Home > Cricket > E-mail archives | |
January 31, 2001Thinking AloudPrem PanickerMid-way through another working week, a few random thoughts...
...So the Mark Waugh imbroglio goes on, and on, and on. Richie Benaud, no
less, becomes the latest to go on the Waugh-path -- vide his statement,
carried in the Australian media, in defence of 'Junior'. Apparently -- so
Benaud says -- it ain't that Mark Waugh didn't want to co-operate with the
investigation. It is merely that Waugh wanted the ACB to first send him the
questions that would be asked -- apparently so that he could, in
consultation with his lawyers, come up with the right answers.
...So Shane Warne continues to provide us this day our daily laugh -- and
we, like the Shakespearian character, laugh that we may not weep. I mean,
this gent -- "the greatest spinner of all time", the "man with his sights on
500 wickets" and so on and so forth -- is so upset at being hit for a couple
of sixes that he uses language hardly in keeping with the image of a
sportsman. I mean, we all use the odd f-word -- the issue here is the
occasion. You and I, and the rest of us average Joes, would probably use the
word over a beer-y argument with friends -- but not, unless you have an
extraordinarily tumultous home life, to mom and pop in the family dressing
room. Similarly, you would expect a player to cut loose with the odd word in
the privacy of the team dressing room -- but not on the field of play.
...So Azhar has gone and done it. Moved the court, that is. Quite a good
thing, actually -- instead of players and the Board slanging each other in
the media, let's have them all get into court and let it all hang out.
Players and board alike have been fudging, hiding stuff about themselves
while airing dirty linen about the other -- out there in court, the lid will
get blown off, and a lot of stuff will come out in the open. There is,
though, one little bit that sticks in the craw. If you notice, the suit
filed in court relates to only one question -- can the BCCI ban a player?
Which narrows the issue down to a question of employer-employee relations.
The real question, the one we would all like definitive answers to, is --
did the players actually fix matches? And there is only one way to
definitively answer that -- have the players go up against the CBI.
...So Nayan Mongia is back in the squad -- or rather, among the probables
from which list the final squad will be picked. Interesting, that. Even more
interesting, when you consider the BCCI's response to the CBI charge-sheet.
Remember? The CBI had accused the Board of neglecting the spectre of
match-fixing, of turning a deaf ear to the whispers, and thus allowing the
malaise to flourish unchecked. In its statement in defense, the Board went,
who, me? (*hands on hips, outraged glare*) Negligent? What nonsense! And
now, a direct quote from the Board's own response: "There was only one
instance in October 1994 when Manoj Prabhkar and Nayan Mongia had indulged
in slow batting in a One-Day International against the West Indies at
Kanpur. The term “match fixing” was unknown in those days. Yet, the Board
(as well as the ICC Referee appointed for the match) had lost no time in
taking actions against the concerned players for not playing according to
the spirit of the game.
...So... well, never mind, this stream of conciousness thing has gone on long enough for today. So, here, an end. Till tomorrow, adios...
Design: Devyani Chandwarkar | |
©1996 to 2001 rediff.com India Limited. All Rights Reserved. |