fun

Thomas Cook and Cox & Kings woo Lalit Modi (Satire)

Lalit Modi is making waves not just in the political sphere but also in the travel sphere.

Unconfirmed reports reveal that travel companies Thomas Cook and Cox and King are vying to enlist the former cricket czar as their brand ambassador.

An anonymous source within Thomas Cook confirmed the news.

“Mr. Lalit Modi would be a wonderful emissary for the travel industry and Thomas Cook, in particular. Extensive reportage of his sojourns in the Indian media over the past few days has witnessed an increased interest in packages for exotic locations such as Havana, Cuba, Montenegro, Madrid,Jamaica,Zimbabwe,Pattaya,Seychelles, Serengeti,Venice,Istanbul, Doha, Qatar, Positano, La Coruna, Ibiza, Spain and last, but not least, Portugal. We expect the demand for these destinations to grow exponentially should Mr. Modi agree to our terms. Who are we kidding? Mr. Modi can name his price.”

Cox and Kings representatives expressed similar sentiments.

Meanwhile, ICC chieftain, N Srinivasan, was horrified that his former ally and current foe was visiting countries and places  on the fringes of international cricket.

It is learnt that the former BCCI chief is investigating the possibility that Mr. Modi is a front-man for Dr. Subhash Chandra, chairman of the Essel group. The Essel conglomerate is in the news for registering subsidiaries in Australia and New Zealand in an attempt to overthrow the existing cricketing establishment and form a breakaway body that would lure top cricketers into their fold.

“Is Mr. Modi purveying Mr. Chandra’s agenda while purportedly holidaying at these outposts?”

wondered Mr. Srinivasan in a hastily deleted tweet.

“I can visualize the sales pitch—A truly international T20 competition, come with your WAGS. Come one, come all. Beach cricket now not just a dream.”

English: Indian director and scriptwriter Zoya Akhtar (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Meanwhile, in an interview with a leading daily, Ms. Zoya Akhtar thanked Mr. Modi for inspiring the choice of locations for her next film.

Disclaimer: This is a work of fiction. Any resemblance to persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental. (Some facts and all “quotes” in this article are fabricated but you knew that already, didn’t you?)

Robert Green: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t

Robert Green is not your mate.

What he said:

“People see you in the street, especially fans of your club, and because you’re on the pitch and they see you every week, they think you’re their mate. To me it is a stranger in the street. I’ve been playing football for 18 years and it still surprises me when people come and speak to me. My mates have said I’ll come across as rude and arrogant. It’s not like that. But it’s that initial: ‘Oh, Christ, what do you want me to say?’”

Queens Park Rangers goalkeeper Robert Green is quite certain that television and fame may make you everybody’s bosom pal but it does not make them yours.

Green is not quite keen on becoming a coach-manager and would prefer to play ball in the boardroom instead.

Green said:

“Eventually I’d like to have some sort of role like a chief executive in a football club.”

Green is pursuing a BA (Hons) in business management (sports and football) from the Open University.

Green added:

“The speed of how football changes is so fast that to finish playing and still to be able to relate to 18-, 19-, 20-year-old lads, enough for them to like you, to run around for you, is probably beyond my limitations as a person. I think if I want to stay in football then this would be the path that I need to take rather than the coaching side.”

On his first course workshop:

“I sat down at the workshop with the tutor and six or seven other lads who are all football fans and I thought: ‘Hold on a minute, I’ve got half a chance here because I know the outside view is so different to what is going on on the inside.’

I think to be a fan and take over a football club would be great but you’re going to lose your money and you’re going to have a rollercoaster of a ride doing it. So to have someone [working for you] who’s been in that rollercoaster all their life and realises how good clubs operate …

A great model for me is West Brom. When I first started playing at Norwich, West Brom were in the Championship, got promoted, got relegated, got promoted, got relegated, and all the time they were building until they eventually stayed up. The dangerous point is when you try and make those steps like Leeds did by buying all those players in the late 90s and early 2000s, living beyond their means, and that’s when the problems occur.”

Green takes his goalkeeping seriously but does not bring work home.

Green said:

“I think it’s a self-preservation thing more than anything. I think as a youngster I took myself far too seriously. Now, with experience maybe, having good times, bad times, you think: ’Are you prepared physically and mentally for a game? Yes. Have I done everything I can this week to make myself as good as I can be for this game? Yes. Am I going to try my utmost in this game? Yes.’ Right, that’s all you can do. Could I stop Oscar’s shot in the game at Stamford Bridge? No, because I’d need a four metre extension on my arm.’ It’s managing your own expectations.

If you walked into my house there wouldn’t be one thing to do with football in there. You see people with a room full of their career achievements. Brilliant. Well done. That’s just not something I do. They’re in a bin bag in my mum and dad’s loft. And if I go out, I’ve got the same mates from the Sunday football team when I was a kid. That doesn’t change. They probably hammer me as much as anybody, saying: ‘He’s an oddball.’”

On the infamous lapse that handed the US a 1-1 draw in the 2010 World Cup, how he handles opposition fans and whether his career will be forever defined by that moment:

“I just turn around and give them (hecklers) a yawn sign. It’s something that happened two tournaments ago. We drew the game. We didn’t lose the opening game of the World Cup.

If that happens, fair enough. You can’t argue with apathy. People can say what they want, do what they want, realistically it’s not something that’s going to affect my life.

I actually think it’s going to be good for my children. They are going to ask me one day about it, because some kid is going to Google it and hammer them at school. So it’s a great lesson that you can put everything you can into something for all your life and it’s not always beautiful at the end of it.”

What Green really meant:

“Hey man, it’s called information asymmetry. You know all about me but I know nothing about you. Would you like a stranger chatting you up, in a familiar manner? Would ya, really? Sure, it’s a hazard of fame but don’t let it go to your head.”

What he definitely didn’t:

“I’m the friendliest bloke around. Let’s have a pint of lager anytime.”

Deepika Padukone: What she said, really meant and definitely didn’t

Deepika Padukone is a sports lover, biopics or no biopics.

What she said:

“It’s nice that so many biopics are being made, and they are leading to more awareness. But why do we have to wait for a movie to learn more about the sportsperson or sport? It just shows that we don’t encourage our athletes enough.”

Bollywood actor, Deepika Padukone, feels that the big screen should not be the sole medium via which sports stars are lionised for the public.

Padukone said:

“If we start writing and talking about them early in their careers, it will be much easier to create awareness about various sports and their champions. Also, I feel the media has a huge part to play in making people aware of our champions. It’s not just cricket, we have so many other sports.” 

Deepika is the daughter of former shuttler, Prakash Padukone, the first Indian player to win the All-England Open. He is widely rated India’s best male badminton player ever.

On the Mary Kom biopic:

“But people didn’t know who Mary was. Four-five years back, I think she was a three-time world champion. Now, she is four- or five-time world champion. So, when Priyanka (Chopra) did the film, I thought it would be great as everyone would get to know her.”

What she really meant:

“I’m not just a pretty face, you know. I have sporting genes. That I chose to become a model and  actress instead is beside the point.”

What she definitely didn’t:

“Now if I’d only known that I wouldn’t have to wear prosthetic makeup for ‘Mary Kom’, I’d have done the picture in a blink of an eye.”

Steve Waugh: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t

Steve Waugh tries hard to soften the blow.

What he said:

“The hard thing about Pakistan is that they throw up these cricketers that you’ve never seen before.”

Steve Waugh is hard-pressed to explain away Australia’s batting collapse against an inexperienced Pakistani bowling attack in the first Test at Dubai.

Waugh said:

“Their legspinner Yasir Shah looked a fantastic find, he bowled as good as anyone in the last couple of years in Test cricket and we hadn’t even seen him. They had an attack that had just eight Test matches between them yet they performed very well. So they are always a dangerous side.”

What he really meant:

“Australians pride themselves for their preparation. But it’s difficult to be prepared when you have no idea who’s going to show up. Better the devils we know than the devils we don’t, eh?”

What he definitely didn’t:

 “Now if only the Pakistanis would play the IPL…We’d have an idea of their talent base… All our batsmen and bowlers now play the IPL and then graduate onto Aussie honours.. What an idea!”

Virat Kohli: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t

Virat Kohli is not even remotely concerned about his batting form or technique.

What he said:

“Either they think I don’t deserve to be in the bad phase or they think I have a remote to score runs in every match.”

Standing in as skipper for MS Dhoni in the first three ODIs against Sri Lanka beginning today, Virat Kohli believes that his travails in England in the Tests was about lacking confidence against the moving ball rather than any failings in his time-tested technique.

Kohli answered his critics thus:

“Talks are for people to discuss. I mean there has to be something for people to talk about. I’m not really bothered.

I don’t know how I got 25 hundreds with the same technique, you can start a debate on that as well. I worked on my fitness. It’s not a nice thing to break down the whole batting when something has been working for you. Something that I’ve done is to work on my confidence a lot rather than going into technical stuff.

I don’t know why there’s been so much of hype about my bad phase. Either they think I don’t deserve to be in the bad phase or they think I have a remote to score runs in every match. I know what all I’ve learnt from that phase. I take everything normally, good or bad performance. It’s just a day in life.Yes there’re some things that I felt personally to work on. It’s just been a process to get my confidence back.

It’s much about mentally and not much about technique as otherwise you start spoiling your game.”

What he really meant:

 “I’m quite disgruntled with my disgruntled fans. Do they think that Virat Kohli’s bat has a remote control switch that can be turned off and on at will and the runs will flow? Am I a run machine?”

What he definitely didn’t:

 “I’m a confidence man.”

Caroline Wozniacki: What she said, really meant and definitely didn’t

English: Caroline Wozniacki at the 2010 US Open after winning against Chan Yung-jan. 6-1, 6-0. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Caroline Wozniacki is not looking for excuses to not run the New York City marathon.

What she said:

“I was like, ‘I’ve got this; I’m cool; it’s going to be easy. And then I started running more, and in Asia I felt like, ‘Where am I going to run?’ I started panicking a little bit — uh oh, it’s getting close, and I don’t know if I can do this.”

Tennis heartthrob Caroline Wozniacki feels training for the New York City marathon has aided her tennis  game specifically helping her outlast Maria Sharapova in a three-hour three-set match at the year-ending WTA championship.

Wozniacki said:

“I think you can never feel too sure in life. You can’t really plan ahead because you never know what’s going to happen tomorrow. To be honest, this half of the year I’ve been great tennis-wise, and the running and everything has definitely helped me with everything. It’s cleared my head, but also it’s helped me physically, and I feel stronger on the court. So it’s been a great thing for me. It’s a nice challenge.”

Ian Chappell: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t

English: Image of Australian cricketer Ian Chappell. Courtesy of the National Archive of Australia. The NAA has given permission for the image to be used under the GDFL license. Confirmation of this permission has been sent to the OTRS system. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Ian Chappell raises his index finger to doctored pitches and biased adjudicating.

What he said:

“The players need to be careful where tit-for-tat pitch preparation might lead.'”

Ian Chappell is not keen on cricketers’ insistence on having wickets that suit them in home series. The former Australian skipper was responding to Shane Watson’s desire for bouncy pitches in the upcoming series against India.

Shane Watson (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Watson said:

“We are hopeful that the groundsmen are going to make the grounds very conducive to what we do, because in India they certainly make sure the conditions are favourable to them.”

Chappell, writing in his column, commented:

“I was reminded of two things when I read that quote. The first was a story told by Tony Greig about playing first-class cricket in South Africa.

It was at a time when umpires were appointed by the local association and the standard had dipped alarmingly. Greig described how the Western Province players would tell their local umpires to ‘send off’ the Transvaal batsmen because that was the treatment they received when playing in Johannesburg. In the end the situation became so dire the players declared a moratorium and agreed to ‘walk’ when they knew they were out.

That situation didn’t last long and soon chaos reigned.

The other was a comment concerning players who decide an umpire is either weak or incompetent and the team agrees to ‘appeal for everything’. Those teams are often the first to complain when the umpiring in a match is below standard. Hence the often-heard and eminently true comment: ‘Beware you don’t get the umpiring you deserve.’

The same could apply to pitches if players are going to start demanding retribution from the home curators.”

Chappell added:

“I’d go one step further and say that as captain, if I’d asked any Australian curator for a certain type of pitch, the answer would have been: ‘Get stuffed. I’ll prepare the pitch, you play on it.'”

What he really meant:

“Tit-for-tat reactions will create a dysfunctional relationship and ruin the ethos of the sport. It also breeds one-dimensional cricketers who cannot adapt to different situations and conditions. It’s  not going to produce great cricketers, but home-grown bully boys.”

What he definitely didn’t:

“How about a tit for two tats instead? Also, you ought to keep in mind that if Team India fold in three days or less, Cricket Australia will lose out on all that gate money and television revenue.”

Shamil Tarpischev: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t

Shamil Tarpischev is de-fined by his misogyny.

What he said:

“Williams brothers…Look at our athletes–elegant and beautiful. I have tremendous respect for them [Williams sisters], but once one of the sisters passed next to me, and I found myself in her shadow for about forty seconds. They are so physically powerful. Weren’t you afraid to play against them?” 

Venus Williams playing World Team Tennis in Mamaroneck, NY (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Russian Tennis Federation President Shamil Tarpischev made a hash of a television show referring to the William sisters, Venus and Serena, as men casting aspersions on their beauty, style of play and domination of women’s tennis in a single disparaging remark.

Women’s Tennis Association (WTA) CEO Stacey Allaster responded harshly to Tarpischev’s provocative comments with a $25,000 fine. Tarpischev has also been suspended from any involvement with the WTA for a year.

Allaster’s full statement:

“The statements made by Shamil Tarpischev on Russian television with respect to two of the greatest athletes in the history of women’s tennis are insulting, demeaning and have absolutely no place in our sport. Serena Williams and Venus Williams are champions on and off the court – outstanding human beings, incredible sportswomen and amazing role models who have done so much to inspire women and girls around the world to achieve their dreams.

The WTA was founded on the principles of equality, opportunity and respect, and Venus and Serena embody all of these attributes. Mr. Tarpischev’s statement questioning their gender tarnishes our great game and two of our champions. His derogatory remarks deserve to be condemned and he will be sanctioned.

As a result of his comments, I have ordered Mr. Tarpischev to be fined $25,000, the maximum allowed under WTA rules. In addition, he will be suspended from any involvement with the WTA for one year and we are seeking his removal from his position as Chairman of the Board of the Kremlin Cup for one year. His re-instatement will be dependent on good behavior. Mr. Tarpischev’s private letter of acknowledgement is a start. However, Mr. Tarpischev owes Venus and Serena Williams a personal apology, as well as other players and tennis fans everywhere, a public apology.”

What Shamil Tarpischev really meant:

“I really don’t like powerful women especially when they can beat the socks out of me (and everybody else) at tennis.”

What he definitely didn’t:

“How about a Bobby Riggs type of match-up, Williamses?”

Serena Williams at the 2008 WTA Tour Championships (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Anil Kumble: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t

Anil Kumble defaulted to skipper status.

What he said:

“‘ok, Anil is the only guy and let’s give it to him’.”

Anil Kumble tells a tale of his ascendancy to the most exalted position in Indian cricket—the captaincy of the national side.

Kumble said:

“I became captain after representing India for 17 years, so, probably, I became captain by default… Because nobody else wanted it..

Rahul Dravid had just given up the captaincy and at that time, it was probably too early for (Mahendra Singh) Dhoni to step in as the Test captain… Sachin (Tendulkar) also did not want it… So they looked around and said ‘ok, Anil is the only guy and let’s give it to him’.”

What he really meant:

“I was the only one in the Fab Five (Sachin, Saurav, Laxman, Kumble and Dravid) willing to take up the onus of leading the country. I got it not because they felt I was the most deserving candidate but because they felt they could not risk putting Dhoni in the hot seat for a tour of Australia right then. It was way too early and he could have fizzled out given the additional pressure. At least, that was the opinion of the then bigwigs (selection committee).”

What he definitely didn’t:

“I wanted it, though, oh , how I wanted it. And I made it mine and how. Success—thy name is desire.”

Michael Kasprowicz: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t

Michael Kasprowicz does know what pressure is.

What he said:

“What pressure does to you is make you doubt your skills.”

Former Australian fast bowler, Michael Kasprowicz, draws upon his cricketing acumen to chart up success in the business world. Kasprowicz is an MBA from the University of Queensland Business School in Brisbane and now Managing Director of advisory business, Venture India, which promotes business relations for Australian companies in India.

Kasprowicz said:

“I was first picked for Queensland at the age of 17, and had a cricketing career of 19 years. Throughout my career, I never looked for the easy option. I wanted to test myself out in something entirely different; hence I went and did the MBA.”

Kasprowicz adds:

“What I learnt from my career is something I’ll classify in my own 4 Ps—perceptions, dealing with pressure, appreciating that there’s pain and most importantly, possession, the thought that you are in charge of your own journey. In cricket, there are uncontrollables that can always influence decisions—the weather, the pitch, umpiring decisions. It doesn’t matter how well you prepare, quite often, they can dictate or change the result. That lesson in itself is the most important thing, because of the ownership of your journey, you’re not relying on anyone else. You can take control of what you’re doing.”

The pacer believes in adapting his skills to suit the conditions.

He said:

“In 2004, (when Australia won a Test series in India after 32 years), we sat down as a bowling group and decided that we had to change it around a bit. We could not be doing what we did at home and expect to do well as a unit. Businesses come to India and think what they’ve been doing normally would work here in India too. That’s not arrogance as much as it is naivety. You have to be flexible, adjustable and adaptable to the market here and also see what the consumers want.”

So how does Kasprowicz deal with losses?

He says:

“I’ll go back to my Ps, and this time deal with pressure. What pressure does to you is make you doubt your skills. When all of a sudden an organization or cricket association goes through a few losses, it’s almost like a major GFC (global financial crisis) where everyone starts doubting their skills and questions the way they’re doing it. From a sporting background, whenever you have a few losses, we have a performance review. It’s important to go back and draw the straw man again.

I know the Australians get a bad tag for being sledgers, but all that, when you break it down, is to make someone not think about the ball that’s coming down and to doubt their skills, that’s all there is. There are other ways to make them doubt their skills—through field placements or the Three Card Trick (keep a deep-square leg, making the batsman anticipate a short ball, when the bowler delivers a fuller ball). When you’re under pressure, when you’re having a few losses, trust your skills—the ones that got you there, and the ones you’re the best at, but also have the conviction to adjust those skills to suit the conditions.”

What he really meant:

“When you’re under pressure, you tend to doubt yourself and wonder if you should be doing things differently. If the skills are not ingrained, you tend to revert to older, more tried-and-tested methods instead of continuing with the newly learnt skills. That’s what pressure does, that’s what questioning yourself does to you.”

What he definitely didn’t:

“Pressure causes some people to shut down. And brings out the best in others. How’s that for a cliché? Or would you rather prefer, when the going gets tough, the tough get going.Over to you, Ravi (Shastri). “