It was called a 'gentleman's' game. Those were the days when there used to be matches played between Gentlemen and Players. It was mainly Test cricket between England and Australia for several decades though there has been the Larwood series and the tradition of 'The Ashes' Tests when the matches between the two countries were fought for retaining the 'urn'. After a long time, where the British had their imprint, other countries joined in the Test circuit. India and later Pakistan, West Indies and later South Africa. And then followed by Sri Lanka, New Zealand, Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. The common factor in all these countries was the influence of the British rule!
Test cricket although extended over four later to five days was seen to be too slow and waste of time. But in those good old days we did not need rules to promote the 'spirit of the game'. Gate money and player's fees were not major issues at all. It was good honest cricket. The old greats of Bradman and others in his era, W.G.Grace in England followed by the Hammonds, Comptons etc were household names. In India we had the great C.K.Nayudu, Vijay Merchant, Vijay Hazare, Subash Gupte etc and Pakistan had their greats too. Unfortunately the era during the apartheid regime in South Africa had its greats like the Pollocks and others but who were not part of the circuit.
But the game took a bad turn( for the purists) as the years progressed. To increase spectator interest the one day matches were started in 1975 principally in England. Becoming world champions was the objective. While the quicker game improved several aspects of the game, competition brought in questionable tactics which have eroded the gentlemanly spirit of the game. Then we had professionals in game and one could earn money in cricket. ODIs created such a great interest in the game the world over that spectators came in large numbers in bigger stadii and lots of money came in. This was followed by the T20 matches while in England there are 40 over matches. Technique, finesse and grace gave way to agricultural and wild stroke-- making - any way to make runs. The T20 bug has resulted in tournaments in many countries of sponsored teams like the BIG Bash in Australia, and the IPL in India.
With moneys coming in, an organisation -ICC- was formed to regulate and control the game -albeit surreptitiously. This body thought it wise to improve the spirit of the game but it has not really achieved this purpose.. A panel of elite neutral umpires, match referees became necessary to 'inculcate the "spirit of the game". The motivation in the game has become money and winning at any cost. The very soul of the game has been destroyed. To make it worse , we now have leagues like the IPL were a price is put on each player and probably some young cricketers are happier playing for the money than to play the game for one's country.
To conclude, it is a vary sad state of affairs that being a gentleman and playing the game in the right spirit is totally absent and cricketer's game and judgement of their own fitness is sacrificed by the lure of money. As one notable cricket writer put it -Test Cricket is vintage whisky, while T20 and IPL etc are like indigenous illicit liquor.
Alas, do we now have to play for the 'ashes' of the 'gentleman's game'.
Monday, 19 September 2011
Monday, 12 September 2011
Big Brother- the Man and his philosophy!
We respect Anna Hazare as a good man who loves his country, is honest and sincere. He has perhaps a lot for his village- Ralegan Siddi. Hed has enforced various social improvementl measures as seen by him. He has introduced prohibition in his village and he seems to have his own system of meting out punishment to offenders. He has done goodwork on water conservation with Govt funds and assistance. He is as much respected in his village as he is feared.
Such an elder brother provided an ideal person to be selected by some well meaning individuals to take his help to launch their fight against corruption. It is not difficult to get anyone in the country to support such a movement. So these self appointed representatives of 'civil society' formed a team of some legal brains, ex disgruntled Govt officers and others for their fight. Their first objective was to give credibility to their chosen leader. Without questioning the honesty and sincerity of their Elder brother, they sought to take the name of Gandhiji. Here is unfortunately the mistake as their Elder brother was not at all Gandhian in his methods or philosophy. But by a sustained campaign, these self appointed advisers to Anna, created a false notion of Gandhiji's image.
Gandhiji never promoted himself as a leader of the country. His philosophy of non violence and satyagraha however seemed to catch the imagination of the people and their leaders. He successfully used these methods to win our Independence from the British. He protested and started non cooperation movements on salt, British textiles and occasionally resorted to fasts ((not hunger strike to death) for short periods to counter some anti Indian moves and laws of the British Govt. He held regular talks with the British Govt incl visiting England in his traditional dhoti, but never called them names such as cheats or thieves, liars etc etc We are one of the few countries to have won our independence without a traditional notion of war. After 1947, despite his difference of opinions with the late Dr B.R.Ambedkar on some issues, he insisted that he should be the law Minister and the prime mover for writing our Constitution. Gandhiji tried to unite the country against any communal violence and went on hunger fasts for fixed periods whenever were communal riots in the country for self purification in that his principle of communal unity was not being accepted. He never used the fast as a tool for coercion announced months or weeks ahead!
This limited account of Gandhiji's philosophy is enough to counter the false notion that was being created that Annaji and his movement is following Gandhiji's philosophy. To call the movement as a 'war of independence' is a gross misnomer and the methds being followed are totally misconceived. I do not wish to attribute any false motives to him or his advisers. The cause is right. The right to express one's views and prepare a draft Jan Lokpal Bill are not disputed. But the democratic processes in the Constitution and the Parliament cannot be bypassed to approve their draft Bill in toto. Unfortunately, the whole movement became an anti Govt and not against the corruption of all politicians from most political parties. Probably, using Gandhiji's name and probably the support of various other elements who were using the movement to further their own cause and to cover up their own party policies caused enough confusion in the country to stop any meaningful activity in the country. Here it will not be out of place to mention the totally biased reporting of the media in their reports completely ignoring the balanced views being expressed in the print media on the whole issue by many jurists, experts and seasoned elder journalists. The drama that ensued including the Govt's inept handling of the arrest of Annaji added grist to the events. Speeches were made inciting people by calling MPs names and unbecoming comments such as liars. cheats and thieves. The atmosphere was further vitiated by the 'fast until death' as announced by Annaji while his own trusted ex police officer adviser had announced earlier that it would be a fast till his health permitted. Differing voices from Annaji's advisers on several issues revealed that there was no thought no behind the movement. There was fiery speech by a leading member of the team that the people will make the laws and not the Parliament. Bogus or rather defective methods of carrying out "referendums", attacking homes of politicians and such violent measures showed the weakness in movement ofther dichotomy o what is being said publicly and was being done on the ground. Luckily, sanity was restored when the Parliament with a thumping majority gave some issues to be looked into by the Standing Committee and the fast by the Big Brother was called off.
The various statements now being made by the Big Brother of Ralegan Siddi is very worrying. This shows the lack of any coherent philosophy behind the movement.The calmness and right atmosphere to allow the issues to be discussed and an effective Bill be presented to the Parliament is being vitiated by irresponsible statements being made. It is imperative that all parties should refrain from making provocative statements. While the privilege motions in the Parliament may become redundant and withdrawn equally the team should also stop taking defamation cases when apologies have been made and even accepted by Shri Annaji. Anna has also made some unfortunate remarks. Anyone opposing their Bill must be gheraoed and people should agitate against such persons. Why cannot they wait for the Bill till it is presented. Moreover, if he has the right of free expression, so do those who do not agree with any of the clauses in his Bill.
Secondly , he has made some disturbing statements that are against the very fundamentals of democracy. He says that gram panchayats members should be ''selected' and not elected. Are we therefore heading to the creation of a 'village autocrat' becoming a national dictator? With no elections as the base argument, Ralegan Siddi may become the capital of India and his 22 advisers will run the country. The Parliament and Constitution will be jettisoned and their own legal advisers will make the laws and there will be no courts as there will be no Constitution. I hate to visualise the anarchy that this country will face. May be even worse than a banana republic.
In order not to be pessimistic, I would like to make a few suggestions. Representatives of civil society cannot arbitrarily appoint themselves. on framing laws. We need a better presentation of retired judges of proven on Constitutional matters as well as independent thinkers. Drafts produced with serious thought can be presented to all political parties or all MPs so that the Standing Committee can have a good document to further examine. For the several other issues that has been raised about electoral reforms, let a broad base committee be fomed of ex Chief Election Commissioners. jurists, and other experts to prevent money power, those charged with criminal cases from being elected and a none of the above clause in thr ballot paper. Let political parties include professionals like experts in agriculture, engineers, economists, finance etc to be a part of the Govt or in Parliament. As one nhotable thinker expressed recently, we need a bipartsan approach on national issues like security, foreign affairs, defence etc Political partes should be transparent on theri funding and must have regular elections in their own party. All this can be done without having a confrontational approach and allow the right atmosphere for democracy to prevail and work. We need people participation but in a orderly and well reasoned approach to allow dissenters to present their views, if they have any substance.
It is now the responsibility of Shri Anna Hazare and his team to do some serious thinking and prepare a manifesto on every issue that they wish to raise and submits a considered document for consideration by all concerned. Let us avoid arbitrary ideas without deep thought to confuse one's thinking and have a movement bereft of any philosophy. They should promote a new party with a agenda, policy and fight elections and get heard in the Parliament and change the present system. We need such a national party desperately!
Such an elder brother provided an ideal person to be selected by some well meaning individuals to take his help to launch their fight against corruption. It is not difficult to get anyone in the country to support such a movement. So these self appointed representatives of 'civil society' formed a team of some legal brains, ex disgruntled Govt officers and others for their fight. Their first objective was to give credibility to their chosen leader. Without questioning the honesty and sincerity of their Elder brother, they sought to take the name of Gandhiji. Here is unfortunately the mistake as their Elder brother was not at all Gandhian in his methods or philosophy. But by a sustained campaign, these self appointed advisers to Anna, created a false notion of Gandhiji's image.
Gandhiji never promoted himself as a leader of the country. His philosophy of non violence and satyagraha however seemed to catch the imagination of the people and their leaders. He successfully used these methods to win our Independence from the British. He protested and started non cooperation movements on salt, British textiles and occasionally resorted to fasts ((not hunger strike to death) for short periods to counter some anti Indian moves and laws of the British Govt. He held regular talks with the British Govt incl visiting England in his traditional dhoti, but never called them names such as cheats or thieves, liars etc etc We are one of the few countries to have won our independence without a traditional notion of war. After 1947, despite his difference of opinions with the late Dr B.R.Ambedkar on some issues, he insisted that he should be the law Minister and the prime mover for writing our Constitution. Gandhiji tried to unite the country against any communal violence and went on hunger fasts for fixed periods whenever were communal riots in the country for self purification in that his principle of communal unity was not being accepted. He never used the fast as a tool for coercion announced months or weeks ahead!
This limited account of Gandhiji's philosophy is enough to counter the false notion that was being created that Annaji and his movement is following Gandhiji's philosophy. To call the movement as a 'war of independence' is a gross misnomer and the methds being followed are totally misconceived. I do not wish to attribute any false motives to him or his advisers. The cause is right. The right to express one's views and prepare a draft Jan Lokpal Bill are not disputed. But the democratic processes in the Constitution and the Parliament cannot be bypassed to approve their draft Bill in toto. Unfortunately, the whole movement became an anti Govt and not against the corruption of all politicians from most political parties. Probably, using Gandhiji's name and probably the support of various other elements who were using the movement to further their own cause and to cover up their own party policies caused enough confusion in the country to stop any meaningful activity in the country. Here it will not be out of place to mention the totally biased reporting of the media in their reports completely ignoring the balanced views being expressed in the print media on the whole issue by many jurists, experts and seasoned elder journalists. The drama that ensued including the Govt's inept handling of the arrest of Annaji added grist to the events. Speeches were made inciting people by calling MPs names and unbecoming comments such as liars. cheats and thieves. The atmosphere was further vitiated by the 'fast until death' as announced by Annaji while his own trusted ex police officer adviser had announced earlier that it would be a fast till his health permitted. Differing voices from Annaji's advisers on several issues revealed that there was no thought no behind the movement. There was fiery speech by a leading member of the team that the people will make the laws and not the Parliament. Bogus or rather defective methods of carrying out "referendums", attacking homes of politicians and such violent measures showed the weakness in movement ofther dichotomy o what is being said publicly and was being done on the ground. Luckily, sanity was restored when the Parliament with a thumping majority gave some issues to be looked into by the Standing Committee and the fast by the Big Brother was called off.
The various statements now being made by the Big Brother of Ralegan Siddi is very worrying. This shows the lack of any coherent philosophy behind the movement.The calmness and right atmosphere to allow the issues to be discussed and an effective Bill be presented to the Parliament is being vitiated by irresponsible statements being made. It is imperative that all parties should refrain from making provocative statements. While the privilege motions in the Parliament may become redundant and withdrawn equally the team should also stop taking defamation cases when apologies have been made and even accepted by Shri Annaji. Anna has also made some unfortunate remarks. Anyone opposing their Bill must be gheraoed and people should agitate against such persons. Why cannot they wait for the Bill till it is presented. Moreover, if he has the right of free expression, so do those who do not agree with any of the clauses in his Bill.
Secondly , he has made some disturbing statements that are against the very fundamentals of democracy. He says that gram panchayats members should be ''selected' and not elected. Are we therefore heading to the creation of a 'village autocrat' becoming a national dictator? With no elections as the base argument, Ralegan Siddi may become the capital of India and his 22 advisers will run the country. The Parliament and Constitution will be jettisoned and their own legal advisers will make the laws and there will be no courts as there will be no Constitution. I hate to visualise the anarchy that this country will face. May be even worse than a banana republic.
In order not to be pessimistic, I would like to make a few suggestions. Representatives of civil society cannot arbitrarily appoint themselves. on framing laws. We need a better presentation of retired judges of proven on Constitutional matters as well as independent thinkers. Drafts produced with serious thought can be presented to all political parties or all MPs so that the Standing Committee can have a good document to further examine. For the several other issues that has been raised about electoral reforms, let a broad base committee be fomed of ex Chief Election Commissioners. jurists, and other experts to prevent money power, those charged with criminal cases from being elected and a none of the above clause in thr ballot paper. Let political parties include professionals like experts in agriculture, engineers, economists, finance etc to be a part of the Govt or in Parliament. As one nhotable thinker expressed recently, we need a bipartsan approach on national issues like security, foreign affairs, defence etc Political partes should be transparent on theri funding and must have regular elections in their own party. All this can be done without having a confrontational approach and allow the right atmosphere for democracy to prevail and work. We need people participation but in a orderly and well reasoned approach to allow dissenters to present their views, if they have any substance.
It is now the responsibility of Shri Anna Hazare and his team to do some serious thinking and prepare a manifesto on every issue that they wish to raise and submits a considered document for consideration by all concerned. Let us avoid arbitrary ideas without deep thought to confuse one's thinking and have a movement bereft of any philosophy. They should promote a new party with a agenda, policy and fight elections and get heard in the Parliament and change the present system. We need such a national party desperately!
Wednesday, 7 September 2011
Instinct vs reason
Man is the most evolved being on earth. He has a mind to reason and think. Animals whoich are the next lower evolved, have a very strong instinct. This instinct regulates their lives and is seen by humans as intelligence. Of course, by repetitive action, they can perform as though they are as intelligent as man. But there are pet lovers, who will swear that some the instincts in animals are stronger and more reliable than human behavior.
As a layman, I have just returned to my own home and environs after staying for nearly 20 days in Bombay with my grandson. I cannot complain of the lack of comforts in large home, with A/cs humming right through the day, a high end music system, enough help in the house etc We were expected to look after our 14 year old grandson who was completely pre occupied with school, games at school and doing his homework on his own and we had no role to play. He even chose his own menu. He was so self sufficient that he woke up at 5 am on certain days with his own alarm. We only needed to coordinate the car and driver to look after his needs.
So what am I complaining about? I have no reason to complain about anything. But yet, when I returned yesterday to my own home, my instincts took over. I was happiest sitting in my own
Poyang chair watching TV, sleeping in my own bed and following my own regular routine. Everything about the world seemed to be just fine. What gave this feeling is that ultimately our 'creature' comforts' as they are called are governed by our instincts and not by reason.
I dont think this is a bad thing as usually instinct is never wrong though reason can be sometimes.
Is there a moral to the story? Dont travel out of your home if you neednt. If you have to, try to follow your usual routine as much as possible. But please dont be a slave to your instinctual impulses and try and find other activities to keep you busy - meeting friends, relatives and shopping which you cannot do in your home town. Dont allow your reason and mind to be idle but as possible with reading, listening to music etc.
Be a good dog but learn to be a good human, being too
As a layman, I have just returned to my own home and environs after staying for nearly 20 days in Bombay with my grandson. I cannot complain of the lack of comforts in large home, with A/cs humming right through the day, a high end music system, enough help in the house etc We were expected to look after our 14 year old grandson who was completely pre occupied with school, games at school and doing his homework on his own and we had no role to play. He even chose his own menu. He was so self sufficient that he woke up at 5 am on certain days with his own alarm. We only needed to coordinate the car and driver to look after his needs.
So what am I complaining about? I have no reason to complain about anything. But yet, when I returned yesterday to my own home, my instincts took over. I was happiest sitting in my own
Poyang chair watching TV, sleeping in my own bed and following my own regular routine. Everything about the world seemed to be just fine. What gave this feeling is that ultimately our 'creature' comforts' as they are called are governed by our instincts and not by reason.
I dont think this is a bad thing as usually instinct is never wrong though reason can be sometimes.
Is there a moral to the story? Dont travel out of your home if you neednt. If you have to, try to follow your usual routine as much as possible. But please dont be a slave to your instinctual impulses and try and find other activities to keep you busy - meeting friends, relatives and shopping which you cannot do in your home town. Dont allow your reason and mind to be idle but as possible with reading, listening to music etc.
Be a good dog but learn to be a good human, being too
Sunday, 4 September 2011
Mud slinging!
Anna Hazare seems to be peeved that some privilege motions have been admitted against some of his members. If Anna and his friends continue to call them 'labbads' etc to get cheap cheers from the crowds as also other such demeaning abusive words against the MPs ,what do you expect. Let some better sense prevail and both parties should abjure using such language. I am sure with such an atmosphere, good sense will prevail and bitterness will die a natural death.
The dust has settled!
At long last the dust has settled and sanity is almost restored. But unfortunately some are yet trying to incite people. While no one denies the freedom of expression, one has to recognize that so do others. SO LISTEN CAREFULLY and dont get caught in your mindset.
There was no reason why anyone wouldn't support such a generic cause as corruption. But it is quite possible that the thousands who gathered in Ramlila Maidan were not even aware what the real issues were involved. Several team members were wrongly that the methods being followed were Gandhian. Maybe Shri Anna Hazare is simple and sincere and honest man. But that doesnt qualify him to be a follower of Mahatma Gandhi. He has no doubt done good in his village which has been accepted by all. Gandhiji too hdstroct rules in hisashram but never forced them on anyone and those who did not wish to follow them were free to follow him from outside the ashram. Unfortunately, some of the younger members of his team were not born nor aware of Gandhiji's life and work. Enough has been said on this question and there is no need to repeat them.
There is however some important lessons to be learnt. That the Parliament should take note of the people's mood. And equally for civil society groups to realize that they must accept the Constitutional processes and respect the Parliament who are the elected members of the country. Any views to be presented should not be on any threat but with discussions have to be done with mutual respect. Calling names like 'liars', 'cheats'. 'thieves' is neither Gandhian or conducive to any meaningful talks.
However it has opened to a new avenue for taking various stake holders, like the public, law makers, judiciary and experts from social groups and organizations who have studied such problems in detail, into a committee authorized by the Parliament to evolve a consensus and a bill to be debated in the Parliament. This may force Govt and opposition parties to clearly spell out their views rather than resort to walkouts and stoppages of the functioning of the Parliament. This may avoid the situation from being a win-win situation but rather a well reasoned consensus to be debated by the Parliament.
Rightly, various other important issues have been raised viz electoral reforms, Judicial Accountability, education reforms, Grievance machinery for lower level Govt officials etc Special committees with experts from the Election Commission . ex CECs, judges, representatives from political parties, civil society members who are familiar with the present electoral system can be part of this Committee. A similar committee can be constituted for Judicial reforms with constitution experts, ex Chief Justices and others. Ideally, these committees should preferably not be chaired by political appointees but by independent experts from the judiciary.
We need systemic changes in Govt depts at all levels with the use of IT to establish procedures without giving any discretion and with timelines. Refusals can only be on procedural lapses and approvals have to be done within a time frame. Police depts. RTOs, Municipal organizations, registrar officers where there is cause to complain of corruption can be checked. We may need in every such office a vigilance officer who will take complaints of delays or bribe taking. Officials who work within the system and do their tasks on time may have to rewarded rather their asking for a bribe.
I am not a Constitutional expert but certainly we can evolve some system to promote a rational way of dealing with people's aspirations and make the Parliament more responsive to burning issues and engage in meaningful debates and discussions to pass important Bills with greater responsibility by both the Govt and other parties in the Parliament.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)