Afridi. Again.

Wow! Seriously?!

[Thanks to Sourabh Saurabh Somani for the link]

Krishna, Radha and Shahid Afridi

Spotted this post on my friend Bhaskar Dasgupta’s blog that details the latest instance of ‘Hindu’ ire. A series of clips:

It is absurd to refer to the episode of Radha-Krishna in the context of a case related to pre-marital sex. Sri Krishna, Bala Krishna was only 10 years of age when he left Brindavan for the Gurukulam in Sandeepani Ashram. The episode of Radha-Krishna occurred when Sri Bala Krishna was a child 10 years of age.

Krishna left Vrindavan for Mathura at the age of 10 years and 7 months according to Bhagavata Purana.

What is wrong with our educational system that even learned judges should refer to a seven-year old Shri Krishna and his being a darling of humanity and who enthralled Radha and other Gopikas has NOTHING to do with pre-marital sex since he was in Brindavan only until he was seven years of age.

Does a seven year old darling of Brindavan become an example of pre-marital sex in jurisprudence?

Why does all of this put me irresistibly in mind of Shahid Afridi? [And I hope I am not offending any "Hindu" sentiments here -- even Afridi is not mythology].

Measuring greatness

Courtesy the Telegraph [and courtesy my friend Siddhartha Vaidhyanathan on Twitter], a great read on Lionel Messi that goes beyond the player and looks at the nature of greatness itself:

The argument that a player cannot be considered great until he claims a World Cup winner’s medal is rendered nonsense by the portfolios of Ferenc Puskas, Alfredo di Stéfano, Johan Cruyff and George Best. Tell me they couldn’t play, that they did not redefine the parameters of the game. Greatness is not measured in silverware but in the memory.

Just one of several bits in that piece that reminds you of the on again, off again argument whether Sachin can really be called the greatest, without a World Cup to his name. There are other bits in the Messi piece that reminds you of SRT. Like, so:

His diminutive, beautifully balanced frame benefits from a low centre of gravity that affords acute changes in direction and keeps him upright when the big lads pile in. For an anatomically challenged male he is not without strength. These are the technical elements.

Messi has another dimension that is harder to measure. His awareness and understanding of space is preternatural; he is Pythagoras with a paint brush, all angles and vision.

And then there is the primal hunger that drives him, and the courage to take a chance.

This places him alongside the likes of Tiger Woods, Michael Schumacher, Usain Bolt, Michael Phelps, Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, athletes whose desire to win can be considered a pathology, a kind of insanity, a life dedicated to nothing but balls, spikes, water and wheels. At least Messi’s obsession has not put a scowl on his face.

Read on. And watch:

Of Sania, IPL and other ‘newsmakers’

So the big news, since we last spoke, was Sania Mirza announcing her engagement to Shoaib Malik. An occasion for considerable humor on Twitter streams, with my friend Ramesh Srivats nailing it when he said, “Good thing Shoaib and Sania don’t have to do the saat pheras — she wouldn’t get past the first round”.

Cruel, perhaps — but indicative of how rapidly Sania Mirza has slipped in the public estimation from her glory year, 2005, when she hit her career high ranking of 27 on the back of a dream run at first the Australian Open, when she lost in the third round to Serena Williams, and at the US Open later that year where she was the cynosure, celebrated as much for her fearless tennis as for her feisty attitude and funky T-shirts. Outside of a Grand Slam title in 2009 in tandem with Mahesh Bhupathi at the Australian apart, Sania since that breakout year has made the news more for controversies and recurrent injuries, rather than for her game — so perhaps the cruelty is understandable.

More cricket news from Pakistan: Mohammad Yusuf has announced his retirement “for now” — the caveat clearly indicating that this is more an attempt to prompt a dialog with the powers with a view to an eventual return, than the act of a cricketer who has reached that point where the daily grind no longer appeals. That point occurs to Osman Samiuddin, who starts off his column with this:

Not once in his scripted spiel did Mohammad Yousufactually say anything about quitting international cricket, which, given that the occasion was to officially announce his retirement, seemed a strange way of going about it. Having already told the biggest, most influential Urdu-language paper in Pakistan – essentially the whole country – two days ago that he was going to retire, perhaps he felt he didn’t need to say he was actually retiring at the function organised for that very purpose.

It was only after he finished thanking past captains, players, God, and talking about a PCB letter, that a bemused reporter asked him, just to be sure, “So you are retiring right?”

“Yes, yes,” Yousuf quickly responded. “Yes, this is my retirement. I have retired from international cricket.” The whole affair has about it the permanence of an ice cube in the Sahara.

On the surface, funny. But at a larger level, indicative of the state of affairs in Pakistan cricket, where players are in a state of suspended animation, the administration has been reduced to a joke, and media and commentators laugh that they may not weep.

Busy day, so for now will leave you with some random reading: India Today’s cover story on the IPL; a Mint article on how the tournament is proving to be a great showcase for emerging brands; and Ashok Malik on the economics of it all.

Back in a while — and, of course, live on Yorker between 3.30-4.30. Links etc as always on Twitter — mine and the official Yahoo ID.

‘Alex Rutherford’ returns

I hadn’t realized, at the time of writing this post [and then this], just how many of you out there are hard core historical fiction fans. The posts led to several wonderful e-mail conversations with some equally addicted readers, and produced some recommendations for which I am much indebted.

On that theme, here’s the always excellent Nilanjana Roy  [Twitter, blog] on the second book in Alex Rutherford’s Mughals series:

In their account, Humayun emerges as a man of the senses, beguiled and betrayed by his appetites, embracing opium as passionately as he embraces the women of his harem. His virtues are also his weaknesses: the compassion and forgiveness he shows his warring brothers as they plot against him will drive him into exile for years. As with the first book in the series, it’s the Prestons’ attention to detail and their intimate knowledge of the workings of the Mughal empire that makes this a satisfying, meaty read. They’re great on the battle sequences, and when they offer details such as the astrological carpet Humayun has woven when his opium-fuddled mind wants the court to be governed by the planets, they bring the period alive.

Despite the mixed review, I want. Flipkart, I notice, has run out of stock, so it is off to the bookstores this evening to hunt down a copy.

Open thread for live show

Right, so greatbong was live on Yorker today. Tomorrow, it’s just me, and Tejaswi and other in-house personnel.

Open thread, folks — post your questions, and we’ll get a jump start on the show tomorrow.

In passing, and in case you missed it, the Indian Parivar League is getting some stick from Sports Minister MS Gill.

“… the BCCI, they have a direct interest as owners of teams, as people who have a direct benefit from it [IPL] and this is something very dangerous,” Gill said. “They have also used the rules against another rival league [ICL]. But the controlling body has to be for India, for cricket for the long term. It has to be totally uninvolved.”

Bang on, Minister. So what do you think you can do about it, given that most state associations are run by politicians of various hues, and the central board is dominated by heavyweight politicians, literally and figuratively?

Here’s a suggestion: rethink BCCI’s status as a “society”; revoke the tax exemption — that is, or should be, a privilege of genuine non-profits, no? Since the BCCI and its offspring are clearly profit-making bodies, why should it be treated differently from any other corporation? Similarly, it currently gets its grounds for ridiculously low rentals, again in keeping with its non-profit status. Begin charging market rates, and pump those tax dollars and other earnings to the cause of improving the infrastructure for other sports, why don’t you?