The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

	So near yet so far The Indian women’s hockey team needs to iron out its flaws to defend the Commonwealth title next year, writes M. S. Unnikrishnan Indian girls won’t find it easy to retain the Commonwealth Games hockey title in Melbourne next year. There are many soft spots in the team which need to be firmed up. And there are also a few challengers who are determined to topple India, including Australia and last year’s runners-up England. India chopped and changed the team after they won the Commonwealth gold at Manchester in 2002. The present squad seem to have not yet "set in", as seen during the seventh Indira Gandhi International Gold Cup in New Delhi last week. India got off to a tentative start, beating Malaysia 2-1, then picked up momentum to crush Italy 5-0, beat New Zealand 2-1 before crashing into a 0-2 defeat to Australia. Australia did an encore the next day, winning the title via the tie-breaker 5-3, to retain the cup they had won on their first appearance in 1996 in Delhi, beating Korea. The tournament was not held since then till it was revived this year. India’s defeat in the title clash was difficult to digest as they capitulated after taking an impressive 2-0 lead in the first half. Australia, fifth at the 2004 Athens Olympics, fought back to square up and then pulled ahead to walk away with the trophy They displayed perfect teamwork, superior skill and better stamina to triumph. India got the message loud and clear that there would be more than one contender for the crown in the 2006 Commonwealth Games. Hockey on the distaff side was never a priority discipline till the Indian girls lifted the 1982 Asian Games gold at a packed Shivaji Stadium in the Capital. The win turned the spotlight on women’s hockey as the custodians of the game reckoned that here was a sport which could be a potential medal winner at the Asian, Commonwealth and Olympic levels. Though India have met the first two targets, they are yet to come near the Olympic podium. India can make a distinctive mark only if they plan and prepare the team in a systematic and serious manner. Presently, there is no continuity or consistency in the preparations or performance of the team. The only thing consistent about them is their inconsistency. They win when not expected, and lose when in sight of victory. The paradox of women’s hockey was exemplified at the National Stadium in Delhi within a span of a few months. During the Asia Cup Hockey Championship in February, 2004, India surprised everyone when they stunned the formidable Korea to bag the title with a standout display, which scripted a new chapter in Indian women’s hockey. In the recent title clash of the Indira Gandhi Gold Cup against Australia, India were expected to pull off a win, but came a cropper, despite taking a 2-0 lead through goals by Mamta Kharb and Jasjeet Kaur. It was the same Jasjeet who had knocked in the match-winner against the Koreans in the Asia Cup final. The Australians possessed an all-round game which India lacked. Their superior physique gave them an edge, yet they were not infallible. Their inability to convert penalty corners was so glaring that they became a laughing stock. They converted only three of their 49 penalty corners. Yet the visitors scored goals when they really needed them. The Indian girls showed no such flair. They overdid the dribbling act, failed to keep pace with the ball, and were easily hemmed out. When a snap shot or a quick pass would have done the trick, they tried to show off, and paid for it. Indian coach Maharaja Kishan Kaushik, who has had the distinction of training the men’s team to the Asian Games gold at Bangkok in 1998, must have learnt quite a few lessons for applying these on the Indian team, when he does the mending act. Though the Indira Gandhi Gold Cup was conceived and executed by the Indian Women’s Hockey Federation (IWHF) to give exposure to the Indian team against quality foreign teams in congenial home conditions, the hosts won the title just once when they shared the honours with the erstwhile Soviet Union in the inaugural year in 1985. They finished second to the same team in 1987 and to Korea in 1994, but never reached the top spot. The tournament was not held for nine years for various reasons, politics included, as the IWHF could not rope in sponsors. But thanks to the initiative of IWHF president Vidya Stokes, the seventh edition was held with much fanfare as sponsors came in droves to fill the coffers of the women’s federation. If the Indira Gold Cup is kept alive as a biennial event, as was the original idea, women’s hockey in India would be richer by the exposure and experience.
	Chessboard of Indian cricket K.R. Wadhwaney "Indian cricket has been built downwards". This observation, made 60 years ago, holds good even today. What are the reasons? There are many. But one over-riding reason is that a majority of the cricket Board’s office-bearers, particularly presidents and secretaries, have not played any recognised cricket. Before Independence, princes had a hold on Indian cricket; post-Partition, it has generally been in the clutches of industrialists, politicians, bureaucrats or social climbers. In its 76 years of chequered existence, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) has not been able to "identify" what kind of a competition is the Ranji Trophy. To call it an inter-state event is nonsensical. Gujarat fields three teams (three votes) — Gujarat, Baroda and Saurashtra. Similarly, Maharashtra fields three sides (three votes) — Mumbai, Pune (Maharashta) and Nagpur (Vidarbha). Andhra Pradesh is a state but Hyderabad has its independent identity (two votes). Surprisingly, Bihar, affiliated with the Board for 70 years (1935), is being tossed about after the state was split into two by the government. For decades, the Board’s strength has been around 30. It comprises state bodies, founder members and government units. Everyone has one vote. Two founder members are the Cricket Club of India (CCI, Mumbai) and the Calcutta Cricket Club. The CCI houses the Brabourne stadium. What is the role of the CCI? It does not participate in any activity of the Board. Why should it have the right to vote? Three government units are Railways, Services, and the Association of Indian Universities (AIU). Services and Railways take part in the Ranji Trophy.The Railways team is going great guns. A little-known coach,Vinod Sharma, is doing wonders for the team. The AIU, affiliated with the Board since 1941, was an important unit till the 1960s because visiting foreign teams began their tours with a three-day match against Combined Universities. Polly Umrigar, GS Ramchand, Bishan Singh Bedi and many others made the national grade through universities. Now it has no role to play. Why should it continue to have a vote? In the 1970s, Inderjit Singh Bindra and Jagmohan Dalmiya were united. Their rival within the Board was MA Chidambaram (MAC). Bindra was then Secretary to President Zail Singh, while Dalmiya was a rising construction industrialist. With the help of Rajiv Gandhi and Pranab Mukherjee, they made a dent in MAC’s empire. NKP Salve was prevailed upon to unseat MAC’s favourite, SK Wankhede, from the office of the President. Wankhede and Salve were close friends. Wankhede’s term was reduced from three years to two. Fateh Singh Rao Gaekwad and Raj Singh Dungarpur took an active part in this game. Salve’s efforts saw the International Cricket Council (ICC) become a truly world body. Why did Salve do it? He was denied four passes for his guests, two among them being Siddhartha Shankar Ray and his wife. It was the final of the 1983 World Cup, which India won under Kapil Dev’s captaincy. For the ICC’s top post, Bindra and Dalmiya drifted away. They are now in rival camps. In these two months following the adjournment of the BCCI AGM, Dalmiya will leave no stone unturned to ensure his group continues to stay in power. Had the elections been held on September 22, the Bindra-Dungarpur-Sharad Pawar faction would have scraped through. But Dalmiya managed to find an escape route by getting the all-important voting meeting deferred for two months. Lalit Modi was the one who brought the two observers to the meeting. Modi is currently the president of the Rajasthan Cricket Association. He succeeded in scuttling Rungta’s regime in Rajasthan. Modi’s game plan was simple. He succeeded in getting the Bill passed that only district units affiliated to the RCA were entitled to vote. The Supreme Court, on October 3 this year, ruled that only one observer should supervise the Board elections scheduled for November. The court also ruled that he should be from the category of retired players. Maybe Sunil Gavaskar will be the observer. But will the Pawar faction accept him? It is doubtful. The Mumbai Cricket Association chief pawar has been talking a lot about transparency. But does he really think that contesting on proxy of North (Jammu and Kashmir) is an act of transparency? Does he think that two wrongs make one right? Will Pawar get his nomination again from Jammu and Kashmir? It is difficult to say because Dr Farooq Abdullah, a golf addict, has an open mind. He brings into play his height and strength in executing a tee shot. Maybe this time his shot will land in the Calcutta Royal golf course bunker.
	Wrong-arm tactics Vikramdeep Johal Imagine Brett Lee charging towards the wicket from his long run-up, only to deliver the ball under-arm. It isn’t a prank — he has done it simply because over-arm bowling is outlawed. How boringly slow the game of cricket would be if the players were forced to bowl without raising their arm! The ball would take ages to reach the batsmen, and they would have to shake themselves out of slumber to play a shot. Had Lee and Co. played in 1805, this nightmare would have been a reality. In those days, bowlers were no-balled if their hand went above the elbow level. The "gentleman’s" game owes it to a lady for the genesis of something we take for granted today — over-arm bowling. This little-known woman, Christina Willes, was the subject of a one-crore question on KBC-2 last week. Unaware of her contribution to their beloved sport, most cricket buffs were clean bowled by this googly. Not surprisingly, the wise contestant decided to quit the game rather than hazard a guess. Christina was the sister of Kent cricketer John Willes. A keen player herself, she used to help him in his practice near their house in Canterbury. The story goes that finding it difficult to bowl under-arm due to her voluminous skirt, she started throwing the ball round-arm. Little did she realise that her invention, a child of necessity, would change the face of cricket. Her brother recognised the possibilities of this way of bowling and in 1807, he tried it out in some matches. His efforts met with great opposition. Batsmen objected, umpires no-balled him and spectators often invaded the pitch and pulled out the stumps. For 15 years, John persevered, gaining some support, but when he bowled in the new style in a match at Lord’s in 1822, he was no-balled for throwing. He left the mecca of cricket, mounted his horse and rode away, vowing never to play the game again. It wasn’t until 1835 that the law was amended to allow bowlers to raise their hand level with their shoulder, and only in 1864 was over-arm bowling legalised. An attempt was made to "revive" the under-arm style over a century later, but it caused a furore in cricketing as well as political circles. The man who came up with this hell-raising idea was none other than India’s coach Greg Chappell. On February 1, 1981, Australia were playing New Zealand in the third final of the World Series Cup at the Melbourne Cricket Ground. The Kiwis needed six runs off the last ball to tie the match. Chappell, the then Australian captain, ordered his brother Trevor to bowl the final ball under-arm to prevent New Zealand’s Brian McKechnie from hitting a six. When Trevor delivered it, the shocked batsman just tapped the ball and threw his bat in disgust. Kiwi captain Geoff Howarth ran out onto the field to argue with the umpires, but since under-arm bowling was not specifically banned at that time, his protest went in vain. The episode raised a trans-Tasman storm, with New Zealand Prime Minister Robert Muldoon saying that it was appropriate the Aussies should have been dressed in yellow (slang for cowardly) and his Australian counterpart Malcolm Fraser exclaiming that the incident was contrary to the traditions of cricket. The ICC quickly stepped in to officially prohibit under-arm bowling. Chappell was severely reprimanded by the Australian Cricket Board, but he still had the last laugh, walking away with the man of the series award. One hopes he won’t instruct any of the Indian bowlers to "throw it like Trevor" in a desperate situation. (Indian cricket can certainly do without another controversy). The Australian once made poor Christina toss and turn in her grave, and it would be sheer cruelty to the pioneering lady if he does it again.
	IN THE NEWS Super Shane Ramandeep Singh The ICC World XI had top-class allrounders like Andrew Flintoff, Jacques Kallis, Shaun Pollock and Shahid Afridi, yet it was an Australian who easily stole the limelight from them. The trump card for the Aussies turned out to be Shane Watson, who shone with a superb all-round performance which even Flintoff, the Ashes hero, would have been proud of. Watson captured three wickets and was declared man of the match in the first game. In the second, he took just one wicket, but in the third he not only scored 66 valuable runs and also took four crucial wickets to once again bag the man of the match award. In the third match, he bowled the dangerous Flintoff and spectacularly ran out Virender Sehwag off his own bowling. The man of the series award might have gone to Adam Gilchrist, but it was Watson who deserved it more, for he was the real find of the series for Australia. Watson (24) has had a chequered career mainly due to nagging injuries but whenever he has got the opportunity he has delivered the goods. As a 15-year-old he played for the the Queensland Under-17 side and made it to the Australian Cricket Academy. Later, he played first-class cricket for Tasmania and presently he plays for Queensland. He impressed the selectors so much that he made it to the national side within a year of playing for Tasmania but missed out performing on the biggest stage when he had to pull out of the 2003 World Cup due to a stress fracture of the back. Cricket pundits have forecasted a bright future for Watson, if he can keep injuries at bay. The Australian selectors, who selected the team for the Super Series with an eye on the 2007 World Cup, must be mighty pleased with Watson’s performance. It was an allrounder by the name of Steve Waugh who came to bowl in crunch situations during the 1987 World Cup and won the day for the Aussies. They must be hoping that 20 years on they have finally found a replacement for Waugh in Watson. After Steve stopped bowling because of a bad back, Australia have never had an allrounder in his mould. Many players have come and gone since but none have been as talented as Watson. Till the World Cup he has to be handled carefully and reserved for crucial matches and series. Like Shane Bond — the Kiwi quick — Watson is like a thoroughbred — prodigiously talented but equally fragile. Watson has played in 40 one-dayers, scoring 454 runs at an average of 32.42 with two fifties. He also has 33 wickets at an average of 38.27. These are early days for him and here on he can only improve. Along with Michael Clarke, Watson is the future of Australian cricket. Come the 2007 World Cup, both these young players are likely to be in the thick of action and they will crucial to the defence of the title which the Aussies have virtually made their own, having won it in 1987, 1999 and 2003. OJ Simpson is back OJ Simpson’s rare public appearance in Los Angeles at the annual NecroComicon show drew little interest, with no more than a dozen persons traipsing up a rear stairwell into a small room to glimpse the former football star and actor. A bigger crowd of reporters and camera crews turned up, but many were kept away by organisers who tried to prevent the media from asking Simpson questions. After about 90 minutes, they hustled Simpson out of the building’s rear exit into a waiting car. Asked by a reporter if he was being paid for his appearance, Simpson replied, "I’m not doing this for my health." Tom Riccio, a promoter of the event, said Simpson attended the convention as a favour to a friend who was paid in advance to arrange for the weekend appearance. Riccio told Reuters that Simpson, who lives in Florida, was "not getting a penny" for his visit but was using the event as a dry run for possible future public appearances he might make in exchange for donations to his children’s college fund. "A lot of promoters are watching this to see how it goes," Riccio said. He said he was charging $95 for photos and T-shirts signed by Simpson, and $125 for autographed football jerseys and helmets. But one fan who turned up, Joseph Wells, 41, said he paid $200 for an autographed jersey. "I like the Juice, and I wanted to get a shirt signed," Wells said, referring to the former running back’s football nickname. Simpson also made a joint appearance with his old team-mate Al Cowlings, who famously drove his friend around Los Angeles in a white Ford Bronco during a televised slow-speed police pursuit that ended with Simpson’s arrest on murder charges. (He was later acquitted after a famous trial in 1995). — Reuters