IPL (Indian Premier League) took the world by storm when it was launched and lived upto the huge expectations in its inaugural year. It changed the way cricket was played. It gave some hope to countries like Pakistan and New Zealand that their players wont join ICL now. It raked in a lot of moolah for its owners, gave fame to many unknown but talented cricketers and gave great entertainment to its viewers. This year's event was supposed to be bigger and better. But then Election Commission bowled a googly and announced the elections at same time. So after prolonged discussions and press conferences, it was decided that IPL would go global.
I dont think it was a wise decision to move the tournament out of India. Firstly, it does give the impression that BCCI and Govt. of India are of the view that India is not a safe country. During the whole controversy it never looked like BCCI and govt. were on the same side. It always seemed that they were playing a game of their own. None ready to cede any ground. Couldn't IPL have agreed to a truncated tournament in May? By May the elections in many states would have been over and there would not have been much of a problem but IPL was concerned that with a truncated tournament it would lose out on money.
Also, all along BCCI has been saying that IPL is a domestic tournament with a global reach. It is very sad that we are hosting a domestic tournament outside India. BCCI says it wants to ensure continuity and thats why they are forced to do so. Would BCCI have rescheduled Ranji trophy elsewhere if it faced such a problem? If BCCI doesn't mind going to England or South Africa to play a domestic tournament, then I am sure it should not mind going to these countries again to play home matches against opponents who are not sure about India being able to provide adequate security. After all like IPL, only 1% go to stadiums to watch them, rest watch them on television only. So, if BCCI can ensure that match timings are same as that in India there should not be a problem.
Also, BCCI is sending the wrong signals to athletes who are in two minds about participating in CWG next year in Delhi. They will ask if Indians dont feel comfortable playing in India, how can they? The event which could have proved to the world that India is a safe country to tour, an event which could have shown how we can provide secuity which brings about a smile, an event which would have cleared the doubts of all, that event is going to do just the opposite.
Hopefully, all these would not occur and teams and athletes would not cite IPL to justify their fear in coming to India. Hopefully, IPL-2 would be able to generate as much hype on the field as it has generated off the field. Hopefully, stadiums would be filled with fans even in South Africa or England to support a local Indian team.
Tuesday 24 March 2009
Saturday 17 January 2009
Passport or Passion?
2008 was a tremendous year for Indian sports. First individual olympic gold medal, two more olympic medals, Saina's meteoric rise, Anand becoming undisputed king of chess, great performances by the cricket team, Jeev showing his class on golfing greens, Advani's once again stellar performance, qualification to the Asian Cup in football, rise of Somdev and Prakash, Marykom's 4th successive tital, so many plus in a year. Just when everyone was hoping that finally India is developing into a sporting nation, our government made a rule that will only allow Indian Passport holders to represent India.
This move has met with some resistance from the players who have been representing India for last few years but are not Indian citizens, citing that their american passports help them and hence they would not like to give up on them. But i agree with the government. If you want to represent India then you have to be Indian citizen. You can't have the better of both the worlds.
I agree that Prakash Amritraj is better than many of the Indian tennis players but he should also realise that he would not get a chance to play in Davis Cup for USA. So, if India is benefiting, then he is as well. And more than benefits, it is a matter of respect and pride. Can we trust that Prakash or Shikha won't be tempted to play in such a manner that will benefit USA if we face them in Davis Cup, Fed Cup or Hopman Cup? When they dont want to relinquish their USA citizenship then i think it is fair to say that their loyalties towards USA are more pronounced. It is not that you cant succeed in international sports as an Indian. Prakash's father Vijay Amritraj (though never won a Grand Slam) is considered to be one of the best players of his time. Paes and Bhupathi have won on the tour regularly despite having permanent residence in India.
And even if you think that travelling from India to Europe and USA is a problem, then do what Anand has done. He lives in Spain but never has he given up on his Indian citizenship. The question here is not of being jingoistic but being practical. All the major sportsperson (whether Indian or belonging to any country) say that playing for the country is always a dream, to hear your national anthem, to see you flag rise are all part of the thrill. Can we expect the same from these persons? Won't they be getting same level of excitement when they hear the national anthem of their country? The thing is they need to chose one country.
Allowing OCIs and PIOs to represent India opens a Pandora's box. In cricket we have a long list of successful cricketers of Indian ancestry. Should BCCI then approach them as well to play for India? Should Jeev Milkha Singh be told you are not the best Indian golfer because Vijay Singh's ancestors belonged to India? Should we also take the easy route that many gulf countries are taking to win Olympic medals and import renowned athletes? Should we also consider Alexi Grewal as the first individual gold medalist of India rather than Abhinav Bindra?
I believe sports is more about passion and emotions then about success and failure. If you want to represent India, you have to be an Indian. If you want to hold onto your American or British passport, good for you and best of luck for your life. Just as we cant allow Bobby Jindal to one day come up and say i want to be Indian MP while still being governor of Louisiana, we cant allow non- Indians to represent India.
JAI HIND!!!
This move has met with some resistance from the players who have been representing India for last few years but are not Indian citizens, citing that their american passports help them and hence they would not like to give up on them. But i agree with the government. If you want to represent India then you have to be Indian citizen. You can't have the better of both the worlds.
I agree that Prakash Amritraj is better than many of the Indian tennis players but he should also realise that he would not get a chance to play in Davis Cup for USA. So, if India is benefiting, then he is as well. And more than benefits, it is a matter of respect and pride. Can we trust that Prakash or Shikha won't be tempted to play in such a manner that will benefit USA if we face them in Davis Cup, Fed Cup or Hopman Cup? When they dont want to relinquish their USA citizenship then i think it is fair to say that their loyalties towards USA are more pronounced. It is not that you cant succeed in international sports as an Indian. Prakash's father Vijay Amritraj (though never won a Grand Slam) is considered to be one of the best players of his time. Paes and Bhupathi have won on the tour regularly despite having permanent residence in India.
And even if you think that travelling from India to Europe and USA is a problem, then do what Anand has done. He lives in Spain but never has he given up on his Indian citizenship. The question here is not of being jingoistic but being practical. All the major sportsperson (whether Indian or belonging to any country) say that playing for the country is always a dream, to hear your national anthem, to see you flag rise are all part of the thrill. Can we expect the same from these persons? Won't they be getting same level of excitement when they hear the national anthem of their country? The thing is they need to chose one country.
Allowing OCIs and PIOs to represent India opens a Pandora's box. In cricket we have a long list of successful cricketers of Indian ancestry. Should BCCI then approach them as well to play for India? Should Jeev Milkha Singh be told you are not the best Indian golfer because Vijay Singh's ancestors belonged to India? Should we also take the easy route that many gulf countries are taking to win Olympic medals and import renowned athletes? Should we also consider Alexi Grewal as the first individual gold medalist of India rather than Abhinav Bindra?
I believe sports is more about passion and emotions then about success and failure. If you want to represent India, you have to be an Indian. If you want to hold onto your American or British passport, good for you and best of luck for your life. Just as we cant allow Bobby Jindal to one day come up and say i want to be Indian MP while still being governor of Louisiana, we cant allow non- Indians to represent India.
JAI HIND!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
