Mahesh Sethuraman
Was Steve Waugh really a crisis man?
Steve Waugh's reputation as a crisis man is like the real estate market in Mumbai: everyone around me, except me, believes it's credible. It's the one awkward point of discussion in almost all my cricket conversations
Mahesh Sethuraman
13-Mar-2013
Last week I was chatting with a colleague at the office about the India-Australia series. While he was delighted with India's performance in the first two Tests, he was extremely disappointed with the way Australia had played so far. After ruminating over the feats of the great Australian teams of the past and the retirements of their legends, he delivered the knockout punch: "Losing is no crime, but to lose without a fight is a shame. They need gritty, resilient batsmen like Steve Waugh to withstand the crisis as if their lives depended on it." Not again. That was the cue for me to get back to my desk.
Steve Waugh's reputation as a crisis man is like the real estate market in Mumbai: everyone around me, except me, believes it's credible. It's the one awkward point of discussion in almost all my cricket conversations. How do you explain to the world that what they seem to take as an irrefutable fact, is an extremely dicey claim? Sometimes I wonder if some dream architect played an evil trick and planted such a thought in people's minds.
To begin with, it's such a counterintuitive claim to make without even getting into much detail. Waugh predominantly represented an Australian team which conquered nearly every peak in the cricket world. He had the luxury of fine opening batsmen in the early part of his career and a truly legendary one towards the latter stages of his career. With Ricky Ponting at No. 3 (or six), it's hard to ask for more. And if you add some fine bowling attacks over the years, including one of the best to have graced the game, and arguably the greatest No. 7 ever into the equation, there's not a particularly great scope for crisis.
Full postCricket between the ads
Watching cricket on TV in India is getting depressing because of the inexcusable and illegitimate plethora of intrusive advertisements in the cricket telecasts
Mahesh Sethuraman
05-Mar-2013
I had travelled to Chennai last week to watch the first India-Australia Test. The choice was obvious. Chennai is my hometown and the MA Chidambaram Stadium has given me so many happy memories I will cherish for a lifetime. India and Australia have often produced classics there; there was also the possibility of this being Sachin Tendulkar's last Test at Chepauk. I just had to be there. Over and above all these reasons, these days I have another great incentive to go to the cricket grounds because the alternative of watching it on TV is most depressing.
I have ranted extensively in the past about the horrible experience of attending matches in Indian grounds. It was pleasing to see Sambit Bal's column on the pain a fan endures at Indian grounds. For a sport which is trigger-happy to invoke management jargons in the context of the way the game is administered, the indifference to the fan (often called the consumer without an iota of irony) experience from both the administrators and the media at large is laughable.
While the atrocious ground experience is finally getting its share of attention from voices that have the reach, what is still largely ignored is the inexcusable and illegitimate plethora of intrusive advertisements in the cricket telecasts in India. BCCI honchos and its apologists in the media have been rattling out the humongous increase in cricket revenue in India as a justification for all the sweeping changes in our cricketing landscape. That most of the incremental revenue has come from either an irrational expansion of the schedule and/or illegitimate advertisements is hardly pointed out.
Full postMumbai '01 - An underrated classic
India may have been mauled, but Tendulkar and Dravid came together to script one of the most absorbing sessions of Test cricket
Mahesh Sethuraman
27-Feb-2013
India and Australia have produced some fabulous contests over the last decade bookended by whitewashes on either side of the glory era. Kolkata '01 is often invoked as the defining moment of the rivalry. How could anyone dispute that? But to consider that as the starting point of the rivalry would be decidedly unfair.
Steve Waugh's all conquering team visited India on the back of a 15-0 score line, with a promise to make it 18-0. The first Test in Mumbai was finished in three days and Australia won by 10 wickets. Going by the scorecard alone, it's a mauling. But it was the kind of match that reinforces the Cardusian axiom: The scoreboard is an ass.
Sachin Tendulkar produced one of the most glorious seventies the game has seen - with five pristine straight drives - against Glenn McGrath, Jason Gillespie and Shane Warne at their peak. After failing to put up a big score in the first innings, India got Australia in trouble at 99 for 5, before Adam Gilchrist came out and rewrote the job description of a wicketkeeper in the game forever. Has any other cricketer ever had such a huge impact on their respective discipline?
Full postMost Read
Writers