Make Time For Sports.
News
Ben Stokes no fury at his obstructive dismissal
Was it obstruction or was it self-defence?
Was it deliberate or was it instinctive?
Preservation of one’s self is an instinctive response in any living creäture.
Was Ben Stokes any different?
There is no one way to decide it—it all depends on which side you’re rooting for.
The third umpire’s decision is final. And Joe Wilson adjudged the left-hander out.
And that’s how it should have stayed.
Sure, Stokes was the first English batsman to be dismissed in such a fashion in an ODI.
Sure, he was only the seventh batter in cricketing history to be kayoed so cruelly.
Sure, to be run-out is the unhappiest and unlikeliest way any cricketer expects or wishes to be dismissed and to be considered wilful in obstructing the natural course of a game is worse.
The opposing skippers have their viewpoints.
Steve Smith called for a referral after appealing and has no qualms about his decision. He will not be losing any sleep over it.
Smith said:
“If you’re out of your crease and put your hand up to stop the ball, it’s out.
It might have looked a bit worse because it went back to the bowler, but it’s exactly the same as me turning for a second run, putting my arm out and stopping the ball.
The ball wasn’t going to hit him, he was out of his crease, he put his arm out and got in the way of the ball. The ball was going very close to hitting the stumps.
If you read the rule book, we’re well within our rights to appeal and the umpires have given it out.
Not at all. I’ve got no dramas with that (his decision to appeal).
I thought it was the right decision at the time and I still think it’s the right decision.”
The English were united in deriding Smith’s characterisation of his act.
English skipper, Eoin Morgan, said:
“A guy throws the ball in your direction and all you can do is flinch.
You don’t have time to think. It was a natural reaction to avoid the ball. Mitchell Starc was about five yards away from Ben Stokes.
The decision was made. It would have been a lot different if we were fielding.”
English: Eoin Morgan in the field during the 2nd ODI against Bangladesh at the County Ground Bristol. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
(Would it, Morgan, would it, really? Easier said than done, Eoin, easier said than done.)
Michael Vaughan said :
“Anyone who has played the game knows that when the ball is thrown at you from close range like that you put your hand up to protect yourself. When you see it in real time he fears the ball is going to hit him. It was obvious. It was a poor decision.”
Alec Stewart added:
“He was taking evasive action; he’s looking the other way. Show me someone who can catch the ball looking the other way?
You would have thought between the three umpires that common sense would have prevailed.”
Shane Warne was not quite rooting for Smith and his side.
Law 37 (Obstructing the field) states quite categorically:
“1. Out Obstructing the field
Either batsman is out Obstructing the field if he wilfully attempts to obstruct or distract the fielding side by word or action. In particular, but not solely, it shall be regarded as obstruction and either batsman will be out Obstructing the field if while the ball is in play and after the striker has completed the act of playing the ball, as defined in Law 33.1, he wilfully strikes the ball with
(i) a hand not holding the bat, unless this is in order to avoid injury. See also Law 33.2 (Not out Handled the ball).
(ii) any other part of his person or with his bat. See also Law 34 (Hit the ball twice).
2. Accidental obstruction
It is for either umpire to decide whether any obstruction or distraction is wilful or not. He shall consult the other umpire if he has any doubt.”
Stokes himself is not chuffed about the manner of his exit.
https://twitter.com/benstokes38/status/640486910402654208
Team-mate, Steve Finn, was quite vocal with his antipathy.
He said:
“I think everyone in the dressing room, when we saw it in real time, we all thought he was taking evasive action. When you watch it in slo-mo, the fielding team were entitled to appeal if you’re going by the letter of the game. The fact that it was in slow-motion didn’t help Ben’s cause.
How often does the bowler feign to throw the ball but doesn’t actually do it? But this time he did let the ball go and, by the time you realise the bowler has actually let the ball go, then first and foremost you’re worried for your safety rather than worrying about where your stumps are.
Everyone in the dressing room was disappointed but I don’t think the game was won or lost at that moment. In the dressing room, we weren’t overly happy.”
If there was any doubt in Smith’s mind about the mode of dismissal, he should have retracted his appeal and let the game continue. This would have been within the ambit of the Spirit of the Game. He need not have looked further than former India Test skipper MS Dhoni and his recent magnanimity in rescinding his appeal against Ian Bell’s dismissal for walking out for tea before the bails were whipped off by the on-field umpires. But I guess, no one, least of all Steven Smith, wishes to be termed a sucker in this ultra-competitive day and age.
Waugh, Ponting and Holding toss away the coin
If Steve Waugh, Ricky Ponting and Michael Holding have their way, there will be no more commemorative coins to toss while celebrating special Test occasions.
Ricky Ponting at a training session at the Adelaide Oval (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Former Aussie skipper Ponting suggested—during the recent Ashes series—that the toss be done away with and have the visiting side choose which side should bat first. This would even out any advantage from pitches prepared to suit the home side.
Stephen Rodger Waugh, former professional cricketer and captain of the Australian national team, photographed at the Sydney Cricket Ground at the start of the Test match against South Africa in January 2002 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Speaking to Melbourne Radio Station, Waugh said:
“I don’t mind that, I think that’s not such a bad thing. At the end of the day I think there’s probably too much emphasis placed on the toss and the conditions away from home. I don’t mind the authorities looking at some other options.”
Michael Holding, in his column for Wisden India, wrote:
“…the concerned authorities must look at what Ricky Ponting suggested – no more tosses. The minor setback there in my opinion, is that tosses are big for television. It makes for good tension, everyone is focussed on that coin when it’s in the air and the winning captain’s decision and so on. But that isn’t relevant now, times have changed and interest is waning in Test match cricket. What you need to do now is to make sure you have even contests between bat and ball. For that, there should be no toss and the visiting captain should be allowed to decide what he wants to do after inspecting the pitch. It’ll ensure better pitches throughout the world, because no one will look to build a pitch whose features are obvious, and which will give an immediate advantage to the visiting captain. They will try and prepare good quality surfaces that give no obvious advantage to anyone, which is what you want in Test matches. Some may say that policy will produce flat lifeless pitches with boring games. I disagree. You will still see a bit of ‘hometown’ pitches which suit the qualities of the home team more than the opposition, but the slant won’t be as dramatic as we tend to see in some countries now.”
In his previous post, the West Indian fast bowler elaborated on what makes a side great.
“Great teams can win home and away, and good teams will win at home. It’s as simple as that. I don’t personally see much wrong with that, to be honest. It comes down to how people classify them. Teams should only be qualified as ‘great’ only if they can perform all over the world, and can excel everywhere. If they don’t, they’re not a great team, and that’s fine.
I don’t think the boards should actively try and do something about making it even, you don’t need to say: ‘okay, we have to find a way of making sure teams can do well overseas’. On the contrary, talk to the individuals, the players who are actually playing and performing, and see what necessary adjustments should be done for them to be successful when they leave their homes. There is nothing wrong with people failing away from home as far as world cricket is concerned. I don’t think they should try and make an adjustment. If you can, you can. If you’re not good enough, you’re just not good enough.
Having said that, when you go to some countries, the pitches are prepared in such a way that they are highly in favour of the home team. And I’m talking about even going to some parts of the subcontinent, in India, for instance, where you find – not necessarily now, but quite a few years ago – pitches that turn from day one. It didn’t matter who was touring India, because they knew they had great spinners, and they would be brought into the game from day one.
In England, they changed the nature of the pitches altogether, because they recognised that without seaming pitches, they had no chance of beating Australia. As I said before, I don’t see it as a major factor when you say teams are better at home than overseas, but if you want to have consistent pitches in countries, then you have got to adapt the principle that Ricky Ponting suggested – get rid of the toss.
All you need is for the visiting team to look at the pitch and decide what they will do. Then you will always get consistent pitches, because if it’s too heavily favoured in one way or the other, then the visiting team can take advantage with their decision. That way you’ll get consistent pitches, but that doesn’t mean all of sudden touring sides will start winning away from home. They’ll get a better chance of winning, but at the same time, they’ll have to play well to win away from home, because you can’t change overhead conditions. The ball will still swing in England, and you’ll still need good technique to play there. But the pitches won’t be that heavily favoured to the home bowlers.”
Will the ICC look into the matter?
We don’t wish to see series everywhere decided by the toss and pitches suited to the home side.
We’d like to watch real contests and adaptable players, not bully boys who score by the tons and take wickets by the dozen in their backyards and come up a cropper elsewhere.
We need classy players and their class should be evident on all surfaces and in all conditions.
Take away the toss if that’s what’s needed.
Prepare sporting wickets if that’s what’s needed.
Make curators more independent if that’s what’s needed.
Do whatever that’s needed.
Just don’t let Test cricket die.
Ishant Sharma: Angry and suspended but still his skipper Kohli’s delight
Ishant Sharma is earning both plaudits and criticism.
If the bouquets are for his stirring performances with the ball, the brickbats are for the blatant aggression on the field that has not just seen him fined 65% of his match fee but also found him in violation the ICC’s Code of Conduct.
The new-found aggression and maturity (as a fast bowler) has not gone unnoticed.
Dilip “Colonel” Vengsarkar considers the lanky pacer his find.
He said:
“He has been bowling at good speeds, hitting the good length often and getting bounce because of his height and action.”
Amit Mishra had this to say about Ishant’s efforts with the ball in the first innings of the second Test.
“The way Ishant bowled with the new ball was important on a slow track. His effort in the heat, that spell set the game up for us.”
TA Sekhar, India fast bowling coach, said:
“Basically, he is bowling a good line and length. There is an increase in speed from what he used to bowl earlier. After starting (his career) by bowling 145 kmph, he reduced in pace. But now he has gained speed and touching 140. He is expect to give breakthroughs in the first spell with the new ball. Ishant has played a lot of Test matches but doesn’t have a great record. He lacks variation like what Zaheer Khan had and this is something that he has to start working on.”
Another former fast bowler, Chetan Sharma, believes that Ishant is a much improved player now.
He said:
“Ishant is bowling well. I was in Sri Lanka and I spoke to him for half-an-hour. He sounded a very mature fast bowler. There used to be shy bowlers who used to sneak past their seniors in order to avoid a talk with them, but not Ishant, who comes and speaks to you. And that tells you about his confidence. He understands what he is doing. And, he has the backing of a lot of talented youngsters like Varun Aaron, Umesh Yadav, Bhuvneshwar Kumar and (Mohammed) Shami. I don’t think there is a problem in the pace department. If a pacer can pick up 2-3 wickets on the sub-continent tracks, then I believe he has done his job.”
Fellow Delhiite, Ashish Nehra, was slightly back-handed with his compliments.
He said:
“I am a big fan of Umesh Yadav — talentwise even though he has not fulfilled his true potential as to what he should have achieved by now. He is somewhat similar to me but my case was more to do with injuries. Varun (Aaron) and Bhuvi (Bhuvneshwar Kumar) are also talented.
But Ishant Sharma, who has played 60 Test matches (62) is the least talented among them but one of the most hardworking guys around.
If Ishant has played so much and for so long, it is a testimony that talent alone can’t be the recipe for success. Talent can only take you till certain point but is nothing without hard work.”
If Nehra is right in that Ishant is the least talented among the current crop of pace men, then Indian cricket is blessed indeed.
Nehra spoke at length about Sharma.
Asked about his higher-than-normal strike rate, Nehra said:
“Look, there is a perception about Ishant. I agree his strike-rate is on the higher side but in last one year, he has taken five-fors in New Zealand and England. So he is improving. Don’t forget, he is only 27 and has already played 62 Tests because he started at 18. We should not put undue pressure on him and start saying ‘drop Ishant Sharma and get someone new’. What will happen if he is dropped? Nothing will happen. BCCI should just ensure that a fast bowler is given enough time and confidence to settle down. Dropping a bowler after one bad series can’t be a solution. A new fast bowler would take at least two series to just settle down.”
The Delhi bowler believes that fast bowlers do better when they enjoy the confidence of their skippers.
He added:
“Look the bottom line is, if you are bowling well, then you need nobody for help. But there will be times when even if you keep a deep point, the batsman will still hammer you. Then you have no option but to listen to your captain and bowl as per the field set by him. Michael Clarke was a great captain till last Ashes and today Alastair Cook has suddenly become a great captain. If you look at history of fast bowler-captain relationships — for example Sunil Gavaskar-Kapil Dev or Mohammed Azharuddin-Javagal Srinath, that has always been the case. When the going is good, nothing matters. Everything comes out when the performance level dips.”
Sharma seems to have no such problems on this score with his current leader, Virat Kohli.
Scribes might have expected some censure from India’s fire-brand captain given that Sharma will now miss the first home Test against South Africa for his aggressive send-offs in the third Test and the war of words with opposition players.
Kohli, however, was unperturbed.
He said:
“I was very happy with the incident (argument with Prasad) when he was batting. It happened at the right time for us because we had to bowl on Monday and they made him angry. It could not have happened at a better time for us And the way he (Ishant) bowled in the second innings, he didn’t concede a boundary for 19 overs. That’s the kind of pressure he created on those batsmen because of one incident. He bowled his heart out like he has always done when the Indian team has needed to defend scores in Test matches.An angry fast bowler is a captain’s delight. I was really happy to see what happened yesterday and it switched some things on in the right ways. It had to be controlled but in the end it benefitted us.”
The spring in the step is back and very much evident. After two hard-fought series in England and Australia where the Indians came off second-best, they appeared a much more hardy bunch in Sri Lanka. The score-line could very well have read 3-0 instead of 2-1 if the Indians had plugged away as they did in the last two Tests. It is a team sport and moments of personal brilliance and stellar performances can at most win you a Test or two. It takes consistent togetherness and toughness to pull through a gruelling series.
South Africa at home will be the real Test. Can Team India do an encore?
Usain Bolt and Justin Gatlin: Contrasting styles and paths
Usain Bolt is a freak of nature.
Usain Bolt is a force of nature.
The Jamaican claimed his 11th World Championship gold in four appearances in the 4 X 100m relay in his trademarked style.
Is there a greater sprinter in the history of the sport? More dominant, bigger, cleaner?
He was expected to be given a run for his money by his resurgent American rival, Justin Gatlin.
Just one-hundredth of a second separated the two in the 100 metres.
Olympic Gold Medal athelete, Justin Gatlin, at the 2nd Annual Children’s Marathon in Pensacola, FL. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
But the 200 was all Usain. It’s his favourite event and we all saw why.
The Bird’s Nest had seen the eagle land and his name was Bolt.
He said:
“People pretty much counted me out this season. They said, ‘He’s not going to make it. That’s it for him.’ I came out and proved you can never count Usain Bolt out. I’m a champion, and I’ll show up when it matters.”
It took a runaway Segway steered by an errant cameraman to trip this phenomenon.
What will it take to beat Bolt?
You can’t catch up with him, that’s for sure.
Gatlin said:
“What will it take? It will take staying in front. That’s what it’s going to take.”
And to think that this is his worst year yet.
Gatlin was hoping for redemption for his fall from grace, having been banned for doping.
It was and it wasn’t. The better man won.
It wasn’t for lack of trying.
However, the paying public or the online denizens would not have anything of it. There was no substance behind the portrayal of Gatlin as the ‘villain’ of the showpiece.
The American had paid for his folly. And he was back to prove that he could run—clean—and win.
Bolt spoke of retiring after the Rio Olympics next year.
The newly crowned IAAF chief, Sebastian Coe, was quick to lament the announcement.
He said:
“I do sort of feel that I’m in sort of 1960s, 1970s time warp. It’s the kind of conversation that was probably taking place in boxing at that time as to what happens after Muhammad Ali retires. Well, after Muhammad Ali, Marvin Hagler happens. After Muhammad Ali, (Thomas) Hearns happen, Sugar Ray Leonard, (Floyd) Mayweather. It happens.Yes, what we have to concede, and what I believe is that I don’t think any athlete, any sportsman or woman since Muhammad Ali has captured the public imagination and propelled their sport as quickly and as far as Usain Bolt has. The Usain Bolts of this world will not come along on a conveyor belt . We do need to make sure people understand we have extraordinary talent, which we’ve witnessed in Beijing. We shouldn’t be concerned because we have a sport that is adorned by some of the most outrageously superhuman, talented people in any sport. Our challenge is to make sure the public know there are other athletes in out sport.”
Spare a thought for Gatlin, the vilified.
His lack of contrition is held against him as against Bolt’s lack of arrogance.
Gatlin’s agent, Renaldo Nehemiah, says:
“When people say he never apologised, I say: ‘You haven’t done your homework.’ And the IAAF, who know this, have never come out and said anything, which I am very sad about. Justin has apologised. What is he supposed to do, go to every country and say sorry?”
I have always said to Usada and Wada: ‘Come and test us, day or night’. That’s all we can do, make ourselves available and, if that’s not good enough for people, that’s just the world we live in.
In the last few years Justin has focused on getting his weight right and getting his technique on where it needed to be and starting to run more efficiently. We don’t know with certainty anyone, who hasn’t tested positive, is not doing anything. The good thing about our testing is that it does catch people. Justin Gatlin did get caught doping. That is a fact. So we do catch people and I am happy about that.”
Justin is very charming, personable and bright. But at some point you have to back away. He said: ‘I can’t be beat down by this every single day. I came here to run, this is not fun for me.’ So I told him: ‘If anyone is going to continue to talk about the past, let’s not talk to them.’”
Gatlin admits he was a drug cheat but he’s also a human being:
“Obviously I am the most criticised athlete in track and field but at the end of the day I am a runner and that’s all I can be.”
Gatlin has now gone public about his multiple apologies in the past for his mistakes.
In one of his letters addressed to IAAF’s then president, Lamine Diack, and his senior vice-president, Sergey Bubka, he wrote:
“I am sincerely remorseful and it continues to be my mission to be a positive role model mentoring to athletes to avoid the dangers and public and personal humiliation of doping. And the harm it brings to the sport of athletics.”
I have cooperated fully with the United States federal investigation to clean up our sport of track and field working towards it becoming drug free.”
Bolt may be clean but he’s hardly your typical sprinter.
He’s blessed with twitch fibres much like other sprinters but he’s also a huge man. His large strides lend him an advantage that’s hard to overcome once he hits his paces.
He’s no lumbering mountain man; he’s the biggest, fastest man on the planet.
He’s a freak of nature. And it’s more than likely that it will need another anomalous human being to break his existing records.
Is that possible? Or is it possible, even feasible, that gene therapy and its mutations are the way forward in games that require superhuman efforts to be ‘Higher, Faster, Stronger’?
Go figure.
Flexibility is the key but players must be willing
Does position matter?
Coaches don’t seem to think so but players certainly do.
I know for certain—when playing my brand of gully cricket—I’d never open. Simply because I never felt comfortable facing the bowling right off, maybe because I wanted to have a dekko at the opposition first, or maybe simply there’d always be someone clamouring, “Hurry up and score some runs and get out; I want to bat too.”
That’s beside the point.
It’s psychological.
There’s a comfort factor associated with a player’s favoured position. That’s his lucky number.
Or that’s what he’s been accustomed to playing at or where for a long, long time. To move him around is a travesty of natural justice—to him.
Team Director, Ravi Shastri, the man who began at No.11 and batted his way up to No.1, does not believe that Indian batsmen can own a spot in the line-up. He feels that there’s a crying need for horses for courses. A player’s position will depend on the quality of the opposition.
He said:
“In this team, no one owns a batting position. It all depends on the situation. We will play horses for courses and see what the situation and the opposition demands. Accordingly, we will see what the best batting position in the side is for each batsman against that particular outfit and seeing the state of the series.”
Flexibility is the demanded norm. Ajinkya Rahane and Cheteshwar Pujara responded splendidly scoring centuries at No.3 and No.1 respectively.
The ploy worked.
The original strategy, though, of having Rohit Sharma come in at No.3 has fallen flat.
Sharma oozes talent but he needs the extra protection and a long rope for him to succeed. There’s little doubt about his calibre. He needs some time to come into his own. His lazy elegance is his undoing, much like David Gower, but both batters would defiantly deny any such claims vigorously.
(The most technically adept player—after your openers, of course—should be No.3. In this side, it appears to fall upon either Pujara, Kohli or Rahane to fill this spot. Sharma is probably best at No. 4 or 5. In my opinion, you cannot have Rohit batting at that spot when the wicket’s a belter and then push him back when seamers make the ball talk and he fails. It’s just not fair to the others in the side.)
Former India hockey coach Arjun Halappa is on the players’ side when it comes to switching them around.
Paul Van Ass’ implementation of ‘Total Hockey’ is criticised as being too ‘harsh’.
“It’s very tough. When I started playing under (Jose) Brasa, I was a right winger and I was played as a central midfielder. I got really irritated at first, but gradually when I started to understand what the team wanted, I adjusted. But everyone can’t adjust.
I think it was too harsh on the part of Paul Van Ass to make those position changes straightaway in a big tournament (Hockey World League Semifinals). It could’ve been done gradually. Europeans have their own thinking, and they think they are always doing the right thing. But when they come to India, they have to understand the culture, language and players. You can’t just walk in and get things done the way you like.”
It differs from player to player. Every player needs to feel secure that he will not lose out when he’s moved to unfamiliar territory and where he may not immediately perform as expected. They deserve to be given some time to prepare and adjust. The challenge is mental. Visualization exercises with the team psychologist are not a bad idea.
Results will come when players are happy. Unhappy players are a dampener on performance and results. Process must take precedence.
“If you’re over 30, you’re over,” says Hockey India
If you’re 30+, you’re past it, over the hill, or simply put, too old.
Ageism hit Indian hockey players in the form of an arbitrary ruling from Hockey India (HI) preventing dribblers and keepers past 30 from participating in the Hockey India League (HIL).
Adrian D’souza, Deepak Thakur and Prabhjot Singh find themselves out in the cold without a blanket to keep them warm.
The rule is discriminatory. Foreign players have no such restrictions.
The IPL has no such problems accommodating retired cricketers and on the wrong side of 40. Look at Pravin Tambe.
You can argue that hockey is a different game where fitness is of paramount significance.
The logo of Hockey India (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Then fitness tests should be made the criteria, not a number that informs clubs what your birth year is.
Dhanraj Pillay, former Indian field hockey player and captain, attending annual sports meet of GGSIPU in Delhi as a chief guest. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Dhanraj Pillay turned out for India till the age of 36.
Four Olympics, World Cups,Champions Trophy and Asian Games figure against his name. He still plays hockey at the club level for Karnataka Lions.
Does he have nothing to say?
Update:
Dhanraj Pillay, Air India coach, slammed Hockey India for its perverse logic saying:
“I request Narinder Batra to reconsider the decision. Players like Adrian D’Souza, Arjun Halappa, Prabodh Tirkey have left a deep impact on hockey and they are still as capable as they were a few years back. If foreigners who are above the age of 30 can be accommodated, I am sure Indians can as well.
These players have given invaluable services to the sport. Even today in places like Punjab, Delhi, Haryana and Chandigarh, they are a household name. I don’t understand the logic. If we can have foreign players who are much older in the auctions, then why not Indians? Someone like Adrian is still going so well, and deserves to be part of the league purely on form and merit. I request Narinder Batra (HI President) to look into the matter and treat Indians the same way.”
Finish slow and easy
When Stephen Menezes, a 43-year-old runner and employee with Airtel, Mumbai, collapsed and succumbed to a heart attack after the ‘Run, India, Run-10K challenge’ in Borivali West, the news shocked the running community.
Stephen died on a Sunday, the 19th day in July, 2015. He was survived by his wife, Evona, and three children, Laurel, Audrey and Catriel. The eldest is fifteen.
My reaction to the report in the papers the following day was on the lines, “If this could happen to a seasoned runner like Menezes, this could happen to me or anyone else for that matter. This is terrible news both for runners and his family.”
(It is never easy to be calm or unemotional about people or events in which you are emotionally vested. Silence then does its turn.)
Stephen was a runner over the past five years. He was also a swimmer.
An investigating official said:
“Menezes had a blood pressure problem for the past 10 years.”
A neighbour said:
“He had run the Standard Chartered Mumbai Marathon, the Vasai-Virar Marathon as well as the Mayor’s Marathon. Some of these were 21km long. He used to even go swimming and jogging to stay fit. We cannot accept that he is no more.”
Sandeep Figer, a friend, said:
“Menezes was a strict disciplinarian. He was particular about his health and diet.”
Neil Bronel, another friend, blamed the organisers for the delayed response.
“I am really sorry and disappointed to say it was one of the worst running events ever. The water stations were way too far. We faced the worst of the situation when one of us collapsed and there was nothing that could be done. No ambulance or medical aid was in place, which is a basic need for every run. One of our co-runners and a good family friend is no more with us due to the delay in medical help. We had to arrange to ferry him to the hospital ourselves.”
Maitri Porecha, reporting for DNA India, wrote:
“While permissions from the roads department of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) and the traffic police have to be obtained for a marathon, there is no rule that prescribes the local health department has to be consulted.
Experts say basic medication like Sorbitrate, a nitro-glycerine tablet that immediately expands blood vessels, should be mandatory in the first-aid kit, and it should be within easy reach of a patient during marathons.
Ambulances equipped with para-medical staff trained in cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and equipment like Atrial Electronic Difibrillator (AED) should also be there.
In Italy, every marathon runner has to submit his/her latest electro cardiogram (ECG) report before attempting the run. In the US, event organisers have to be affiliated with the local Athletic Federation. The federation ensures certain level of quality, checks and balances.”
Venkat Raman, a senior city-based marathoner, said:
“In India, none of this is followed. Local groups should screen all runners for fitness and cardiac risk profiles before enrolling them. Organisers should keep everything ready so that there is no risk to life. Every organiser should be conscious of the fact that they are playing with the runners’ lives.”
At this year’s Mumbai marathon, almost 4000 participants needed medical attention.
A participant in the Mumbai marathon 2011 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
That’s 10% of the total runners participating.
Most of the patients were dehydrated.
Dr. Vijay D’silva said:
“Oral dehydration, treatment for cramps, physiotherapy and nausea were the most-attended problems. Thirty runners were treated for intravenous rehydration therapy. The number of dehydrated runners has increased since last year.
Younger runners, too, faced problems this time. People are unaware of what goes on inside their body. We recommend a medical check-up and conditional training before running to all participants. A large number of people are over-confident and adventurous. They refrain from seeing a doctor before running. That is unadvisable.”
52-year-old Kirit Ganatra suffered a heart attack and after being resuscitated on the spot was rushed to Bombay Hospital.
Another runner, 27-year-old Ashish Malkar, suffered convulsions near the finish line and hit his head on the pavement. He was an epileptic.
Dr Ramakant Panda, Asian Heart Institute, said:
“If a person undertakes arduous activities like continuous running for hours, he can injure himself. Also, runners get excited as the finishing line nears and the level of excitement heightens suddenly, causing injuries.”
Bipasha Basu as Brand ambassadors of Mumbai marathon (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Inexperienced runners tend to finish races on a high note sprinting the last few hundred metres. As a runner, I would not advise this for the longer races (21K or more) especially if you are not accustomed to doing it in training.
Running for a cause in the “Mumbai Marathon-2009” (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
A mild speeding up may be fine but not an outright sprint because the cardiovascular system is overloaded with the stress of the past one-and-a-half to three hours. It is best to maintain your pace and finish calm and cool. The extra seconds you gain on your finishing time or the photo-op are surely not worth the additional risk.
“The Model” in the “Mumbai Marathon-2009” (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Rahul Sawant’s on-field heart attack forces MCA to re-evaluate medical facilities
When a sportsman suffers a grievous, deadly injury on the field like Philip Hughes who was felled by a Sean Abbott bouncer or Raman Lamba who was struck on the skull by a powerful shot, we are always shocked and debate whether the sport can be made more safe for the players. All kinds of methods and inventions are discussed and remedies are provided. Hughes’ untimely death, unseemly as it was, has forced helmet manufacturers to provide newer versions of their products that now cover the back of the neck hopefully preventing a recurrence of such an event.
Raman Lamba (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Pain in acute myocardial infarction (front) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
But when more and more players are felled by disease on the field (and myocardial infarction is simply a symptom of coronary heart and artery diseases), it is time to look at the reason behind its occurrence and question the immediate reaction that exercise itself is unsafe for individuals.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
An outsized reaction to medical tragedies on the field is unwarranted and unbecoming of informed, educated persons.
Rahul Sawant, a 34-year-old wicketkeeper-batsman with Dahisar Cricket Club suffered a heart attack on Sunday while playing in the Dr HD Kanga League.
He was rushed to Bombay hospital by his teammates which saved his life.
Speaking to DNA, his skipper Pravin Gogri said:
“He was also feeling suffocated and could not bare the pain. We gave him water, but it didn’t help. We could not find the doctors provided by the Mumbai Cricket Association. Then we rushed him to Bombay Hospital.The Kanga League (rule) book says there are doctors at various grounds, but we could not find one at Azad Maidan. God knows what would have happened had we reached (the hospital) late.”
Gogri’s teammate added:
“He doesn’t smoke or drink. He is a nice man and a good cricketer. Life is full of stress these days. Today’s youngsters lead an unhealthy life. They sleep late and have loads of stress. We have now started going back to playing Kanga League on wet wickets. This could cause injuries. The MCA should be prepared if something like this happens.
Sawant has spent Rs 40,000 already. Let’s hope he is out of danger. He is the only son of his parents. You never know what can happen. I am sure MCA can afford ambulances for emergency situations.”
The matter will be taken up by the MCA in the next managing committee meeting with a promise to provide the desired medical facilities for all players.
MCA Joint Secretary, Unmesh Khanvilkar, said:
“This is a rare case. Normally, injuries like cuts, bruises or sprains happen while playing cricket. Hence we have appointed physios and provided first aids at various points of the grounds. But this is something which is serious and we will have to look into it.
We have to come out with a solution to make facilities that could deal with something like this. Other than the physios who are already there, we will try to arrange doctors who can deal with these issues. Also, we will try to arrange ambulances at each centre including gymkhanas so they can be used during emergencies.”
Sawant, meanwhile, will undergo angioplasty to remove a couple of blockages in his heart.
CPR training (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
The move by the MCA is welcome. Sportsmen definitely need doctors around to tend to them should they suddenly succumb to ailments on the field. Immediate medical attention, especially in the case of heart attacks and treatment such as cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) can make the difference between life and death.
But that is not the end of it.
Players , too , need to monitor themselves and their bodies and not overexert themselves after a tiring week at work or play.
More on that later….
The Why and Que of Kumara Sangakkara and Michael Clarke – II
If Sangakkara is the quintessential gentleman beyond the game, Michael Clarke is the bright young upstart turned elder statesman and guardian of its values.
The transformation occurred under intense public scrutiny where every move and misdemeanour was analysed and dissected.
Pup’s metamorphosis would not have been possible without the support of his partner and wife, Kyly Boldy.
Clarke’s previous choice, Lara Bingle, was an equally high profile personality.
Their three-year relationship which began in 2007 and ended in 2010 was always in the news and not for the right reasons.
It was, perhaps, no surprise that the relationship ended around the time Clarke began his ascension to the throne of Australian cricket.
The ostensible reason for the break-up was an exclusive tell-all interview that Bingle sold to a women’s magazine.
And that’s when the current Mrs. Clarke and then Kyly Boldy boldly stepped into the frame.
From ‘just friends’ to an ‘item’ within months, the former schoolmates fast forwarded to the present with Boldy proving to be an able and capable First Lady of the national obsession.
Just who is Kyly Boldy?
According to her:
“I’d hope that people would think I come across as classy and that’s just because I like to hold myself that way. I guess that’s what I like to embrace and I think that’s a really nice quality in a woman.
And I hope people see me as a fun-loving ‘girl next door’. I’m a lot more of a jokester than everyone thinks – a lot more. I’m always cracking some kind of a joke or having a laugh, and I think people will be a bit surprised to see that really down-to-earth Kyly my family get to see.”
The comparisons to Bingle were evident, at first. They are both models and media personalities in their own rights.
Boldy, however, decided to shun the limelight post her marriage to Clarke in 2012.
The wedding was low-profile.
Boldy certainly has no time or place for the WAG tag used to euphemistically describe sportsmen’s partners.
She says:
“I’m not sure who started it, but they should get a slap on the wrist. Every single wife or girlfriend I’ve met who has been a part of the cricket community has always stood on her own – they have their own jobs, they have their own careers, they all do very, very well for themselves. I wonder what the husbands could be called? I wonder if we could swap this around?”
And she certainly would not like to take any credit for her husband’s success.
“That is so funny. But, nah, I don’t take any credit for any of his success. I see Michael wake up every single day, trying to be the best cricketer he can be, to be a better captain than the day before. The dedication and the passion that he has for his job is something I’ve never seen before and something I really admire. He should get every little bit of credit.
Sure, his family life or his home life might be more suitable for him, and maybe he’s just more comfortable that he feels like he can just go to cricket and do his thing – but that’s not a question I can answer. I am just happy that he is doing so well, and I know he will continue to do well because he wants to.”
She sums up her life with Clarke in these words:
“You have to wake up every single day with your own goals and dreams in life, love, family and career. You can’t take that away from anybody and I think that’s what our family is about.”
Kyly took her job as captain Clarke’s better half seriously enough to learn the rules to the game.
“As everyone keeps reminding me, it (being cricket captain) is the second most important job in Australia so obviously being alongside Michael, that is a huge thing. I’ve matured with age, a girl that has turned into a lady, and I’m trying to do everything the best way I can by learning as I go. I’ve had to Wikipedia the rules because I wanted to go into it knowing something. It makes it so much more enjoyable when you know exactly what is going on. And then you really do start to love the game because you can appreciate what is happening.”
Perhaps, it has helped that Clarke himself was a more mature person when he started dating Kyly.
An older, wiser Clarke refused to talk about his personal life and focused media questions on his cricket.
Embed from Getty Images
Clarke also has nothing but praise for his wife’s workout ethic especially her diet.
“I can’t believe how disciplined she is with her diet. She’s got that self-discipline to not touch the junk food if she doesn’t want to, whereas if I see it in the cupboard it’s gone, I eat it! I can’t have two pieces of chocolate and put it away, I’ve got to eat the whole bar.”
(Funny how this jells with my personal view that if sportsmen need to watch their diets, they should date or wed models or actresses who do that all the time. Look at Shane Warne’s new, slim, look since teaming up with Elizabeth Hurley—now apart.)
A bad back and an indifferent Ashes series hastened Pup’s early retirement. It, however, gives the couple ample privacy and time to welcome the first addition to their family with Kyly expecting soon.
While two greats exit the field, they begin anew a home life that demands much more from them than just runs, wickets, catches and wins. It is a second innings away from glory but will require guts nonetheless.
WADA considers blanket ban on rogue nations
The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) is fear-mongering.
Its president, Craig Reedie, proclaimed that WADA is considering a blanket ban on countries that regularly violate doping guidelines. This should act as sufficient deterrent to prevent or reduce doping across all sports.
Reedie said:
“The fact that this is being discussed as a potential sanction is not entirely unhelpful. It’s a very, very serious sanction because it tends to be a pretty blunt instrument. Maybe that’s required. I’m not sure. It’s never been done before. I would want to wait until I see what my expert commission says about this.”
National bans—for varying reasons—have occurred before but it has always been restricted to individual disciplines.
Reedie’s deliberations come in the wake of recent revelations of widespread blood-doping in an investigation launched by Britain’s Sunday Times and German broadcaster ARD/WDR.
But WADA itself is toothless and has no powers to impose such a stringent punishment. It can merely lobby and hope.
What this does imply is that WADA believes that doping in some rogue states is systematic and that national anti-doping agencies are in collusion with offenders letting them off lightly.
Reedie admitted that WADA does not quite have the resources to tackle the global menace.
He said:
“People who wish to cheat have different and more opportunities to cheat than we have to resolve it in conventional ways.
If somebody produces a completely new substance that should be banned, it will take us some time to firstly identify it and then create a test (for it).
We don’t have enough money, but we’re realistic.
We’re now up to roughly $30 million a year as a budget. I think we have become pretty efficient at doing this much as we’ve been able to do within the restrictions that we have in budget terms. But yes, a little bit more help would be warmly welcomed.
If you look at our new (anti-doping) code, you will see there’s a much greater emphasis on investigations and intelligence gathering, and this involves a whole range of entities — law enforcement, customs and sports people.
You can pick up lots of information which allows you to then target a test, rather than blanket test lots of athletes.
Some of the major successes that the anti-doping movement has made have come from these non-analytical efforts.”
Reedie believes that efforts from athletes themselves where they come clean about their blood results may assist in alleviating suspicions that currently cloud sporting achievements.
We’d like to believe that sport is clean. We’d like to believe that there is no need to monitor athletes when we should be relying that honour and integrity are the code words they abide by.
Unfortunately, reality bites. The presence of agencies like WADA is a necessary tool to safeguard the sanctity of sport. Science and sports have intermingled so closely in recent times that separating what’s right and what’s not is no longer the domain of athletes, coaches and trainers. The more aware we are, the better we are able to respond. The general public, at large, merely perceives. And what it perceives is that ethics is being sacrificed at the altar of Mammon. “Everybody else does it, so why shouldn’t I?” can scarcely be the rallying cry of elite athletes.
And to assume that our heroes are saints is deceiving ourselves. It is also true that athletes are a reflection of their environment and while such a ban may be seem a little too extreme, it may be one solution. Such a ban, however, may benefit the countries that are at the leading edge of developments in science and R&D. They may be able to concoct substances that have not yet been listed as prohibited thus staying one step ahead of their pursuers. Is there not a danger of victimization of less fortunate nations?
There are no easy answers, just easy questions.
Number of readers subscribed
Read it on Apple News
Read it on Apple News
Stat Counter
Sports, Health and Exercise
- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
Make Time For Sports. 