Posts Tagged ‘Star Sports’

World’s best batsman ever? No, the 29th best!

16 November 2013

20131116-081404 AM.jpg

As the mammon-worshipping mavens of the cricket board turn a team sport into an individual one in Bombay, as a cash-strapped media engages in a cloying overkill of its original cash cow, as the devout get confused about ‘God’, the BBC asks a simple question.

Was Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar—in whose name a Test match is being played, a gymkhana usurped from children has been renamed, a postage has been issued—is Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar really the greatest ever batsman?

Or, just a fine batsman of the TV age who handled the “pressure of a billion” with quality and equanimity, who never put a foot wrong, whose humility and modesty despite his accumulated millions, and whose motivation was an object lesson to those of us who give up easily?

In the midst of all the hagiography—no different from the bhajan sandhya, sangeet, mehendi and shaadi of a typical Punjabi wedding that Rupert Murdoch‘s Star TV is famous for, with guests from all over—it’s difficult to find a word of criticism, as Tendulkar stands on a mountain of runs, records and reputation.

Still, it must be asked: was he really that good?

The BBC’s Ben Carter throws up three key sets of numbers:

# The highest rating given by the International Cricket Council ratings to Tendulkar was 29 in 2002, after a series against Zimbabwe—below not just the invincible Don Bradman, but also his contemporaries Ricky Ponting, Kumar Sangakkara, Jacques Kallis, Brian Lara, in that order.

# When Patrick Ferriday and Dave Wilson compiled the 100 greatest centuries, again factoring in “intangibles” like conditions, rivals, pitch quality, match impact, series impact, etc, only one of Sachin’s 51 centuries came in, at no. 100. Lara had five.

# When Jaideep Verma compiled the the “impact index”, measuring performances with other performances in the same match, Tendulkar (5) had fewer series-defining shows than Rahul Dravid (8) although he had played more matches. Even Inzamam-ul-Haq fared better.

So, the best, the greatest?

Really?

Read the full article: The 29th best batsman

Also read: Gavaskar vs Vishwanath=Tendulkar vs Dravid?

India’s greatest match-winning batsman is…

India vs England series, and ESPN’s crass TV ads

13 November 2012

KRISHNAKUMAR P. writes from Bombay: Is the Indian cricket fan so cheap?

Do only cheap tricks appeal to the Indian cricket fan?

When ESPNStar won the broadcast rights for India’s home matches for the next six years, Indian fans rejoiced.

First, there was hope of better telecast quality. Second, there was the promise of some erudite commentary. And third, there was the hope that the viewer would now get to watch the first and last balls of each over.

Above all, being a pure sports broadcaster with years of experience covering cricket, ESPNStar was expected to deliver a rich viewing experience as opposed to the kitschy fare delivered by earlier broadcasters.

In short, here was a golden opportunity for ESPNStar to begin the Channel9-isation of Indian cricket broadcast, by injecting some much-needed professionalism at a time when cricket has been packaged and promoted more as entertainment than sport.

But the manner in which the broadcaster has been promoting the India-England series starting on November 15 comes as a sad reminder that not much has changed from the time we were told that ‘it was tough being a West Indian or a Sri Lankan in India.’

The running theme in the ESPN Star TV commercials—‘Angrezon kit toh bajaa di!’ using, in different spots, a pungi, a dafli, a band, and basuri—is as bad, if not worse, as Neo Sports’s racist ads targeting the West Indians or the Sri Lankans.

Understandably, ESPNStar has just come back into the subcontinent and would want to garner as much attention as possible. And admittedly, these ads are just to tell the viewer that the coverage of the series is available with Hindi commentary.

But rather than absolve the broadcaster, this only raises another disturbing question: Does ESPNStar think that the Hindi speaking/listening fan cannot understand the nuances of the game and the only way to connect with those fans is to appeal to their basest instincts?

And does it think that fans are only interested in seeing the Angrez getting bajao-ed and would not be interested in watching a hard fought, evenly matched series of cricket?

What is even more disappointing is that, unlike the Neo sports campaign, which was in the innocent pre-IPL days, this comes in the age of the shrinking dressing rooms and when player camaraderie that cuts across nations and clubs.

Could ESPNStar not have celebrated this newfound camaraderie to promote a big series in India, the home of the IPL?

It is not like STAR cricket doesn’t know how to promote a marquee series on its cricketing merits with a dash of good natured humour and wit. You just have to wait for another ad break between overs to see the ads promoting another cracker of a series being played a couple of time zones removed.

A South African fan asks his Aussie counterpart, ‘Hey Bru, what do you call a world-class Aussie cricketer?’ and goes on to answer: ‘A retired cricketer’. Another spot has the Aussie fan returning the complement, saying the best chance South African fans have of seeing a Dale Steyn wicket on this tour is when he walks in to bat.

Back then, Neo Sports found itself taken to court for its racist ads.

Considering that this time around it is our former colonial masters that are subjected to some old-fashioned bajao-ing, ESPNStar may well get away with it. But make no mistake — these ads are crass, tasteless and offensive.

Where were you when Fedex was serving an ace?

8 July 2009

E.R. RAMACHANDRAN writes: Roger Federer and Andy Roddick played perhaps one of the greatest Wimbledon finals ever on Sunday.

Federer, who had never broken Roddick’s service during the four-hour, five- set match, did so only once to win the championship. It was a match memorable for the event as also played in front of some greatest tennis players of the game Bjorn Borg, Rod Laver, Manuel Santana, Ilie Nastase along with Sampras.

When the whole world was watching the match, what were Indians watching?

Our sports minister Manohar Singh Gill probably had a ringside seat at centre court like last year. How did his countrymen who depend on Doordarshan watch the match?

They didn’t.

It is a crying shame that the Wimbledon men’s finals was not scheduled to be shown at all on our so-called “National Network”.

What was scheduled was the live telecast of the 4th one-day international between India and West Indies. India already had a 2-1 lead in the series and even if they had lost the match, would have leveled the series at 2-2.

Tennis was shown on DD only because play was stopped in the rain-affected ODI, and finally the cricket match was abandoned. This is the fate of international tennis final vis-a- vis an inconsequential cricket match.

It is true that sports channels like ESPN or Star Sports show these matches live. But should those who do not subscribe to the cable network miss such matches because of shortsighted policy of DD mandarins? Who decides on such issues anyway?

DD has a ‘dedicated’ sports channel which was showing some badminton match from the files.

In all fairness, DD had telecast live the ladies single the previous evening. But when it comes to cricket, every other sport, has to suffer the ignominy of playing second fiddle.

What if Leander Paes had reached the finals?


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 7,704 other followers