoni have scored and averaged more. Raina’s strike-rate of 101.73 makes it even more spectacular.
But still, for many, it’s the IPL that has made Raina and to an extent rightly so. Even in those moments when his form in blue was a disappointment, like when he was dropped after the one-day series against South Africa in 2006, he has found solace in CSK’s yellow.
With more than 400 runs in each of the seasons so far, Raina is the most prolific scorer in the IPL with 2613 runs at 34.84. He does bat much higher up the order than in the 50-over format, but with just 20 overs to play, the line between an anchor and a finisher is often blurred. Internationals and domestic matches put together, he has the most T20 runs for an Indian. When he scored a splendid maiden ton against Kings XI Punjab recently, his IPL resume seemed complete.
If you add his wonderful athleticism and brilliant fielding, you have a shorter format colossus. The way he mans the cover areas, constantly on the prowl, and his patrolling of the boundaries during the death overs, where he restricts the batsmen’s twos into ones, you get the picture of a “complete package” as seen by Australian great Greg Chappell when he was the coach of the Indian cricket team.
It’s also the IPL which has seen Raina evolve as a batsman. Albie Morkel who has been with him all along had this to say after Raina’s recent century: “I think he’s always had the talent as a batsman. Now he’s more clever and experienced. He thinks a lot more. In the past he would go out and start hitting from ball-one. Now he plays proper cricket shots, targets different bowlers and tries to bat through.”
This particularly should offer encouragement and spur Raina on, for, so often in Tests he has been charged with trying to blast his way out of trouble. In spite of a century on Test debut in Sri Lanka, he has looked uncertain and impatient, plagued by technical shortcomings, .
His weakness against short-pitched bowling has been cited as a problem area and it’s a fact that he has struggled against bouncers. But it seems partly right when he says that “all Indian players are targeted for not playing the short ball well.” However, this can never be an excuse. Ian Chappell in an ESPNCricinfo article on Raina’s shortcomings said, “Cricket can’t afford to have talented individuals fall short of the international level purely because their technique failed. Temperament can be a matter of fortune, but skill can be honed.”
Raina seems to have grasped this when he says that “he is trying hard to master it” and maintains that Test cricket is where he belongs and to get there is his only aim. But, regardless of what happens to the 26-year-old’s Test career, (17 matches, 768 runs at 28.44), whether he will be able to stem the reversal of fortunes after that monumental high, his careers in blue and more particularly yellow have been nothing short of golden. He is already a highly successful one-day cricketer and it might not be an exaggeration to call him an IPL legend, the short history of the competition notwithstanding.
http://www.tssonnet.com/tss3620/stories/20130518502400500.htm
It’s that time of the year when one looks back at 12 months of sporting excellence and cherishes the great moments, the accompanying drama, the excitement and the thrills. But inevitably, buried beneath these will be the losses. Not of the kind on the sporting pitch, but of the very beings who enthralled one and all with their performances. Here is a look at a few of them.
Leslie Walter Claudius, died December 20, aged 85.
The Times London, after India’s gold medal winning performance in the 1948 London Games, wrote “Hockey is not worthwhile seeing if he is not playing.” The man being referred to was Leslie Claudius, a triple Olympic gold medallist and one of India’s finest hockey players.
Born in Bilaspur on 27th March 1927, Claudius took to sport early. As a 21-year-old he was selected to play in the 1948 Games. He went on to collect two more gold medals in the next two editions at Helsinki and Melbourne. He captained the side at the Rome Games in 1960 and would have ideally liked to cap his illustrious career with a fourth gold. But India lost to archrival Pakistan in the final by a solitary goal.
Before the 2012 London Games, a special Olympic Legends Map for all the London tube stations was brought out and the Bushey railway station was named by the organisers as Leslie Claudius.
Teofilo Stevenson, died June 11, aged 60.
He was one of the greatest amateur boxers ever, winner of three consecutive Olympic heavyweight titles in 1972, 1976 and 1980 and one who turned a blind eye to the prospect of turning pro and making millions.
Born on March 29, 1952 in the Cuban town of Puerto Padre, Teofilo Stevenson first entered the ring at the age of nine. In mid 1960s, when as a teenager he won the Cuban junior title, his career took off. In 1974, at the height of his prowess, American boxing promoters tried to pit him against Muhammad Ali in return for thousands of dollars. But, the Sports Illustrated quoted him as saying, “No, I will not leave my country for one million dollars or for much more than that.”
If not for the Cuban boycott of the 1984 Los Angeles Games, he could have won a fourth consecutive gold. He retired in 1987 with 301 victories in 321 bouts.
Hector “Macho” Camacho, died November 24, aged 50.
While Stevenson’s was, as the Guardian obituary put it, ‘glory unpaid but universal’, another boxer, Hector “Macho” Camacho’s was entirely so. A world champion in three different weights, his professional career, spanning three decades came on the back of a stunning amateur career with just four defeats in 100 fights and three New York Golden Gloves titles before he turned 18.
Born in Bayamon, Puerto Rico on May 24, 1962, he moved to New York’s Spanish Harlem when he was three. He grew up in poverty and took to street fighting. His raw aggression finally found the right outlet when he entered the boxing ring when he was 11.
After being thrown out of many schools, at 15, he was enrolled in a Manhattan high school for troubled youth. His language teacher Pat Flannery who acted as his mentor nicknamed him ‘Macho’, a title that stayed with him until the end.
At 21, he won the first of his three world titles, the WBC super-featherweight title. In 1985 he took the WBC lightweight crown and the light-welterweight title came in 1989.
Camacho’s was a troubled life. He admitted to serial shoplifting, drug use and car thefts at various points and was arrested many times. Known for his brashness, dazzling outfits and a spit curl over his forehead, he was a stylist inside the ring too with his terrific agility, fiery punches and deft counter-punches.
Bhausaheb Babasaheb Nimbalkar, died December 11, aged 92.
He was regarded as the “man who nearly beat Bradman”. His mammoth 443 not out for Maharashtra against Kathiawar in the Ranji Trophy in 1948-49 was at that time next only to the Australian great’s unbeaten 452 in first class cricket. It is believed that Bradman later sent a note saying that the effort was better than his own.
B. B. Nimbalkar was born on December 12, 1919 and represented Baroda, Holkar, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Railways. Though considered to be one of the best batsmen in the Ranji Trophy with an aggregate of 3687 runs at an average of 56.72 and first class aggregate of 4577 runs at 52.01, he never played for India in an official Test match.
Kevin Curran, died October 10, aged 53.
Kevin Curran made his debut for Zimbabwe in its first ever ODI against Australia, which it won by 13 runs, at Trent Bridge in the 1983 World Cup. However, his best years were with Gloucestershire and Northamptonshire and went on to become one of county cricket’s most effective overseas players. He chose to remain in England when Zimbabwe attained Test status and thus missed out on five day cricket. He also served as the Zimbabwe national team’s coach from 2005 to 2007.
It was not just the lives of sportspersons in retirement, after fulfilling careers, that were cut short, but a few fledgling ones were also nipped in the bud.
Tom Maynard, died June 18, aged 23.
Tom Maynard, the 23-year-old son of former England cricketer and coach Matthew Maynard, was considered as one of the most promising cricketers to emerge. After initially turning out for the county side Glamorgan, he signed for Surrey at the end of the 2010 season. He flourished at Surrey scoring more than 1000 runs and was called up for the England Lions’ team and was even tipped to represent the national team. He was found dead on the tracks of the London tube in the southern part of the city.
Runako Morton, died March 4, aged 33.
West Indies batsman, Runako Morton had represented his country in 15 Test matches and 56 ODIs. His career was one of underachievement — 573 runs at an average of 22.03 in Tests and 1519 runs at 33.75 in ODIs — and plagued by disciplinary problems until that fatal day when, on his way back home from a cricket match, his vehicle hit a utility pole in central Trinidad.
Suresh Saraiya, died July 18, aged 76.
Amidst all the highs and lows and the surrounding din, an iconic voice associated with Indian cricket for over four decades fell silent. Suresh Saraiya, the All India Radio cricket commentator who covered more than 100 Tests from 1969 to 2011 succumbed to death.
http://www.tssonnet.com/tss3601/stories/20130105506506000.htm
Last month when Mo Farah, a British athlete of Somali origin, won the European 5,000m crown, he became the first man in history to successfully defend it. The victory, coming just before the London Olympic Games, would be a confidence-booster for him.
Farah was born in Mogadishu in war-torn Somalia. At the age of eight he moved to a west London suburb along with his father, who was a British citizen. Alan Watkinson, his physical education teacher in school, was the first to spot his talent. At the schools’ cross-country championship in England in 1996, when he was barely 14, he finished second, and that too, after he had started running in the wrong direction. Watkinson immediately realised that he was dealing with someone special.
When he took to full time running after leaving school, he moved into a house in Teddington, London, with top Kenyan athletes, including the 5,000m world champion Benjamin Limo. He found the lifestyle and training regimen of the African athletes invigorating. The desire to reach the pinnacle of sporting excellence was kindled.
A successful junior athlete when he won the European junior 5,000m title in 2001, his first success in the senior circuit was in 2006 at the European track and field championships where he won the silver. At the 2007 and 2009 world championships, with African athletes also in the fray, he finished a creditable sixth and seventh respectively.
At the European championships in 2010, he won the 10,000m and 5,000m double. His fledgling athletic career was now in full flight. A year and a handful of races later, he became the first Brit to win the world 5,000m title.
Despite being born in a country stricken by poverty and lawlessness, Farah’s is not a rags-to-riches story. By his own admission his early life was a fairly comfortable one.
But for an athlete from Somalia, who landed in London speaking little English, to be regarded as one of Britain’s biggest hopes for success in 2012 Olympics is a great achievement in itself. He has become a symbol of multi-culturalism in a world where tolerance levels towards immigrants are fast approaching zero.
http://www.thehindu.com/sport/athletics/farah-carrying-britains-hopes/article3599430.ece
Ever since the magnificent Mark Spitz won seven gold medals at the 1972 Munich Games, every swimming prodigy has been expected to emulate the feat. One such sensation was Matt Biondi, a young swimmer from California with a 6 feet, 6 inches frame that literally made him larger than life.
Biondi’s career actually started as a sprinter and a water polo player. His performances in schoolboy sprints caught many an eye and helped him secure a scholarship to the University of California, Berkeley.
His first Olympic success came on home turf at the 1984 Los Angeles Games in the 4x100m freestyle relay, the first of 11 Olympic medals he went on to win.
Having won as a novice, he followed up the success with a 100m and 200m freestyle double at the World University Games in Kobe. The first to clock under 49 seconds in the 100m freestyle, he at one point owned the 10 fastest times in the event.
In the years leading up to the 1988 Games at Seoul, he dominated freestyle swimming and broke a string of world records that set him up to at least match, if not surpass, Spitz’s record.
However, on the eve of the Games, Biondi was a little shaken when people said he should win seven gold medals. He eventually won five — 50 metre freestyle, 100 metre freestyle and three relays — and later admitted to have been surprised.
Sandwiched between these moments of success was his high-profile loss in the 100m butterfly. He lost by an agonising one hundredth of a second to Anthony Nesty of Surinam.
A man who also had to his name six gold, two silver and three bronze medals from two World championship appearances, he returned to the Olympics at Barcelona in 1992 and added two more gold and a silver to his already rich haul.
However, he could not keep pace with his fellow swimmers who lowered records consistently and set higher benchmarks.
Having lost his killer-instinct, he duly retired from the sport post 1992.
http://www.thehindu.com/sport/other-sports/biondi-the-man-who-nearly-matched-spitz/article3595589.ece
For a fast bowler, R. Vinay Kumar’s on-field demeanour is far from intimidating. He is so even off the field. A tad nervous, with the photographer constantly requesting him to strike a relaxed pose, the Indian medium-pacer, who was in Chennai for the Buchi Babu All-India tournament, spoke to Sportstar about his early cricketing days, his idols, his cherished moments and his most recent injury.
Excerpts:
Question: A hamstring injury just before the Sri Lankan tour resulted in you missing the series. You would have been disappointed not to make the team.
Answer: Yes. It was not a big injury, but unfortunately, it happened two days before the camp in Chennai. If it had happened 10 days before, I would have travelled to Sri Lanka. I was on the verge of cementing my place in the ODI team.
Now that you have recovered, you have been selected for the India ‘A’ team’s tour of New Zealand in September-October. How do you view it?
I don’t consider it a demotion. New Zealand will be a different experience as I have never been there. India or India ‘A’, it doesn’t matter. My motto is to give the best. I don’t think I have been completely ignored. I was not part of the team due to injury. I will be back soon.
Looking back at your cricketing journey so far, how and when did it all start?
I was first introduced to cricket when I was in Standard Eight. It was at a summer camp in my hometown Davanagere. The coach at the camp was Mr. Prakash Pawar. He appreciated my bowling and that’s how I started playing. Later on, it was Mr. L. M. Prakash who coached me.
How was the support from your family?
Mine was not a rich family. I come from a lower middle-class family. I am the eldest among three children, which brings more responsibility. My father was an auto driver and it was tough, but the entire family, including my uncle, was very supportive. Credit should go to my coaches. I am what I am because of them.
You broke into the Ranji Trophy squad in 2003-04. How did that happen?
Before that season, I played in the MRF Trophy under Anil Kumble. In a match against IOC, which had the likes of Wasim Jaffer and Zaheer Khan in its ranks, I took four wickets. In the next game against Railways, I took a hat-trick. Later on, an NCA under-19 camp was held and I was asked to play as there were not enough players in the practice games. I took two six-wicket hauls in two games. I got noticed and these performances helped me break into the team.
It wasn’t until 2010 that you made your International debut…
I performed consistently in the Ranji Trophy. In the domestic circuit, you don’t often get to bowl to top batsmen as they are busy playing for India. But IPL changed that. In the three years, from 2008 to 2010, IPL helped me mature faster. It created opportunities for me to bowl against and play with international stars. The performances in the IPL helped me get into the Indian team for the World T20 in 2010.
You were also among the probables this time for the World T20, but you didn’t make the final squad. How does it feel?
I can’t attribute any particular reason as the performance was there. But my time will come.
After three years with Royal Challengers Bangalore in the IPL, was it disappointing to leave the team and move to Kochi?
It’s always disappointing not to play for your home team. But at the end of the day, you need to go out and bowl and do well for the team. It was a good experience playing for Kochi. Mahela (Jayawardene) was my captain, and VVS (Laxman) and Murali (Muttiah Muralitharan) were part of the team as well. It was a great learning experience.
You made your Test debut in Perth against Australia early this year. How do you look at it considering that it wasn’t very spectacular?
It was unfortunate that we lost the match, but I would like to look at the positives. I got Mike Hussey out twice. The first time the decision went against me, but I got him out the very next ball. It was satisfying.
Who is the one player you idolised and looked up to?
My childhood hero was Rahul Dravid. I am proud of the fact that I have played with him in all forms (of the game). The moments I shared while playing with him in Tests, ODIs, IPL, Ranji Trophy and the KSCA League were great.
The performance you cherish the most?
It was when I represented United Cricketers, Davanagere, in the Tumkur Zonal League. In one particular match, I took five wickets off five balls. That remains the performance I cherish the most.
Finally, your attempt to emulate Lasith Malinga’s bowling action. How did that happen?
It was something I developed for the IPL. It was mainly for bowling a dot ball rather than to pick up a wicket because in IPL, a dot ball is a big bonus.
http://www.sportstaronnet.com/tss3537/stories/20120915504402200.htm
Luciano Bacheta, the lanky 22-year-old from the United Kingdom, is living a dream. In September last, he was crowned the F2 champion, and barely a month had passed when he experienced the thrills associated with the sport’s pinnacle, the Formula One. On the sidelines of the MRF Challenge 2012 in Chennai, ‘Luchi’, as he is fondly called, spoke to Sportstar on his career so far, his plans for the future and his Indian connection.
Question: You are the reigning F2 champion. How does it feel?
Answer: It feels good. It’s a tough championship and I learnt a lot. Like for example, I took a sizeable lead at the start (of the championship); I then realised that it’s a lot harder to maintain a lead than to get it. It was a great experience.
You have an Indian first name?
Yeah… Akshay. My parents are from India. My mother is from Ludhiana (Punjab) and dad is from Rajasthan. We moved to England pretty early. It was such that only English was spoken at home. Even my grandparents spoke only in English, but I can understand a bit of Hindi. I have fond memories of India. My first adventures in a car and on a bike were in India, in the farms owned by my family.
When did you first start racing?
It was by pure chance. I was 12 years then and it was during my summer holidays. All my friends were away. I started looking into the yellow pages for some hobbies. I saw something related to go-karting. That’s how it started.
When were you first noticed as one with potential to excel as a top driver?
When I was 15. I won my first race in the Genetta Junior Championship in Britain. I finished third overall. Then in 2010, I came second in the Formula Renault Championship. I was looked at as one with good talent.
How was the support from the family considering that motorsport has always been money-driven?
It was great. They have been my source of inspiration. They have funded me till now. For me, after F2, the next stage is GP2 and that requires around one and half million pounds. That’s a lot of money; a big increase from the 300,000 pounds that was needed for F2. So, a sponsorship deal or something like a partnership will be great.
When you look back, how were the days when you made your first forays into the world of motorsport?
My family doesn’t have a background in racing. I was the first to get into it. When I started go-karting, I didn’t know what Formula Renault was. I had never heard of it. When I got in there (Formula Renault) for the first time, it was an all-new world. Everyone was so comfortable… and I was extremely nervous. (laughs).
Which is the one moment that you cherish the most until now?
Driving a Formula One car, when I test drove for Williams at Silverstone last year. Words can’t describe that feeling… I was very nervous. But everything went well. It was my first experience with a F1 simulator and DRS (Drag Reduction System). I was quick in the car too. It’s something that I’ll remember for the rest of my life.
How different and difficult was it when compared with F2?
It’s more in the mind, I would say. You do need to have a strong neck and core muscles, but more importantly, you are required to think faster. It needs quicker gearshifts. The margin for error is as low as five hundredth of a second. As you go towards the top (towards F1), the demand for accuracy goes up too.
Who is your idol?
Currently in F1 I don’t have any idols. One day I’ll be racing them, so… (laughs). From the past, I like Senna (Ayrton) for his character and determination.
Are you happy with the way your career has progressed so far?
There is always a feeling that it could have been better. But so far, I have managed to pull through pretty well. I have moved from go-karting to F1 in about nine years. Not a lot of people do it quicker… (smiles).
What are you looking forward to this year?
GP2 is my target this year. F1 has a lot of respect for GP2. It’s right under the noses of the F1 bosses. To do well there is my aim.
How are you planning your long-time future?
I would ideally like a couple of years in GP2. Then may be look at F1. It’s my aim to make sure of a career in motorsport. I just love the sport.
Your hobbies and other interests…
Nothing really. I do some boxing at home. We don’t hit each other… (laughs), but just practise. I would like to get into golf, which I feel is the exact opposite of motorsport.
http://www.sportstaronnet.com/tss3609/stories/20130302506004700.htm
October 13, 2010. It was the fifth day of the second Test between India and Australia in Bangalore. The home side, chasing a target of 207 runs, had lost the dashing opener, Virender Sehwag, early. The Bangalore crowd anticipated hometown hero Rahul Dravid to come out and blunt the Aussie attack, but out came the 22-year-old debutant, Cheteshwar Pujara.
Skipper Mahendra Singh Dhoni had promoted Pujara to No. 3 and the results were stunning. Pujara produced a classy fourth innings act (an 89-ball 72) that set up India’s victory.
Is Pujara the ideal replacement for Dravid? The debate started then — and it has been raging until now, getting refined with each passing day.
The comparison between Dravid and Pujara is not without basis. The two have much more in common than just the batting position. To value one’s wicket — the greatest of Rahul Dravid’s traits — to grind the opposition out, to stay humble and keep a low profile are some.
It is one thing to possess these traits and another to put them to good use. Pujara has been able to do that until now. On the five occasions that he crossed 50, four have resulted in centuries. Two of them are in fact double hundreds. During both his maiden century and his latest double hundred, he displayed the quality of biding his time at the crease before taking off. Against New Zealand in Hyderabad, his first fifty came off 119 balls, but the next came in just 50 deliveries. And versus Australia — also at the same venue — he along with M. Vijay added just 37 runs in 22 overs on the second morning, before stepping up the run rate in astonishing fashion.
Pujara is all of 11 Tests old. True, he might have more runs, more centuries and a better average than what Dravid had after an equal number of Tests, but to anoint him as the latter’s successor at this stage would be short-sighted to say the least.
Dravid’s greatest legacy is his performance overseas. Excluding Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, he featured in 15 Test wins abroad, and in those matches, Dravid scored 1577 runs at an average of 65.70. In terms of both average and aggregate runs, he outdid even the maestro, Sachin Tendulkar.
In the long run, it is this ‘Gold Standard’ that Pujara needs to be measured against. In the two Tests he has played away from home so far — in South Africa — no compelling storylines have emerged. For someone brought-up on the dust bowls of Saurashtra, it will no doubt be difficult on the bouncy surfaces outside the sub-continent. This is where it calls for some patience.
No one knows this better than Pujara himself and this has helped keep him grounded amidst the over-the-top comparisons with Dravid. In an interview to ESPN-cricinfo he said: “It is important for the country’s young players to get a chance to tour abroad so they can learn how to adapt to different conditions. Being a youngster, if you play them in their home conditions and you do well, you get confidence out of it.”
His overseas tours have been limited so far. As a 22-year-old, Pujara captained India ‘A’ to England and his form in the series was instrumental in him finding a place against the Aussies at home. A knee injury in 2011 during the Indian Premier League (IPL) and his subsequent rehabilitation meant that he could not tour England and Australia with the national side.
However, his form in West Indies for India ‘A’ — he topped the scoring charts with 252 runs — in mid-2012 put him back in the reckoning. This included a match-winning unbeaten 96 of 222 balls that helped his country scamper home by two wickets.
True, the bowling attacks were nowhere close to the international standards — say South Africa and England — but the experience of batting in those conditions would definitely be of help when he encounters the Steyns, the Morkels and the Philanders on the bouncy pitches of South Africa later this year.
For every sportsperson , it is the second season that is always the most difficult — either in prolonging a promising start or in scrambling for the missing pieces in the jigsaw. Vinod Kambli withered under the burden and Irfan Pathan learnt it the hard way.
Though Pujara made his debut back in 2010, this has been his first full-fledged season in Test cricket and he is peaking all right. His second will begin with the tour of South Africa in November where he will be presented with newer, trickier and tougher problems to solve. He will be expected to answer more questions than when he made his debut. Until he crosses this hurdle, the comparison with Dravid must wait.
http://www.sportstaronnet.com/tss3612/stories/20130323505303700.htm
Chess players around the world seem to get perennially younger. With no dearth of prodigies, the number of elite young players seem to be more than ever before. The trend has been unmistakable closer home too. One among those is 14-year-old Chennai girl M. Mahalakshmi, who won the World Chess Championship title (under-14) last November.
Mahalakshmi first picked up chess figurines when she was only five-and-a-half. “My sister used to play and a Master used to come home to teach her. I used to watch them and that’s how I picked up the game,” she says. Since then she has progressed up the ranks — from being the youngest participant in a school event to winning accolades at the state, district, national and international levels.
Mahalakshmi’s first national crown was the under-8 title which she won at Aurangabad in 2005. In her first foray into the World Championships at Georgia the very next year, she finished a remarkable third. “I was too young even to be nervous,” she says smilingly. “Once I won the bronze I was happy, but other than that I didn’t know a thing.”
Her maiden international was the gold at the Asian Youth Championship (under-10) in 2008. “I had a carefree attitude then. The result didn’t matter and I enjoyed playing and won with a round to spare.”
Since then, her world view has changed considerably. With each passing event, as she garnered more headlines, expectations rose as well. In the World Youth Chess Championship in 2010 in Greece, she finished third. “I was nervous,” she says. “The thought that a win would fetch me the world championship occupied my mind.”
However, Mahalakshmi seems to have learnt from the episode. In the World Championships in 2012 in Slovenia, she didn’t err and duly bagged the under-14 title. “I didn’t worry too much. I thought that I was just a normal chess player. I made sure that over-confidence didn’t creep in. I had already made that mistake once and didn’t want to repeat it.” The icing on the cake came when she received the trophy from the legendary Garry Kasparov who praised her as “a brave girl”.
But for her, like any other upcoming chess player in the country, the idol has always been five-time world champion Viswanathan Anand. “The first name you hear when you utter the word chess is Anand. He has been my idol throughout.” She added that she was thrilled to have received the ‘Young Achiever’ award presented by the Rotary Club of Madras from Anand, where he described her as a “fellow champion”.
Grandmaster R.B. Ramesh, her coach at Chess Gurukul for four years, has only words of praise for her. “She comes from a not-very-sound financial background. She has missed out on a lot. Despite that she has worked hard and this has kept her going. How far she goes depends on how much more she works. But she is very ambitious. The next one year will be crucial.”
In one year from now Mahalakshmi will be gearing for the Standard X board exams. Add to that the World and the Asian Championships. Striking a balancing between sports and academics has always been tough for anybody and it’s no different for her.
But she says her parents and school (Velammal International) have been immensely supportive and hopes to continue playing, in her quest to become what every chess player craves for — a Grandmaster.
http://www.thehindu.com/features/metroplus/starting-young-dreaming-big/article4650347.ece
