“I always felt like God made Muhammad special, but I don’t know why God chose me to carry this child.”—Odessa Grady Clay, Muhammad Ali’s mother.
http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/533758958
Roger Federer couldn’t do it.
Rafael Nadal couldn’t either.
But Novak Djokovic has.
The Serb claimed his first French Open title—his 12th Slam—on his 12th attempt to round off a superb year beginning with Wimbledon 2015, thus holding all four titles at the same time.
It’s a supreme achievement from a supreme athlete.
Andy Murray surpassed himself this year making his first French Open final.
But nothing could stop the incorrigible Nole from getting what he richly deserves—a seat at the pantheon of greats.
Federer has 17, Nadal has 14 and now the Djoker has 12.
Is this the best generation of tennis greats ever?
It sure seems like it.
Is it the beginning of the end for Serena Williams?
Three shots at glory—a 22nd Slam—all gone a-begging.
The US Open last year would have made it a genuine Grand Slam—all four big guns in a calendar year.
It was not to be.
And the next two Slam finals have only seen Serena fall by the wayside to her younger opponents—German Angelique Kerber and Spaniard Garbine Muguruza.
American tennis is on the wane and Serena—their last bastion—is losing her glitter too.
Yes, Serena is not getting any younger. She’s 34—and she’s treading the path that Roger Federer has over the last four years—still competitive but not a real contender.
At least, Federer had the likes of Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokovic, Andy Murray and Stanislas Wawrinka to reckon with.
Williams has no such excuse. She’s still No.1 and she’s expected to dominate her younger opponents.
Is it a mental thing? Is there some fragility , some frailty, not apparent earlier?
It would appear so—every opponent now has the belief that on their day, they can bring the 21-time champion to ground level from her previous stratospheric heights.
Are we being too harsh, too critical already?
Most top 10 women players would give an arm and a limb to have the same kind of results Serena has achieved in the past three Slams.
Yes, Serena’s vulnerable but there’s also a possibility that she can snatch a bigger slice of history once Wimbledon begins in another three weeks.
Lush green grass will tell.
Who is Kiki Bertens?
Sure, she’s that unseeded Dutchwoman who’s reeled off 12 wins in a row over the past two weeks to make the semi-finals of the French Open.
She now faces top seed Serena Williams this afternoon.
We all know that—now.
But where was this wonder-woman prior to this?
What’s her record?
Her best result in a Grand Slam was at the 2014 French Open—again—where she made the fourth round as a qualifier.
It’s on clay that Bertens has really shined—taking a liking to the surface and clinching two WTA singles titles.
That explains a lot.
What’s her head-to-head record against the other three semi-finalists?
Bertens has played Samantha Stosur and Williams just once—losing to them in the Slams—the French Open and the US Open respectively.
She has a much more formidable record against Spaniard Garbine Muguruza holding a 3-0 lead. But these wins were aeons ago—the last one coming in 2014.
But her performances at Roland Garros so far have been stellar.
Australian Open champion Angelique Kerber, Daria Kasatkina , fifteenth seed Madison Keys and eighth seed Timea Bacsinszky.
Can it get better than that?
It surely can.
Maybe Williams will have an off day.
It won’t be easy. Bertens is carrying a left-calf injury.
And then, we could have a new French Open women’s champion.
Stosur, Muguruza, Bertens.
Take your pick.
Muguruza’s been close before losing last year’s Wimbledon final.
Stosur has the US Open to her credit and has made a French Open final before falling to Francesca Schiavone.
It’s all good for women’s tennis—the more competitive the better.
But the news story of the year , of course, would be Bertens doing a mini-Leicester.
Can she? Will she?
Your guess is as good as mine.
“Don’t hate me just because I am not what you want me to be. Don’t hate me because I am not what you are. I am me and I am honest.”
—Chris Gayle.
Should we sympathise with Virat Kohli?
I mean, come on, the guy’s been performing like a maniac over the past few months—first for Team India and then surpassing himself and everyone else with his mind-blowing feats in this year’s IPL.
Almost single-handedly taking his team to the knock-out rounds and yet so near and yet so far.
He cut a forlorn figure at the prize-distribution ceremony post the final.
The Indian media and fans have compared Kohli to that all-time great, Sachin Tendulkar.
The comparisons sometimes seem apt, sometimes odious, but it’s been about the statistics, the numbers and their stature in their respective sides.
Longevity will tell—it always does.
But what Virat has recently had a taste of is what Tendulkar and ,to an even greater extent, Brian Lara, experienced throughout their careers—their inability to carry and inspire their sides across that intangible finish line
That kind of frustration, that kind of heartbreak where you have to stand alone among the ruins requires a special kind of resolve.
Virat has it and that is what’ll make the man truly great.
Not the numbers alone, not the glory alone but the losses—the losses that hurt, the losses that build.
How Virat Kohli cracked the Rs 100-crore league(rediff.com)
“It pains me when a film actor or a cricketer is a youth icon. I don’t have anything against them. They are great entertainers; they are useful to the society. They contribute to people’s lives. But they are not heroes. We haven’t redefined heroes. Heroes are different people. Heroes are people who sacrifice their own concerns and do something bigger, who change people’s lives. We film stars and cricketers shouldn’t be aspirational in such a big way for the healthy growth of the society. It’s a sign of consumerism at its extreme. That’s why I find it so cool and so hip to see that photograph of the women scientists of ISRO celebrating a launch. That’s heroism. That’s cool, that’s hip! Lekin main agar kahin se udhaar le kar, kuch bana ke, thodi der ke liye aapka time pass kara de raha hoon, just because I am famous, you aspire to become me – that’s not cool, that’s pathetic.”
—Irrfan Khan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHjG-V0QJgw
Chris Gayle never learns or so it seems.
The macho West Indian star first made the front pages this year for his infamous ‘Don’t blush, baby’ line to Mel McLaughlin in an on-field interview at the Big Bash League (BBL) in Australia.
Gayle escaped with a warning and a stiff fine of AUSD 10,000.
But the smarts just wouldn’t end.
The Jamaican enjoyed rubbing it in naming his newly-born daughter—with partner Tasha—Blush.
Why draw her in into his mess, Chris? 20 years down the line, would your daughter like to be reminded of the circumstances around which she was named so? Go figure.
Trouble goes around in threes.
And there was surely a ‘threesome’ in store.
Chris Gayle pressed down on the accelerator—ignoring speed bumps— when interviewed by Times journalist Charlotte Edwardes where he talked about sex, female equality and homophobia.
Gayle told Edwardes that he had ‘a very, very big bat, the biggest in the wooooorld’ and whether she thought she “could lift it” and that she’d need both hands.
The Jamaican embarrassed her further by questioning whether she’s had any black men and been part of a threesome.
The interview touched on other aspects as well.
On women’s equality, Gayle said:
‘Women should please their man. When he comes home, food is on the table. Serious. You ask your husband what he likes and then you make it.’”
“Women should have equality and they do have equality. They have more than equality. Women can do what they want. Jamaican women are very vocal. They will let you know what time is it, for sure.’
On homophobia:
“The culture I grew up in, gays were negative. But people can do whatever they want. You can’t tell someone how to live their life. It’s a free world.”
The timing of the interview could hardly have been more ‘fortuitous’.
Gayle is on the verge of releasing his autobiography, ‘”Six Machine” excerpts of which have been published (where else?) in the Times.
Reacting to Freddie Flintoff’s description of him as a “bit of a chop” after the McLaughlin incident, Gayle said:
“Freddie Flintstone, a young boy like you taking Viagra? Don’t lecture me. The only chop Freddie (Flintoff) knows is when he used to bowl short to me and I would chop him past backward point for four.”
Describing the McLaughlin fiasco, he added:
“Now T20 is different. It’s not Test cricket. It’s chilled and fun and let’s do things different. So when Mel asks me that question I stay in the T20 mind, and answer informal and fun. I meant it as a joke. I meant it as a little fun. I didn’t mean to be disrespectful and I didn’t mean it to be taken serious.
Channel 10’s commentary team could be heard laughing in the background … but someone above them clearly decided to step in, and a throwaway comment in a fun format escalates and blows up and within hours it has turned into a major international incident. “
The southpaw had even stronger words reserved for Ian Chappell.
“Ian Chappell, calling for me to banned worldwide, a man who was once convicted of unlawful assault in the West Indies for punching a cricket official. Ian Chappell, how can you ban the Universe Boss? You’d have to ban cricket itself.”
Former Australian opener Chris Rogers was one of his most vocal critics claiming that he set a bad example to his younger teammates.
Gayle responded thus calling him a bit of a “Roger Rabbit”.
He said:
“Chris Rogers, how can you claim that when it was you and me at the bar most nights? I’m not a snitch, but I’ve heard from your own mouth what you’ve done. Next time you want to open your mouth, maybe chew on a carrot instead.”
Is Chris Gayle in trouble yet again? Has he landed in deeper, hotter waters this time around?
His detractors would like to believe so.
Melbourne Renegades have decided not to continue with the T20 star.
This, however, does not prevent any other BBL side from signing him on.
While Somerset chief executive Guy Lavender admitted that he was disappointed with Gayle’s latest blowout, he added:
“But as I’ve said before, we found him to be fantastic the last time he was here, in terms of activities both on and off the pitch.
It’s a shame, because it detracts from his cricketing ability. The fact is, what he has said is inappropriate. But we haven’t had an opportunity to discuss [it] with him. I’m sure we will. But I don’t see it as grounds not to have him playing for us this summer.”
And in India, IPL chairman Rajiv Shukla is taking the matter seriously.
Talking to Times of India, he said:
“The players must behave themselves. We expect the players to adhere to a certain kind of behaviour when the tournament is on. The players should maintain the sanctity of the league. These kind of statements are totally uncalled for in public domain. I will take up this issue with the president and the secretary of the BCCI.”
BCCI’s secretary Ajay Shirke said:
“At this point, we’ll not look into it. We’re focused on completing the IPL, which has reached its final stages. What has happened in this case is between two foreign individuals. It is a personal matter between people who aren’t from India. At the same time, that doesn’t mean that we’ll ignore it. If a complaint is brought to us, we’ll act on it. If it develops into something more, we’ll look into it at an appropriate stage.”
Gayle , in his latest interview, believes that most of the criticism directed his way after the McLaughlin imbroglio was racially motivated.
He says:
“Successful black men are struggling because people do things to put them down. I would say this anywhere in the world, in any sporting arena, right now in 2016: racism is still the case for a black man. Trust me. They just want to get a little sniff of the dirt. They find out some shit and they want to sink you. It’s reality. You have to deal with that as a successful black man.”
Racism has always been an issue in sport.
Henry Gayle was born in a Kingston slum and used cricket as his vehicle to become one of the world’s most beloved and entertaining sportsmen.
Writing for the Guardian, Andy Bull says:
“In the last year the Zimbabwean Test cricketer Mark Vermeulen was banned by his board after he referred to black Zimbabweans as ‘apes’ on social media, while Vermeulen’s old team-mate Prosper Utseya accused that same board of racism in their running of the sport. And several Pakistani players have spoken out about racism in English county cricket, in the wake of the offence committed by Craig Overton. These issues are always there, bubbling under. But it’s rare for a star player to address them directly, as Gayle has just done.
Gayle was talking about something more insidious, about attitudes ‘off the field’, especially, he seems to be saying, among the media. And some aspects of our coverage should make us uncomfortable. As Peter Oborne pointed out in his book Wounded Tiger, the Pakistani team is often subjected to the most ludicrous stereotyping, which has stretched as far as the suggestions, widespread at the time, that certain members of their 2007 World Cup team may have had a hand in the death of their coach Bob Woolmer. Innuendos always swirl when they play poorly, quicker to gather around them than their competitors, though cheating, and fixing, are universal problems.”
Racism is not restricted to the Western hemisphere.
Foreign cheerleaders in the IPL have complained several times about the treatment and slurs they are subjected to by Indian men.
In 2008, British dancers Ellesha Newton and Sherinne Anderson were prevented from performing during a Kings XI Punjab game.
Anderson said:
“An organiser pulled us away. He said the people here don’t want to see dark people. The ‘n’ word was used and they said they only wanted beautiful white girls. We were crying. I could understand if it were the crowd but they were very receptive. This kind of thing has never happened to us – not in Europe, not here, nowhere. “
There have not been any black cheerleaders in any edition of the IPL since.
An unnamed cheerleader in a free-wheeling chat on Reddit’s Ask Me Anything (AMA) had this to say:
“I hate the racism. Why is my team made up of 99% white girls? Why do Indians feel it’s ok to dress white girls up in skimpy outfits but they won’t let their fellow Indian women do it? It’s messed up.
I’ve asked my managers [about why no Indian girls as cheerleaders] and they don’t know. I’ll keep asking around, though, because I’m curious too. They could probably just get good dancers and train them; there’s no shortage of those.”
Chris Gayle adds in his autobiography that some people consider him “lazy“.
He writes:
“People think that [my] attitude towards the game stink. That’s how it come across: lazy.”
If Gayle’s indolent, his record proves otherwise.
He has played 103 Test matches in 14 years, scored two triple centuries and is arguably the best T20 batsman in the world.
But playing the race card in this seemingly complicated mess only addles the issue.
Racial discrimination is not the only kind that exists. Women everywhere face sexual biases on a daily basis. To claim that one is better or worse than the other sidesteps the issues raised by Gayle’s nonchalance towards the ramifications of his ‘jokey‘ sideshows.
Discrimination of any kind is to be frowned upon.
To clear things up, one would probably hark back to the rustic retorts Indian women (and defenders of their modesty) dish out to eve-teasers and molesters, “Tere maa, behn or beti nahin hai kya? (Don’t you have a mother, sister or daughter?) How would you feel if someone dealt with them in the same way?”
No racism about it—just a question of right behavior in a public space.
That, Chris Gayle, is the crux of the matter. Not anything else, not anything more.
Chris Gayle loses major contract after fresh sexism row(manipalworldnews.com)
West Indies star Chris Gayle says sexism row just a ‘little fun’(businessinsider.com)
Chris Gayle opens up about Mel McLaughlin and hits critics for six(theage.com.au)
Melbourne Renegades snub Gayle(stabroeknews.com)
Renegades Snub Windies Star, Gayle(antiguaobserver.com)
‘I have a very, very big bat’: Female journalist claims cricket star Chris Gayle made lewd comments to her and wanted to know if she’d ever had a threesome(dailymail.co.uk)
Gayle hits back at critics in book(sbs.com.au)
Maria Yuryevna Sharapova is still hitting the headlines regularly despite not playing.
Why are we surprised?
Ever since she made her debut as a 17-year-old winning Wimbledon on her first attempt, the Russian diva is first among equals when embodying the glamorous side of her sport.
Her Sugarpova label expanded to incorporate not just candy but also eye candy— her own brand of apparel and cosmetics.
Sugarpova chocolate went on sale this May despite Sharapova’s provisional suspension from the sport following a failed meldonium test at the Australian Open this year.
A hearing into the her case was scheduled last Wednesday by the ITF.
The ruling probably hinges on the amount of the banned drug in her system at the time and how lenient or strict the governing body is about her continuance past the official ban date. WADA subsequently backtracked from tarring all barred athletes with the same brush when it was discovered that the drug could lie latent in the system for months after its use was discontinued.
Can Sharapova play again? Will she?
Speculation about her future has already begun in the media with commentators and administrators joining the media circus.
Former glamour puss Chris Evert chimed in.
She said:
“I think at 29 time is running out for Maria.Look, she started in her teens playing full schedules. I think that motivation and hunger—her hunger even more so has always motivated her to go out and play and that’s what we’ve admired in her so much is the intense hunger that she’s had.
And now that she’s getting a taste of real life. I’m seeing tweets she’s out and about, traveling and going to premieres, modeling and she’s everywhere. And I think as she gets a little taste of the good life who knows if she’s gonna comeback as hungry? I don’t know maybe she’ll have a little bit different attitude.But at 29 years old and the players are getting better and better. And Maria, if you look at her results the past few years, she’s having more and more losses to players that are ranked below her. And I think she was starting to kind of get a little fragile anyway when this happened earlier this year. So I think it’s gonna be tough (to comeback).”
She added:
“If she comes back hungry and as mentally strong as she always has been then again nothing she can do will surprise me. But at the same time, I just wonder just about how much tennis she’s played in her career and the players getting better. I doubt whether she can get back to number two.”
Novak Djokovic felt otherwise:
“I obviously wish her all the best. I’ve known her for a long time. I feel for her with all that’s happening and I just hope she gets out of this stronger.”
But the most surprising comments have come from her own camp.
Shamil Tarpishchev, president of the Russian Tennis Federation, termed Sharapova’s future “very doubtful” and said that she was in a “bad situation.”
Tarpsichev later withdrew his remarks but doubts linger.
What does the future hold for Sharapova?
Can she return if she’s banned for a year or more?
It’s possible, theoretically.
Serena Williams still competes with the same vigour and determination that she displayed when she first burst on the scene as a 16-year-old.
But she and her sister Venus have enjoyed breaks from the game that other tennis stars would term a luxury.
Roger Federer—notwithstanding his withdrawal from this year’s French Open—continues to perform on the big stage and is ranked among the top three.
Federer, though, has fine-tuned his game over the years turning to Swede Stefan Edberg to help improve his serve-and-volley game. Yes, an old dog can learn new tricks and how. Federer may not have clinched a Grand Slam under his tutelage but he’s always the danger man should Murray, Djokovic or Nadal falter.
Williams is, of course, the supreme woman athlete of her generation. But Sharapova with five Slams has not been less consistent over the past few years.
Surely, she can make a fist of this setback and return stronger to the court.
After all, it is this generation of women players that has seen teenagers relegated to the side-lines as the likes of Kim Clijsters, Li Na, Francesca Schiavone proved that age is just a number.
Sharapova reworked her serve post a shoulder surgery. She belongs to the school of hard-hitting baseliners.
Can she add more weapons to her arsenal to overcome her younger opponents? Can she add guile and deception to the mix?
Mentally, she’s been right there in the top echelons.
Can she continue in the same vein on her comeback—if and when it happens?
Can Sharapova return?
Yes, she can.
Will she?
Why not?
Why not, you say?
Are you implying that of the 17℅ of Russian athletes tested positive for mildronate were all unaware of the performance-enhancing properties of the drug? Are you unaware that WADA is simply playing catch-up when it comes to listing the numerous synthetic steroids and chemicals that athletes—in this modern age—can and will consume just to get that extra yard of pace, that extra strength, that ounce of stamina, that edge over their competitors? Are fans to believe their PR machinery that they’re simply victims in this ‘arms race‘ of another kind?
Are they that gullible? Really?
“My temper has been an issue for me. It has been very hard for me.”—
Virat Kohli.