1) I do not follow Major League Baseball closely any more. I'd be hard-pressed to name 5 players who are currently active. The first name that comes to mind, though, is Ichiro Suzuki. I recently wondered whether he had retired and came across this haunting, haunting piece about Ichiro - the man who has become the very thing he hated to become as a 3 year old. Very sad.
2) If a tree is falls in a forest but there is no one to hear it does it make a sound? The best bowling analysis EVER in a T20 match happened at Lal Bahadur Stadium in Hyderabad but to the cricketing it world it does not exist. Alfred Absolem took a scarcely believable 7 wickets for 15 runs but his achievement will probably never be acknowledged because it was a played between two teams in the Indian Cricket League (ICL) which was obliterated by the IPL/BCCI within a few years.
3) The only NFL player I actually wanted to watch in person was Randy Moss. I managed to do it once at Ford Field in Detroit. If you want to know why he has great, watch this: EVERY TD of his greater than 40 yards. Mind you, these are only those that were 40 yards or longer....
Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad with power. Charles A. Beard One week ago, Steven Smith was the undisputed leader of the Australian team. Of late his batting had reached a plane occupied by only The Don himself. He led a rout of the English in the Ashes and began the tour of South Africa with a thumping win in the first Test. Life was good. Today, he stands on the cusp of the unknown, his Fate hanging in the balance, to be determined by others whom he has no control over. A rabid mob is baying for blood, happily throwing stones from glass houses, determined to bring down a man who was flying so high, he didn't realize he was getting perilously close to the sun. Paradoxically, even as the sun is melting his wings it has begun to set on his playing career. Not in the physical sense. Smith will come back from this after serving whatever ban is imposed on him. He is 28 years old and, I suspect, will be given a one year ban from the game. Much like Shane Warne's one year exile in 2003 did no damage to his ultimate playing aura, Smith's year in absentia will not impede him too much. The sun is, however, setting on his reputation. Once someone is labeled a cheat, that sticks for life no matter how hard you try to make amends for it. Especially in today's world of instant condemnation and slow forgiveness. I'm not sorry for Steve Smith. He decided to cheat and should pay the price for doing it. Most importantly, because it was premeditated. Integrity is doing the right thing when no one is watching you. Unfortunately, for Steve Smith, over 30 cameras were watching closely. Thank heavens they were.
Only one man could bring me out of blogging semi-retirement: the Rajah himself.
The story arc of Roger Federer's resurgence has been written many times over by multiple authors around the world and I will not repeat it here. A cursory Google search will suffice. Instead I want to put down some random, disjointed thoughts that float through my brain...
a) For a long time DH and I were reconciled to the fact that he'd be stuck on one prime number - 17. When he won #18 earlier this year in Australia, DH remarked that he would HAVE to win one more to get back to a prime number because that's where he should be (by himself and one). Well, what do you know? It may be time to start thinking of 23 now. Impossible? Well, many of us thought 18 was impossible.
b) Remember this commercial from 10 years ago? It was released on July 6th, 2007, just moments after Roger had won his 10th major and was narrated by Tiger Woods who ended it with the haunting words: My name is Tiger Woods. I have 12 majors and counting. So keep up, buddy.
Yesterday, Roger did what Tiger always dreamed of - overtaking Jack Nicklaus' major count (18). For the record, Tiger has stalled at 14 for over eight years and it does not appear he is going to add to that total.
c) The Federer of 2017 is winning because he is better than the Federer of a few years ago. He is winning because he has improved. His backhand, especially, is a lot flatter and more potent. the elegant top-spin laden one has been beefed up by another version - a flattened, whiplash of a shot that singes across the court with power that is approaching Wawrinka territory.
d) The 2017 Wimbledon final was, finally, lacking in excitement or prolonged tension for Federer. But I am not complaining one bit. I'll take that any day over the 5 set gut-wrencher from earlier this year at the Australian Open where he was (gasp!) trailing 1-3 in the fifth set. Even today I sometimes break into a cold sweat thinking about what might have happened had Roger not raised his game.
Imagine this - Nadal wins the Australian Open. Suddenly the major head-to-head is 17-15 in Roger's favor with the French Open coming up where Nadal would make it 17-16. Oh dear...the GOAT narrative would have taken a drastic turn for the worse for us FedFans. Phew! Thank heavens for that atomic backhand (and Robin Soderling).
e) The loss to Juan Martin del Potro at the 2009 US Open stung for a long, long time. Then came the capitulation to Marin Cilic in 2014 when all Roger had to do was take out Cilic and then Kei Nishikori (neither of whom he had ever lost to at that point in time). For years, I've wondered what those two missed US Opens would have done for his legacy. Suddenly, after what has transpired this year, the pain has eased tremendously.
f) Roger is the only man to have played at least 5 finals at each major. At the French, he has one win (in 2009, thank heavens for Soderling) and 4 losses to the clay GOAT - Rafael Nadal. One wonders what the actual count might have been if the gods had not sent Nadal to mess with us FedFans.
g) But seriously, just watch these 5 games from the 5th set of the 2017 Australia Open again and marvel at how close it was to being a completely different narrative. A matter of inches...literally, on multiple occasions.
h) In 2012 after the Olympics in London, in spite of winning a silver medal, it seemed quite inconceivable that Federer would last as long as Rio in 2016. Verily, it came to pass - Federer did not play in Rio while recovering from his myriad injuries. But if you had told me in 2012 that he would not play in Rio but would win multiple majors in 2017, I would not have believed it possible. I am still having a tough time believing it.
i) Hailing from a nation where we revere the Krishnans and Amritraj for simply making it to the quarter-final at Wimbledon, it is astonishing to think that Federer has played 70 Grand Slam events (tied for first all-time with Fabrice Santoro) and has reached the quarter-final or better in 50 of them. Yes, 50 of them!
j) For a man known for the beauty of his groundstrokes and the fluidity and grace of his foot movement, it is mind-boggling to think that he is third all-time in the list of aces hit on the ATP tour. And, if he plays the rest of the year, he's definitely going to be #2 behind Ivo Karlovic.
k) The final word has to, definitely, belong to the late, great David Foster Wallace from his famous essay: Federer as a religious experience. Mind you, this was published on August 20, 2006, almost 11 years ago, but it still resonates just as loudly today:
... Roger Federer is showing that the speed and strength of today’s pro game are merely its skeleton, not its flesh. He has, figuratively and literally, re-embodied men’s tennis, and for the first time in years the game’s future is unpredictable. (...) Genius is not replicable. Inspiration, though, is contagious, and multiform — and even just to see, close up, power and aggression made vulnerable to beauty is to feel inspired and (in a fleeting, mortal way) reconciled.
In an alternate universe somewhere Ravindra Jadeja does not drop Alistair Cook, Pankaj Singh gets the first (of many) wickets, India gains ascendancy and wins the Test series against England, Alistair Cook is sacked as captain, India goes to Australia buoyed by their away win, Saha does not suffer a brain fade at Adelaide and Kohli is able to pull off a monstrously incredible Test victory and gives the perfect speech in Hughes' memory, India gains further confidence, wins the Test series, steamrolls through the World Cup semi (where Kohli does not drop Johnson), pulverizes New Zealand in the final.....
Months later, I still relive that dropped catch.
Because Ravindra Jadeja did not take a simple catch at point, a kingdom was lost.
For the past few days I have been reflecting on everyone I have to be thankful to for shaping me and my life. Apart from the usual suspects (family and close friends) there are a few I need to remember while I can for the little things they showed me or did for me.
In no particular order:
BPJ: He did a lot of things for me and I cannot thank him enough for them. But the biggest thing he probably did was insisting that my PhD funding was tied directly to being able to drive the departmental truck to our field site. If I did not get the license to do so, he said my funding would be revoked. As simple as that. And it worked. And he insisted that I take official driving lessons to do so. It changed the direction my life was to take.
EP: My driving instructor. Even now when I change lanes, take an exit, brake for a traffic light, take a curve or parallel park, I apply the little tips and rules he told me during our hour-long night sessions so many years ago. All our sessions were in the dark and it rained during every one of them (which maybe one reason why I am more comfortable driving at night than in the day time, relatively speaking).
GM: I would not have taken his course if a researcher at ISU had not taken back his offer of a fully-funded PhD program. But, in hindsight, I am glad the offer was rescinded. The way I teach today is based almost entirely off the GM playbook. He had the incredible gift of being able to take a complex issue and simplify it so the students could learn it piecemeal without losing sight of the bigger picture. Someday, I hope to be half as good as he is.
RP: Bored me to death with his long-winded, one-sided conversations but he did teach me one important thing before he left for Atlanta - how to iron my clothes. Don't scoff...it is not as simple as he made it look.
SM: When the temperature drops and the house gets cold I remember his tip - take a hot shower and then you'll be fine, And the bathroom also becomes the warmest room in the house in the winter.
RT: His simple policy for office hours - if the door is open, come right in - is one that I practice. Nothing gives me more joy at work than having a student walk into my office, sit down, and chat about life in general.
KDK - One week after I received my driver's license I was convinced to be the sole driver on a road trip to Alabama. A lifelong love for the open road and spending weekends in different places was born. The confidence I gained from that trip was immense and life-changing.
SKP: The most generous and giving person I have ever met. Never said no to any request for help without compromising on his ideals. I am not as good as he is but at times I have my moments.
JM: The first person in the US who took me aside and talked to me about my anxieties. He was my professor (and adviser) but I never felt a gap between us. When I wasn't sure if I was good enough to do a PhD, he took me to CEM's office and the two of them convinced me I was capable of it in just two sentences. More than half the labs I teach in my Ecology course are ones I learned from him. He passed away recently and has been in my thoughts a lot since then.
KM: Taught me how to cook dinner for two in 20 minutes or less. And also gave me his warmest winter coat when he moved back to Japan so I did not freeze as much when I walked to my classes.
CR Jr: Ice-fishing? Check. Canoeing? Check. Rafting through rapids? Check. Playing croquet? Check. Golfing? Check. Indoor soccer? Check. Trapping coyotes for research? Check.How to throw a football in a perfect spiral? Check. Spelunking? Check. Bowling? Check. There are more "firsts" that C was able to check off my bucket list but you get the picture. He even drove me to WV and back from Illinois just so I could visit with BPJ and see the PhD program there.
JM: For teaching Biometry. The best statistics course I have ever taken and even today I can teach basic stats without referring to notes because of him.
When the draw for the men's singles event of the 2015 French Open tennis tournament was announced, all eyes were focused on the quarterfinal where two titans were slated to clash against each other. Learned reporters nodded their collective heads and the phrase de facto final was bandied about.
After the first four rounds, the mega-clash came to be and so it came to pass - the winner of this particular quarterfinal DID win the French Open. While most people thought it would be the Djokovic-Nadal clash, any true tennis fan knew - the de facto final was the all-Swiss clash between Wawrinka and Federer. When Federer lost, my good friend DH and I knew that the GOAT had missed a golden opportunity to pad his resume.
Either way, watching Stan Wawrinka's blistering one-handed backhand made me smile, albeit with a tinge of sadness that it wasn't the other Swiss one-handed backhand player mesmerizing the audience.
चलो कोई बात नहीं, Federer नहीं तो Wawrinka ही सही!
I have watched a few of the matches in the World Cup; bits and pieces of about 50% of them; major bits of about 25% and all the India matches except the second inning of the most recent game against Ireland.
From listening to the commentators this is what I have learned or realized:
Shane Warne: According to him - the best way to win a game at any point in time is to bowl a spinner, preferably a leg-spinner. Leg-spinners, no matter how filthy their bowling, are the best wicket-taking options in the world. Bar none. A pitch is magnificent no matter how many runs it leads to. Awwww.....is a new word that we should all learn to use in our daily lives.
Sunil Gavaskar: If a batsman is near a milestone, our man will sniff it out in a heartbeat. You can tell a lot about his mentality from the way he appreciates milestones, game situation be damned. Also, he has a curious habit of making a joke, explaining it, and then repeating the joke again for emphasis just in case we had forgotten it.
Sanjay Manjrekar: I actually like the guy and the insight he brings in each of his stints. He picks up a hatke point of view. Unfortunately, he will then spend the next 15 minutes beating it into the ground by repeatedly pointing it out. Glenn Maxwell was at the crease in a recent match en route to his first ODI century. Manjrekar stated early on that Maxwell is an atypical batsman in that he does not play the ball or the bowler but instead frames his batting based on the type of field being set. Brilliant point. And then, for the rest of the session this lesson was drummed into our senses with each Maxwell hit. I was hoping for further insight into how captains could counter that strategy or bowlers could plan and make Maxwell hit into areas he is less comfortable (or would take more risks) hitting to. I am still waiting for that.
Kiwi commentators:All the Kiwi commentators have been excellent so far. Treating the game with respect, discussing strategy, pointing out the good (and bad) things players are doing, and staying quiet when needed and letting the crowd shots tell the story at times. (Luckily I have not heard Danny Morrison so far).
Channel 9 commentators: Back-slapping, inside-joke telling, laughing out loud once-every-minute, Aussie propaganda stumping. All of these are what I have (unfortunately) come to expect from them. They are rah-rah boys of the worst kind. They often don't even know who the opposing players are and sometimes will (shockingly) admit it. How can they not research the 22 players on the field before beginning their stint? How can the producers of the show let them get away with displaying such ignorance?
Mark Taylor: Special mention - he hasn't met a non-Aussie name that he hasn't mangled. I cannot fathom how he neither cares nor tries to pronounce players names correctly. That is just rude and inconsiderate and unbecoming of someone who, at times, has insightful things to say, especially related to strategy and game plans.
Rameez Raja: Like Ravi Shastri, he has about 10 stock phrases that he uses in varying patterns. Has not done much research for years and it feels as if the only cricket he watches or follows is the little bit he sees when he is commentating.
There are others, plenty of them. If you are interested shoot me their names and I will tell you what I think of them.
For many years I watched sports to root for a particular team, usually the Indian cricket team. But all that changed after I lost touch with (watching) cricket in the 1990's. When I was finally able to watch cricket again, the way I watched sports had changed.
I no longer root for a team. Instead I root for individual players and, by proxy, the teams they play for. I realized this aspect the year(s) I rooted for the New England Patriots (gasp!) simply because Randy Moss was on their roster. Now that Moss has left, I am back to not caring for the Patriots.
As the years have gone by the number of sportsmen who make me turn on the TV/computer to watch them has diminished due to retirement. VVS Laxman, Randy Moss, post-2010 Sachin Tendulkar and Greg Maddux were the prominent ones on the list. There are some stragglers who I don't watch any more but used to a until a few years ago like Jeff Gordon, Kobe Bryant and Tiger Woods (in his prime, El Tigre was as deadly and clutch under pressure as any sportsperson as I have ever seen).
Today, there is just ONE sportsman whom I try to watch whenever I get a chance to because I never know when he will stop playing professionally. A few days ago, it gave me great pleasure to wake up early in the morning to watch the man tick off one of the last items missing from his career resume - the Davis Cup.
Look at that concentration! He takes "watching the ball till the last moment" very seriously.
Watching Roger Federer play tennis is something else altogether. Most matches are won or lost on his terms because he is relentlessly attacking in nature, always looking for a way to end the point. The way he glides across the court, the way he manufactures shots from seemingly-impossible angles are the reasons I watch. In the future, there may be others who win more than him or have a more impressive career resume than him. But none of them will be able to convince me that Federer is not the best all-round tennis player I have ever seen. I was privileged enough to watch him once in person on Arthur Ashe stadium at the US Open and that memory is something I will always cherish.
Roger is not my favorite tennis player ever (that would be Ivan Lendl) but he is definitely the one who has given me the most joy. Even as he fights Time and plays as well as he can, I know the light is burning fiercely but the candle is burning out soon. Yet he is out there "tarnishing" his legacy in the eyes of some, piling up the years without Grand Slam titles. But he is not going down quietly. He ended 2014 a few points shy of the #1 ranking (I predict he will return to #1 sometime before May 2015) and wowed us with the Davis Cup triumph and continues to play on.
... if I account for every contingency when I make a plan, the worst-case scenario imagined will always materialize. If I do not make any plans and simply rush into things without thinking, the sailing will be smooth.
... that today's generation places less regard for their word than I do. If I say I will get something done, I do it. If they say they will get something done, it is just the first step in a series of steps leading to the not keeping their promise.
... in sports, there is no situation that hasn't happened before. And the past has NO bearing whatsoever on the few things that do happen for the first time.
... that work has a way of filling the time available to get a job done.
As the years have progressed, movie directors have pushed the boundaries of what is acceptable to be shown/visualized on-screen. But sometimes, just because you can film something does not mean it is "entertaining".
A common theme that has emerged in recent superhero movies (be it the Hollywood variety - The Avengers, Iron Man, etc. or even the Bollywood kind - Krrish 3, Dhoom 3, etc.) is the "battle" between the main characters. Earlier, the destruction of cities and buildings and, by proxy, humans was reserved for natural disasters such as comets or meteorites crashing into the earth.
But not any more. The zenith (or nadir, if you will) of these scenes was the final battle between Superman and General Zod in Man of Steel. One of the most enduring legacies of Superman was his wish to protect human life at any cost. Look at the following video and try to figure out how many lives were lost before the General was eliminated. Oddly, it seems that the General's fatal mistake was to target a family. As long as he was only destroying buildings (and the people within them) Superman appeared content to simply trade body blows with him.
What bothers me is that human lives appear to not have any value, especially if they are eliminated en masse.
(Note how much destruction has already been wrought on Metropolis by this point. And it is not a vacant city as you can see from the cars that are moving on the roads and the people clearly still milling about).
P.S. And yes, I will admit that the entire premise of my favorite movie of the year was the destruction of everything human-made in outer space but I will submit that the loss of human life was restricted to the astronauts at the start of the episode and was treated with great seriousness.
Years ago, Sports Illustrated begged another sporting legend to not quit the sport. Today, it's my turn to follow their lead.
So, don't bag it, Sachin! Some time ago, Times of India asked: Endulkar? My reply today is an emphatic - No!
Several folks are telling you it is time for you to retire from cricket. I have three things to say about it.
1) It is NONE of their business to tell you when to retire. That's a personal choice that is entirely yours to make. Don't compound their mistake. Their cries for you to retire are, in reality, cries for you to be dropped from the Indian team. Those are two different things. You've been playing cricket for your entire life and competitive cricket for 4/5ths of it. Who are they to tell you when to stop?
2) I don't want you to make the same mistake, too. Retiring from international cricket is different from retiring from playing cricket. It is very obvious that you love the game very much. Keep at it. Play Ranji Trophy, play county cricket. Play the game for the love of it and not for the trappings that come with it. If Graeme Hick and Mark Ramprakash could be productive into their mid-40's, so can you. Heck, it would it really benefit Indian cricket if the Ranji players got to bowl to the likes of you and VVS Laxman. It would give the selectors a clearer idea of how good they really are.
3) To hell with how your legacy is being impacted the longer you play. Don't fret it. In the end, these last few flickers of the flame will be forgotten when your whole body of work is looked at.
When it comes time to discuss legacies, no one really cares any more that...
Sourav Ganguly's last Test inning was a golden duck, out to a spinner, of all things. At least his fate was the same as Don Bradman's, in that regard.
Muhammad Ali was pounded into submission by someone named Trevor Berbick in his last bout.
Pele spent the last three years of his career playing for the New York Cosmos.
Michael Schumacher spent his last three years racing for Mercedes without winning a single race.
Jerry Rice did not catch a single pass in his final game, in a playoff no less....for the Seattle Seahawks.
Wayne Gretzky's last season with the New York Rangers fetched him only 9 goals (in 81 games).
Sunil Gavaskar was bowled for 4 in his final international inning by a journeyman fast bowler.
Michael Jordan spent his last two seasons with the Washington Wizards and did not even make the playoffs in those two years
Do you want me to cite more? You get the point, don't you? Legacy is over-rated. You will not tarnish your legacy by playing on as long as you wish to. If the selectors are bold enough to drop you, so be it. They are simply dropping you from the Indian team, not stopping you from playing cricket. That's what you value more, isn't it?
You are still among the best batsmen India currently has. You are among the best outfielders in cricket. Until someone else comes by whose contributions are vastly superior to the ones you can provide, I feel you should play. After all, when you did play a Ranji Trophy match recently you made a century almost for fun, toying with the bowling.
The Aussies will be here in a few months. I look forward to seeing you take them on. And if the selectors decide otherwise, I'll still look forward to you playing some first-class cricket and making centuries for fun. Like how it used to be. Like how it can be. Like how it should be.
Because one day you, and only you, will know that it is time for one last fling. For one last inning. For one last battle.
I'm a sucker for time-lapse photography...so I cannot pass up a chance to show you this one, taken during the past couple of days while Hurricane Sandy made it's way through the Big Apple.
a) So, last night the result of an NFL game was determined by the shoddiness of replacement referees. Ho-hum. The debacle could have been avoided had any of the Green Bay Packer defenders followed the first rule of defending Hail Mary passes - KNOCK THE BALL DOWN!
Take a look at the replay - no less than three Green Bay defenders had the chance to ice the game by simply batting the ball away.
Yet, all of them went for glory and tried to intercept the ball. See for yourself.
Serves you right. You don't have my sympathies.
b) VVS Laxman retired a few weeks ago and it hasn't sunk in yet. I am still not in the mood to write my eulogy but am getting ready for it. Until then, here are two must-read articles about the good guy of Indian cricket.
First, Peter Roebuck is no longer here to write about VVS, but when he did (in the aftermath of 281) it was fantastic. Poetry in prose.
As Laxman took guard he found himself surrounded by the din of the crowd and the biting resolution of his gum-chewing, green-capped opponents near at hand. Habitually, he cuts an impressive and impassive figure upon which hostility falls like raindrops upon a bear. He stood his ground.
Laxman was about to play the innings of a lifetime, one of the greatest knocks the game has known. His effort has not shrunk in retrospect for it was not a mere protest against fate but rather a purposeful pursuit of an impossible dream.
Second, check out Siddhartha Vadyanathan's piece, not so much for what he wrote but for some of the videos link to in the comments section.
c) If you are a famous sportsperson, maybe even the best ever in your sport, winning a match is not the end of your day's work. Here's Roger Federer's grueling post-match interview schedule. I used to wish I could play like him. Now I don't, for I do not want to have to do all the additional things that come with that gift.
e) Very rarely do I burst out laughing when I read a straight-forward sports article about how someone can help Tiger Woods get his game back on track. But this one did. Johnny Miller is soooo modest, it makes me blush to hear about all the great things he has to say about....himself.
The drive I hit on the last hole at Oakmont in 1973 at the U.S. Open was special. I'd hit every green that day, and my average birdie putt was about 10 to 12 feet. To this day, I've never seen a major championship round of that precision, with tee shots and iron shots, by anyone. That sounds like bragging, but I've seen a lot of rounds.
Are we on the verge of the next hyper-leap in scientific possibility? It sure seems that way. The possibilities are endless...if we don't end our world in December, that is.
If you wonder whether the Earth is still worth fighting for when the (inevitable) destruction is at hand, here's a reminder of all the wonderful things we may lose when we do so:
What can one write about a person who wrote stories for a living and did so well that when he dies, it feels like something monumental has just happened? What can you say about someone that many others better equipped to do so have surely already done so?
Well, you can start by mentioning his name. Ray Bradbury is no longer with us, but his presence will be felt for a long time to come.
You can talk about strange, quirky facts that are not well known about the person. For example, you find out from his Wikipedia page that he never ever had a driver's license. Who does that any more?
But, in the end, it would only be fair to talk about what the man's work has meant to you.
Bradbury is most famous for his seminal work - Fahrenheit 451 - but the ones I like even more are A Sound of Thunder and Dandelion Wine. If asked to pick one among them, I'd settle for the former, a story that spawned the phrase "butterfly effect". It is as close to the perfect sci-fi/horror/ominous portent story as there is. I read it when I was barely in my teens and remember it as if I read it a few months ago.
In a career spanning over 7 decades, he produced 27 novels and over 600 short stories, many of them unread by me. And I am grateful for that as it gives me plenty of things to read of his before I get to properly rue his demise. Actually, let me rephrase that. I will not rue his demise since I did not know him personally, but when the time comes I will rue the fact that I will have no more stories to read.
Not many people leave a mark for posterity in their lifetimes. Bradbury did that and much more. If you do one thing for me this year, do this: read a Bradbury story. You will see exactly what I mean.
On a totally unrelated (and related) note - here's a very rare image, one that I am 100% confident will never be taken again - an artist working on the least-known skill of his.
