Men in White

Comment of the week: A pundit from Pakistan

How a reader's comments can be constructive, expressive and delightful

Mukul Kesavan
25-Feb-2013
Furqan mailed in two comments on the Scenes from a Final post which are near-perfect examples of a) how disagreement on a blog can be firmly and civilly expressed and b) how a great contest ought to be celebrated. This is part of the first one:
"I was personally quite disappointed with Mukul's article. Yes, it was wonderfully written, factually accurate and it conveyed some excellent arguments. However, as his first post after the spectacular end to a fantastic final, I thought it was rather sour to focus half of the article on Shoaib Malik's crass comments. There were so many positives from this tournament, none more so than the excellent final, and after the turmoil that has affected cricket over this year I think it would have been far more apt to express gratitude and praise for the recovery of the game. I think any reasonable person can conclude that Malik's comments were in bad taste. I'm a Muslim in Pakistan and they certainly made me wince. However I think a paragraph expressing distate for the comments would have sufficed, rather than the torrent of negativity shown by Mukul and in numerous comments since..."
And in a second comment, he shows us, with joy and passion, how the thing is done:
Full post
Pietersen and Greig

Kevin Pietersen reminds me of the young Tony Greig

Mukul Kesavan
25-Feb-2013
Kevin Pietersen reminds me of the young Tony Greig. They're both South Africans who switched countries as young adults to become stars in the English game. Talented cricketers with a flair for finding the limelight that amounted to genius, they managed to persuade an English cricketing public hungry for greatness — England hasn't produced a great batsman in forty years — that they were the real thing.
They had a genuine claim to being innovators: Tony Greig pioneered a fielding position, silly point, and a remarkable new shot, the upper cuff (where the batsman deliberately helps the ball over the slips) against that demonic fast-bowling firm: Thomson & Lillee. Pietersen's on-side play is original, specially his stork shot, where, one-legged on his front foot, he smacks the ball hard through midwicket.
As a spectator, though, I found the way Greig played to the gallery irritating and I find Pietersen's narcissism tiresome. Fans willingly indulge genius: I was happy, for example, to watch Shane Warne act out his little turns, ball after ball — the pantomime anguish, the chin-in-hand Thinker — because he was the best bowler in the world and his antics seemed part of the riyaz, the routines, of greatness. With Greig and Pietersen (good players, not great ones) the look-at-me mannerisms came across as a huckster's props; there was always the nagging feeling that their onfield swagger was a bluff waiting to be called.
Full post
More than Muralitharan; bigger than Bedi

Bishan Bedi has been sent a letter by Muttiah Muralitharan’s lawyers for comments he made recently about the off-spinners bowling action and newspapers report that these lawyers are threatening to ‘drag him to the courts’ if his response is

Mukul Kesavan
25-Feb-2013
This still does not rule out the possibility that in the heat of battle Murali may consciously or unaware, flex his arm to really rip the doosra. Bedi has made a serious point about the supervision of the game in general, not just the matter of policing Murali which the ICC needs to take seriously. Murali isn’t responsible for his imitators, but the ICC’s rulings change cricket from the highest level to the lowest, and I’ve seen children in neighbourhood parks manage very creditable imitations of Murali’s bowling style, happily bending and straightening their arms because they know its allowed on television. When Bedi says the ICC has created a monster, he doesn’t mean that Murali has horns: he’s being metaphorical.
But Bedi doesn’t seem to realize that what really annoys Murali’s fans and supporters is the implication that the ICC introduced the 15 degree rule to fit Murali in. The truth is that to start with the ICC introduced differential limits of flexion (5 degrees for spinners, 7.5 degrees for medium pacers, 10 degrees for fast bowlers) and when the unfairness and impracticality of this was pointed out, abandoned this plan. The fifteen degree rule happened after a study of the actions of international bowlers revealed that nearly every bowler bent and straightened his arm, including fast-bowling paragons like Glenn McGrath. Critics of Murali like Holding did an about-face when shown the evidence and by and large, the cricket world followed suit.
Full post
On the importance of being "visibly sheepish"

Mukul Kesavan compares Michael Atherton's opinions regarding Sreesanth's beamer and Brett Lee's tactics two years ago

Mukul Kesavan
25-Feb-2013
Mirroring the ICC's misguided sense of priorities, there was little comment in the media about Sreesanth's 'delivery'. This is partly because only one man, Sreesanth himself, knows whether it was deliberate, partly because a coterie of former bowlers in the press box (Mike Selvey an exception) are inclined to take the charitable view that it was not, and partly because there was so much more, other than the cricket, to talk about. But I have no doubt that Sreesanth's rancorous spell, which included the beamer and the no-ball, was the most glaring example in the match of something that ran completely counter to the spirit of the game. Forget the jellybeans and inane chatter.
Full post

Showing 21 - 30 of 72