Captain Grumpy Mike Atherton finds out that cricket is back in full gear this season. Sadly, he is not there to enjoy the perks but he is still earning a fat sum commentating on Sky. Any regrets huh Athers?
Cricket equipment sales in the first quarter of this year are up 44 per cent on the whole of last year; the DVD of last year's Ashes series has sold 630,000 copies making it the biggest-selling sports DVD of all time, and a YouGov poll commissioned at the end of the one-day series in India reported that 82 per cent of those asked felt proud of the national team, up from 16 per cent two years before. The ECB's aim was to have three players recognised by 10 per cent of the population by 2009; the YouGov poll suggested that figure already stood at 43 per cent, three years ahead of schedule.
Let the good times roll for English cricket. All of which makes it a bad time for the England team to be going through a slump. All these good things trickle down from the top and if the success of the national team dries up, then it is a drought that will eventually affect the whole game.
I agree with you Athers, the last few months haven't been the best for the England cricket team, but I don't think they'l ever compete with your team of the 90s. By the way what was your success rate?...lol..just joking, thankfully you are a great writer, so all is forgiven.
Sunday, May 21, 2006
The reality in the country with the world's highest GDP I never knew much about Norway besides it's fjords, death-metal bands, Oslo(the land of the midnight sun), it's governments role in the Sri Lankan crisis and now the Nepal crisis. This article was a real eye-opener and from now on I will take Norway seriosuly, infact we all must.
Arriving in Oslo, the airport terminal is spanking-new, enormous and eerily quiet; all signs of prestige spending projects funded by easy money. The bullet-style train into the city centre is the first warning of price shocks to come; £30 return for a 15-minute hop, but at least the ticket seller smiles. And I thought the Heathrow Express was the world's priciest train.
In oil-boom Oslo, one might expect rows of Dubai skyscrapers, swaggering executives and a glut of fat 4x4s. Instead, it's more like Birmingham city centre on a quiet shopping day. There's two big glass towers, but they were built in the 1960s and most Oslo-ites would happily see them demolished.
But don't be fooled by the sky-high prices; even after taking them into account, Norwegian incomes still top the table on a "purchasing power parity" basis. Though food and drink (especially wine) is at times gobsmackingly expensive, other goods are on a par with Britain. Housing in Oslo (despite recent rises) is cheaper than London.
So where's the money going? Is the government splashing out on schools, hospitals and lavish welfare projects? A brief visit suggests spending is indeed up - a new cancer wing here, a fancy new school gym there - but nothing that shouts boom-time.
Arriving in Oslo, the airport terminal is spanking-new, enormous and eerily quiet; all signs of prestige spending projects funded by easy money. The bullet-style train into the city centre is the first warning of price shocks to come; £30 return for a 15-minute hop, but at least the ticket seller smiles. And I thought the Heathrow Express was the world's priciest train.
In oil-boom Oslo, one might expect rows of Dubai skyscrapers, swaggering executives and a glut of fat 4x4s. Instead, it's more like Birmingham city centre on a quiet shopping day. There's two big glass towers, but they were built in the 1960s and most Oslo-ites would happily see them demolished.
But don't be fooled by the sky-high prices; even after taking them into account, Norwegian incomes still top the table on a "purchasing power parity" basis. Though food and drink (especially wine) is at times gobsmackingly expensive, other goods are on a par with Britain. Housing in Oslo (despite recent rises) is cheaper than London.
So where's the money going? Is the government splashing out on schools, hospitals and lavish welfare projects? A brief visit suggests spending is indeed up - a new cancer wing here, a fancy new school gym there - but nothing that shouts boom-time.
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
For a class project
The Jumper and The Hat
In our country(England) cricket has always been romanticised as a symbol of English idyll. The meadow game with the beautiful name. A cricket match on Sunday with men in white flannels on the field, the sound of leather hitting the willow, the ladies in the pavilion drinking their tea and eating cucumber sandwiches and scones followed by a subdued applause at the fall of a wicket or a good shot. These are some of the images that come to mind when one thinks about the game. But for me, the two things that are missing here are the classic windproof cricket jumper with it shallow V neck and the crisp white cricket hat. The sport cannot be the same without them.
It does make me sound a little old-fashioned but last week when I came across these two items when I was at Lord’s for a match I realised they are still very much part of the game and I developed a connection with them, again.
Nowadays, the cricket sweater is spotted on fashion runways and not just on the cricket field. Ralph Lauren has its own version; in fact almost every major clothes apparel has one. It does have a quintessential British feel about them but is popular in other countries too because of the aesthetic quality attached to it. Compare it to the basketball jersey for instance, which does not have any character and is useless without all the bling bling and boxer shorts. The cricket sweater goes with anything, or just about anything. It’s smart, suave and for a cricket enthusiast is just more than a mere fashion statement.
During the match I came across a blonde woman, whose back has facing me wearing this vintage jumper and I was smitten. A few minutes later, she turned around, and I was awed by her and especially the sweater, obviously it helped that she was pretty but for me it was the sheer elegance of the sweater. It just made her even more noticeable, she was one in a million. It was the first time I had seen a woman wear it, and now I wish more of them do. I felt like a schoolboy who had just developed his first crush. I couldn’t stop looking at her and that image will forever be in my head.
Then at the interval, I made my way to the shop where they were selling cricket souvenirs and some apparel as well. This time, the England Cricket Team’s long white hat caught my fancy. After some initial hesitation, I caved in and bought it and even though it didn’t really suit me and I was too much of a sucker for it. I wore it for the entire day; even on my way home much to the amusement of everyone on the tube. A few odd glances made me conscious and I compared the hat to the hoodie, what would happen to me if I came across a gang of them right now? During the cricket match I fitted in with the crowd so gracefully with every fifth person wearing one and now I was at the other end. Unlike the sweater it cannot be worn anywhere. I might as well wear a Bowler hat or a trilby. But that doesn’t take away from the beauty of the hat. I am going to look after it and the same goes with the jumper, though when I get one.
But for now, they will remain in my room but I know that when I get old, and spend my summers watching county cricket games with a dusty score sheet and a pint of premium ale, they will come in handy.
The Jumper and The Hat
In our country(England) cricket has always been romanticised as a symbol of English idyll. The meadow game with the beautiful name. A cricket match on Sunday with men in white flannels on the field, the sound of leather hitting the willow, the ladies in the pavilion drinking their tea and eating cucumber sandwiches and scones followed by a subdued applause at the fall of a wicket or a good shot. These are some of the images that come to mind when one thinks about the game. But for me, the two things that are missing here are the classic windproof cricket jumper with it shallow V neck and the crisp white cricket hat. The sport cannot be the same without them.
It does make me sound a little old-fashioned but last week when I came across these two items when I was at Lord’s for a match I realised they are still very much part of the game and I developed a connection with them, again.
Nowadays, the cricket sweater is spotted on fashion runways and not just on the cricket field. Ralph Lauren has its own version; in fact almost every major clothes apparel has one. It does have a quintessential British feel about them but is popular in other countries too because of the aesthetic quality attached to it. Compare it to the basketball jersey for instance, which does not have any character and is useless without all the bling bling and boxer shorts. The cricket sweater goes with anything, or just about anything. It’s smart, suave and for a cricket enthusiast is just more than a mere fashion statement.
During the match I came across a blonde woman, whose back has facing me wearing this vintage jumper and I was smitten. A few minutes later, she turned around, and I was awed by her and especially the sweater, obviously it helped that she was pretty but for me it was the sheer elegance of the sweater. It just made her even more noticeable, she was one in a million. It was the first time I had seen a woman wear it, and now I wish more of them do. I felt like a schoolboy who had just developed his first crush. I couldn’t stop looking at her and that image will forever be in my head.
Then at the interval, I made my way to the shop where they were selling cricket souvenirs and some apparel as well. This time, the England Cricket Team’s long white hat caught my fancy. After some initial hesitation, I caved in and bought it and even though it didn’t really suit me and I was too much of a sucker for it. I wore it for the entire day; even on my way home much to the amusement of everyone on the tube. A few odd glances made me conscious and I compared the hat to the hoodie, what would happen to me if I came across a gang of them right now? During the cricket match I fitted in with the crowd so gracefully with every fifth person wearing one and now I was at the other end. Unlike the sweater it cannot be worn anywhere. I might as well wear a Bowler hat or a trilby. But that doesn’t take away from the beauty of the hat. I am going to look after it and the same goes with the jumper, though when I get one.
But for now, they will remain in my room but I know that when I get old, and spend my summers watching county cricket games with a dusty score sheet and a pint of premium ale, they will come in handy.
The Colonial Hangover
I just finished watching the highlights of the last day of the fifth test between England and Sri Lanka and I feel a sense of pride even though I am not Sri Lankan. In reality I am a neutral outsider, I am Indian, but right now for some reason I feel like we have won
(I refer we as anyone from India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh).
I can’t help but look at it from a match between an ex-colony and an imperial power at the latter’s home ground. Of course, it’s only a draw, the series is still nil all, but it feels like a victory, a well-fought battle where the brown men stuck it out, gave all they had and prevented the whites from getting what was supposed to be theirs, or so they thought.
It’s sad but it’s true, whenever England plays Sri Lanka, India or Pakistan, we brown men want England to lose, it’s our way of standing up to the empire, a feeling which exists on a very sub-conscious level. It’s a hangover of our colonial past. They gave us the game, brought it to our part of world. They were at first hesitant in teaching us the game, we were the coloured natives, we couldn’t play with them, we played amongst ourselves. Then the inevitable happened, we learnt it, we persisted, and now 150 years later we are competing with them and at times even beating them.
English people might write off these feelings as unnecessary and at times even flippant yet these same people feel the exact same thing whenever they beat Australia. The Ashes last year was the best example, I do not have to say no more about that, except that we cheered for you and were glad that you beat them. We did celebrate; your victory was our victory. We drank some pints on your behalf; we were waiting to see the face of Ricky Ponting and his brethren when they were on the other end. And our celebration was genuine, though that is because Australia is our main target, we prefer you to them, we really do.
As Sociologist cum renowned cricket writer, Chris Searle, wrote in the foreword of his book Pitch of life: Writings on Cricket with a special reference to the domination of West Indies in international cricket from the 1960s to the late 1980s and the emergence of South Asia as a cricketing force in the 90s. “Cricket is the metaphor turned around. The coloniser’s game becoming his sporting nemesis. The cricket playing subject becoming more than the equal, the master and the destroyer too. The final blackwash.”
Sri Lanka didn’t play grand cricket, in fact they were outplayed for three days and on the rest two England just couldn’t finish it off. The inexperience displayed early on was replaced by an urge to retain some respect. It was a matter of national pride.
They had been asked to follow on after being bundled out for 191 in their first innings and were expected to lose by Saturday afternoon. They didn’t and survived England’s much touted bowling attack for eight sessions, displaying character and self-confid3ence that they themselves didn’t seem to possess before then. This was their highest second innings score and the highest ever second innings score at Lord's. It couldn’t have come at a better time.
More than anything it was the way they frustrated the England bowlers and fielders.
This is the only the second time they are playing a three match test series in England after being ignored for more than a decade. In 1996, they came and played a one-off test at The Oval, while South Africa played 5 tests. Worse, still Muralitharan single-handedly wrecked the English with match figures of 16 for 220 in that match.
The minnows of the 80s are now a fairly competitive side as they have shown despite the absence of big names and stars in the current squad. Don’t get me wrong I am not saying they will win the series, England should cruise. This match has shown that they can fight and fight they will, of course only on the cricket pitch. For the media and the elite in England, they maybe meek brown people with unpronounceable names but they can play good cricket as they have shown in the past.
England did spill their chances, and over-confidence may have been one of their flaws. Looks like the series will not be as one-sided as they would have hoped. The nine catches that they dropped didn’t help either. I must admit I did laugh in my head at all nine of them but that’s because I myself am I brown man with an unpronounceable name waiting for any chance to laugh at a white man drop a dolly. It’s sad but true. You can’t really blame me though, can you?
I just finished watching the highlights of the last day of the fifth test between England and Sri Lanka and I feel a sense of pride even though I am not Sri Lankan. In reality I am a neutral outsider, I am Indian, but right now for some reason I feel like we have won
(I refer we as anyone from India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh).
I can’t help but look at it from a match between an ex-colony and an imperial power at the latter’s home ground. Of course, it’s only a draw, the series is still nil all, but it feels like a victory, a well-fought battle where the brown men stuck it out, gave all they had and prevented the whites from getting what was supposed to be theirs, or so they thought.
It’s sad but it’s true, whenever England plays Sri Lanka, India or Pakistan, we brown men want England to lose, it’s our way of standing up to the empire, a feeling which exists on a very sub-conscious level. It’s a hangover of our colonial past. They gave us the game, brought it to our part of world. They were at first hesitant in teaching us the game, we were the coloured natives, we couldn’t play with them, we played amongst ourselves. Then the inevitable happened, we learnt it, we persisted, and now 150 years later we are competing with them and at times even beating them.
English people might write off these feelings as unnecessary and at times even flippant yet these same people feel the exact same thing whenever they beat Australia. The Ashes last year was the best example, I do not have to say no more about that, except that we cheered for you and were glad that you beat them. We did celebrate; your victory was our victory. We drank some pints on your behalf; we were waiting to see the face of Ricky Ponting and his brethren when they were on the other end. And our celebration was genuine, though that is because Australia is our main target, we prefer you to them, we really do.
As Sociologist cum renowned cricket writer, Chris Searle, wrote in the foreword of his book Pitch of life: Writings on Cricket with a special reference to the domination of West Indies in international cricket from the 1960s to the late 1980s and the emergence of South Asia as a cricketing force in the 90s. “Cricket is the metaphor turned around. The coloniser’s game becoming his sporting nemesis. The cricket playing subject becoming more than the equal, the master and the destroyer too. The final blackwash.”
Sri Lanka didn’t play grand cricket, in fact they were outplayed for three days and on the rest two England just couldn’t finish it off. The inexperience displayed early on was replaced by an urge to retain some respect. It was a matter of national pride.
They had been asked to follow on after being bundled out for 191 in their first innings and were expected to lose by Saturday afternoon. They didn’t and survived England’s much touted bowling attack for eight sessions, displaying character and self-confid3ence that they themselves didn’t seem to possess before then. This was their highest second innings score and the highest ever second innings score at Lord's. It couldn’t have come at a better time.
More than anything it was the way they frustrated the England bowlers and fielders.
This is the only the second time they are playing a three match test series in England after being ignored for more than a decade. In 1996, they came and played a one-off test at The Oval, while South Africa played 5 tests. Worse, still Muralitharan single-handedly wrecked the English with match figures of 16 for 220 in that match.
The minnows of the 80s are now a fairly competitive side as they have shown despite the absence of big names and stars in the current squad. Don’t get me wrong I am not saying they will win the series, England should cruise. This match has shown that they can fight and fight they will, of course only on the cricket pitch. For the media and the elite in England, they maybe meek brown people with unpronounceable names but they can play good cricket as they have shown in the past.
England did spill their chances, and over-confidence may have been one of their flaws. Looks like the series will not be as one-sided as they would have hoped. The nine catches that they dropped didn’t help either. I must admit I did laugh in my head at all nine of them but that’s because I myself am I brown man with an unpronounceable name waiting for any chance to laugh at a white man drop a dolly. It’s sad but true. You can’t really blame me though, can you?
Sunday, May 07, 2006
A profile on Hugo Chavez in the Observer
Some excerpts
The far left side of Chavez politics
The ability of Chávez to prick the US has been made possible not by a large and modern army, or weapons of mass destruction, or support for terror, but by the simple fact of America's large dependence on Venezuelan oil in the middle of an oil crisis. Chávez, a visceral opponent of the influence of America in a Latin America that, like his 19th-century predecessor Simón Bolívar, he would like to lead, has found his dangerous global stage.
As self-appointed champion against 'the murderer' Bush, he has acted as ringmaster to those who loathe America's First Man: film stars, musicians, unionists, statesmen and writers. Later this month he arrives in London where he will be entertained by Mayor Ken Livingstone, a long-time Chávez supporter who has accused the US of trying to undermine democracy in Venezuela. Chávez has constructed alliances with everyone the White House hates most - including the Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and Evo Morales, the left -wing Bolivian President and former coca farmers' leader. And Chávez has included Morales in his 'axis of good' with Castro in his struggle with the US.
From left to pretty much right
The army answers to Chávez, as does the central bank, the treasury and the state oil-company PDVSA, which provides the vast bulk of Venezuela's revenue as the world's fifth-largest oil exporter. In 2002, when many members of the 19,000-strong company joined a lock-out strike in support of calling early elections to oust him, he fired them all, replacing them with chavistas. He has packed the judiciary with his supporters and rewritten the constitution to suit his ends. Most worryingly, he has talked about finessing the constitution to enable him to stay in office until 2030.
And it is not just because of his political inclinations that Chávez appears to be being pulled in contrary directions - between the authoritarianism of the classic South American caudillo (strongman) and democrat. His personality too appears to be elusive and, say observers, deeply unpredictable.
For a dictator in the making, as his opponents claim he is, he may have the rhetoric and perhaps some of the inclinations of a caudillo, but his record in confrontation has been more mixed. When Chávez began reallocating land from major landowners to the poor , whom he had encouraged to squat, it looked like the end for Venezuela's major estates - the latifundios - including the British-owned Vesty. But Chávez stopped short. For now the policy is one of negotiation, allowing the big businesses to keep some land in exchange for giving up a little. Then there was the confrontation with the middle classes, which resulted in the names of anyone who had signed a petition for a referendum demanding Chávez's recall (popularly known as la lista) being published by a prominent Chávez supporter. This so-called 'Tascón list' was subsequently used to deny signatories government jobs and contracts. It looked like an old-fashioned purge.
'Chávez is still in the "charismatic phase" where he is above good and bad for his people and he has cleverly separated himself from the image of inefficiency and corruption of his government. But that cannot be eternal. If he does not quickly succeed in restructuring the country's problems, people will start losing hope in him. That is his black spot. If he doesn't stop that mismanagement it will stop him.'
Some excerpts
The far left side of Chavez politics
The ability of Chávez to prick the US has been made possible not by a large and modern army, or weapons of mass destruction, or support for terror, but by the simple fact of America's large dependence on Venezuelan oil in the middle of an oil crisis. Chávez, a visceral opponent of the influence of America in a Latin America that, like his 19th-century predecessor Simón Bolívar, he would like to lead, has found his dangerous global stage.
As self-appointed champion against 'the murderer' Bush, he has acted as ringmaster to those who loathe America's First Man: film stars, musicians, unionists, statesmen and writers. Later this month he arrives in London where he will be entertained by Mayor Ken Livingstone, a long-time Chávez supporter who has accused the US of trying to undermine democracy in Venezuela. Chávez has constructed alliances with everyone the White House hates most - including the Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and Evo Morales, the left -wing Bolivian President and former coca farmers' leader. And Chávez has included Morales in his 'axis of good' with Castro in his struggle with the US.
From left to pretty much right
The army answers to Chávez, as does the central bank, the treasury and the state oil-company PDVSA, which provides the vast bulk of Venezuela's revenue as the world's fifth-largest oil exporter. In 2002, when many members of the 19,000-strong company joined a lock-out strike in support of calling early elections to oust him, he fired them all, replacing them with chavistas. He has packed the judiciary with his supporters and rewritten the constitution to suit his ends. Most worryingly, he has talked about finessing the constitution to enable him to stay in office until 2030.
And it is not just because of his political inclinations that Chávez appears to be being pulled in contrary directions - between the authoritarianism of the classic South American caudillo (strongman) and democrat. His personality too appears to be elusive and, say observers, deeply unpredictable.
For a dictator in the making, as his opponents claim he is, he may have the rhetoric and perhaps some of the inclinations of a caudillo, but his record in confrontation has been more mixed. When Chávez began reallocating land from major landowners to the poor , whom he had encouraged to squat, it looked like the end for Venezuela's major estates - the latifundios - including the British-owned Vesty. But Chávez stopped short. For now the policy is one of negotiation, allowing the big businesses to keep some land in exchange for giving up a little. Then there was the confrontation with the middle classes, which resulted in the names of anyone who had signed a petition for a referendum demanding Chávez's recall (popularly known as la lista) being published by a prominent Chávez supporter. This so-called 'Tascón list' was subsequently used to deny signatories government jobs and contracts. It looked like an old-fashioned purge.
'Chávez is still in the "charismatic phase" where he is above good and bad for his people and he has cleverly separated himself from the image of inefficiency and corruption of his government. But that cannot be eternal. If he does not quickly succeed in restructuring the country's problems, people will start losing hope in him. That is his black spot. If he doesn't stop that mismanagement it will stop him.'
Saturday, May 06, 2006
Links of the Day
Roly-Poly Powar on his paunch and the good side on being a fatty.
Don't trust anthropologists, Find out why?
Roly-Poly Powar on his paunch and the good side on being a fatty.
Don't trust anthropologists, Find out why?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)