Yes, India’s woeful showing in overseas Tests needs to be addressed but let us not incite passion in doing so. It is critical that we remain collected as we sit down to find solutions to some problems that the Indian team is so obviously facing now. It is important not to become a part of the cacophony that follows each such defeat.

Let us remember that when the team was picked and when some cricketers left for Australia before the rest of the side to acclamatise themselves with the conditions Down Under, without exception, everyone said that this Indian side had the best chance to win a series in Australia.

Sadly, the team management did not respond to some signs that became obvious in the first two Tests in Melbourne and Sydney. For instance, Gautam Gambhir and Virender Sehwag’s inability to provide the team with a good start should have made the tour selectors seek options. VVS Laxman’s failures called for a harsh decision, too.

It may be a good idea to have Ajinkya Rahane or Rahul Dravid open the innings in Adelaide with Gambhir so that Sehwag can bat at No. 5. It will allow not only Sehwag the chance to play an attacking innings after the ball loses its shine but also be the first steps towards building a middle-order that is capable of taking over from giants like Dravid and Laxman.

It is important to let the likes of Rahane and Rohit Sharma gain the experience of playing Test cricket in Australia. Together with Virat Kohli, it can be expected that they will figure in Test cricket for some years now. It may not be the ideal situation for India to have few players with the experience of playing in Australia when it travels there next.

Of course, there has been some stinging criticism of Mahendra Singh Dhoni’s captaincy, particularly with respect to his field placing. It does appear to his critics that he can’t seem to do anything right at the moment. I am not among those who believe that he has dipped as a tactician. It is just that his batsmen have let him down big time.

How can he be held responsible if the opening batsmen have been unable to accomplish the primary task of seeing the new ball through? How can he be responsible if experienced batsmen like Dravid and Laxman have been done in by late swing that the Australian fast bowlers have obtained?

Let us not get carried away by all the criticism by former players and others on our TV channels. Yes, as fans of Indian cricket, we are hurt, upset and angered by the dismal showing in Australia – in the wake of the disaster in England – but let us not get despondent and start castigating everything about the team and about Indian cricket.

Let me point out to those leading the lament on TV channels now that they have not devoted even two minutes of their time to talk about our top performers in Ranji Trophy, Rajasthan’s Robin Bist (885 runs) and Madhya Pradesh’s TP Sudhindra (40 wickets). Unless all of India – and I include the fans, media and former India cricketers in this – respects the Ranji Trophy again, we can be sure that its fortunes in Test cricket will sink to an all-time low.

And yes, even if Indians are an emotional and sensitive race, let us learn to remain calm at all times and not allow ourselves to be victims of herd mentality. It is time to let our minds overrule our hearts, embrace hope and remain confident that a system that threw up players of the calibre of Dravid and Laxman, Sehwag and Gambhir, Kohli and Dhoni will help us find solutions to the present set of problems too.

Studies in Contrast: Umesh Yadav (left) and Varun Aaron (Photo courtesy: hindustantimes.com)

They have shown that all it takes to succeed is an idea, a dream, a lot of hard work and an element of luck. The rise of players like Umesh Yadav, Varun Aaron and Ajinkya Rahane has come as a confirmation that dreams are no longer a prerogative of the metros likes Mumbai, Delhi, Kolkata, Chennai, Bangalore and Hyderabad.

A little over two decades ago, when cricket telecasts were still being produced by Doordarshan, it was hard to imagine so Indian cricketers coming from such diverse locations. The selling of TV rights to cable and satellite companies has had a huge role in the spawning of such dreams in small towns like Rae Bareily and Jamshedpur, Kochi and Cuttack, Moradabad and Gadag, Allahabad and Ikhar, Jalandhar and Ranchi.

There was a time when players had to migrate to established pastures to be able to play for India.  Vinoo Mankad moved from Western India to Nawanagar, Dattu Phadkar from Maharashtra to Bombay, Bishan Singh Bedi, S Madan Lal and Mohinder Amarnath from Punjab to Delhi and Karsan Ghavri from Saurashtra to Bombay. Prashant Vaidya is another example that springs to mind. He had to move from Vidarbha to Bengal to gain recognition, first to play for the India A team and then to gain four India caps in one-day internationals.

Of course, Kapil Dev had shown that one could stay put anywhere – his home town Chandigarh in his case – and rise to the top. There have been others like Sunil Joshi, the left-arm spinner from Gadag in Karnataka, fast bowler Debashis Mohanty and his fellow Orissa team-mate and opening batsman Shiv Sundar Das, Andhra wicket-keeper MSK Prasad as well as Kerala paceman Tinu Yohannan who has followed suit, even if without much success.

And over the past decade, cricketers like RP Singh, Munaf Patel, and S Sreesanth have come to the fore. And, towering over all else, we have also had one of India’s finest captains – Mahendra Singh Dhoni, if you must know his name, come from the back of beyond. Son of Pan Singh, a pump operator in MECON at Ranchi, Dhoni has entrenched himself in the hearts of millions of cricket fans in and out of India.

There is no doubt that Dhoni’s success story has been an inspiration for countless youngsters in India’s hinterland to dream of playing for India and pursue that dream with single-minded devotion. Indeed, it all starts with a dream. Munaf Patel, for example, just wanted to play cricket outside Ikhar and Bharuch. Umesh Yadav and Varun Aaron, who have emerged as exciting fast bowling prospects for India this season, both dreamt of bowling quick – and consistently. They have repeatedly gone on record as saying they would not compromise on their pace.

One of the key elements in such careers is that their coaches – be it those who have imparted the fundamentals or those who have worked on the nuances – have not tampered too much with the basics. In Varun Aaron’s case, however, Dennis Lillee and TA Sekar helped him improve his action, making it more biomechanically correct. Yadav has worked with former India fast bowler Subroto Banerjee (who is now Vidarbha’s bowling coach).

Interestingly, Umesh Yadav’s formative years show a distinct contrast to those of Aaron and Rahane. While Aaron’s father C Paul Aaron taught him the first lessons of fast bowling and Rahane’s father Mayank took him to a coaching academy when he was eight, Tilak Yadav was quite clear that his son Umesh should work towards joining the police.

Hailing from Jamshedpur where his father was working for Mico Bosch, it was inevitable that sport was a big part of Varun Aaron’s life. His father was a club cricketer in his youth in Bangalore and his mother played basketball for Bihar. And what is more, his grandfather had played hockey for Bihar. Playing the under-15 tournament for the Polly Umrigar Trophy, Varun Aaron was picked up for grooming by the MRF Pace Academy in 2005.

Madhukar Rahane, Ajinkya’s father got his son to a coaching camp in Dombivili so that he would not break window panes at his home and stay fit. And then the family moved to Mulund so that he could attend coaching camps easily. As a junior cricketer, Ajinkya Rahane spent time as a ballboy during two international games at the Wankhede Stadium. That was enough for the lad from Mulund to dream of earning an India cap and back it up with a resolve to work hard for that.

By contrast, Umesh Yadav surfaced only as a 21-year-old tear-away in 2008. His father Tilak Yadav has worked as a miner in the Western Coalfields at Majri in Maharashtra’s Chandrapur district. The young man had to cycle a long distance to play his cricket in Nagpur. He had to content himself playing tennis ball cricket until he got picked up for the Vidarbha under-22 side.

Of course, Yadav is not the first Indian cricketers to come from such a humble background. Even the first few generation of Indian cricket saw diversity – from the wealthy Parsi Mehallasha Pavri, a doctor by profession, to the Harijan groundsman Palwankar Baloo to the middle-class Sanskrit scholar Prof. DB Deodhar.

In the early 60s, Eknath Solkar, later to be unarguably India’s greatest ever fielder at forward short-leg, learnt his cricket at the Hindu Gymkhana in Bombay (as Mumbai was then known) where his father was the chief groundsman. Solkar could not hone his skills against the trainees and members of the club and had to wait for them to leave to be able to work on his game until the great Vinoo Mankad spotted his talent and took him under his wings. Vinod Kambli’s story was no different. Son of a mechanic, he grew up with 18 people in a room in a chawl in Bombay’s Bhindi Bazar.

In the current squad, Virender Sehwag is the son of a grain and flour merchant from Najafgarh in the outskirts of Delhi while Ishant Sharma, one of the stars of India’s last tour of Australia, grew up in a household where his father ran an airconditioner repair shop. And, it is a well-known story that Irfan Pathan, who is now on the road to a Test comeback, is the son of a Muezzin in Baroda.

Yet, what we get to see is some great bowling and batting feats but what remains tucked away in the background is the sacrifices that families make to see that the dreams of their children come true. And, happily, this has no longer been the prerogative of those living in the metros. Dreams have their own way of actualising. Sooner than later, even if for every such wonderful story, there are dozens of heartbreaking tales too. That perhaps is the beauty of this sport that we love so much.

(This piece was written for Prabhat Khabar‘s Sunday supplement, Ravivar)

It begs the question: Why do elite athletes risk using prohibited substances? In the Indian context, the answer is simple: the lure of cash awards that are offered as incentive for winning medals at the international level is strong. But that would be true if it were only the athlete is responsible. In a nation starving for success in the sporting arena, it is our hunger that drives athletes and those guiding them to seek shortcut methods. From the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports to the National Sports Federations to the coaches and trainers, everyone wants good results from the elite athletes.

Let us address some more basic questions on doping.

When their samples turn up adverse analytical findings, can athletes claim ignorance about how the prohibited substance entered their system? Not really. For, athletes are expected to be aware of what gets ingested into their system and they alone are responsible for everything that shows up in their samples. Even if coaches and trainers advocate the use of supplements, athletes become solely responsible for consuming them. There has been some talk in the corridors of power about how semi-literate or illiterate athletes cannot be blamed if they do not know what is being prescribed to them. Modern elite athletes have learnt to even ask their family physicians if some medicine they prescribe contains any prohibited substances.

Who decides on the list of prohibited substances and methods? The World Anti Doping Agency publishes a list on October 1 each year for the following calendar year. The list is drawn up by a panel of experts. The list identifies substances and methods prohibited in-competition, out-of-competition and in particular sports. The substances are classified by categories like anabolic steroids – both those that are ordinarily capable of being produced by the human body and those that are not – stimulants and masking agents. Of course, athletes can apply for Therapeutic Use Exemption for medical reasons.

Who carries out the anti-doping tests? The samples of two athletes – Manjeet Kaur and Juana Murmu – turned up positive in tests conducted by the sport’s world body, International Association of Athletics Federation (IAAF). The six others who returned adverse analytical findings were among those tested by the National Anti Doping Agency (NADA) at the request of the Athletics Federation of India.

These tests will be frowned upon by the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) as it abhors pre-competition testing that would ensure that only ‘clean athletes’ are sent for competition and they do not test positive in competition. These tests could be interpreted as NADA’s compliance with what is possibly a systematic doping programme followed in National camps.

Can dietary supplements used by athletes lead to them testing positive for prohibited substances? WADA says dietary supplements are a matter of concern because in many countries the manufacturing and labeling of supplements may not follow strict rules, leading to a supplement containing an undeclared substance that is prohibited under anti-doping regulations. Taking a poorly labeled dietary supplement is not an adequate defence in a doping hearing.

So, what is in store for the athletes who tested positive recently? The athletes whose samples return an adverse analytical finding are notified by the Anti Doping Organisation – in this case, the Athletics Federation of India – and are handed provisional suspensions from their sport. They are given the opportunity to ask for the B samples to be tested in their presence or in the presence of their representatives.

Some of these athletes have already had their B samples tested and others are in the process of doing that. If the B sample also throws up an adverse analytical finding, the AFI will proceed with the result management process including the right to a fair hearing within three months. The hearing will then be conducted by a panel constituted by the AFI.

AFI will then determine what sanctions will apply to each individual case. Athletes are given the opportunity to establish a basis for eliminating, or reducing the sanction, or having the sanction partially suspended. Sanctions for violating anti-doping regulations may range from a reprimand to a lifetime ban. The period of ineligibility may vary depending on the type of anti-doping violation, the circumstances of an individual case, the substance, and the possible repetition of an anti-doping violation.

Of course, athletes have the right to appeal any decision regarding a positive test or a sanction imposed following an antidoping rule violation. Athletes must file the appeal before an appeal body within the AFI or the Court for Arbitration in Sport.

What does India need against doping in sport?

The official machinery needs to stop paying lip service to the anti-doping philosophy since most adverse results in sports like weightlifting and athletics have come from National camps that are run by the Sports Authority of India at its centres across the country. There has to be a realisation that doping does not only bring shame but also has adverse effect on the athlete’s health.

Collectively, India needs to ensure that the desire to win international recognition does not include a desire to win by unfair means. And this has to start from the very top of this machinery – from the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, the Sports Authority of India, the National Sports Federations and percolate down to the athletes and fans.

Since out-of-competition testing is one of the best ways to curb the menace, NADA has to ensure that its test distribution and testing itself is stricter than its results show then to be. In 2010-11, NADA carried out as many as 2684 tests across all sports and found 122 samples positive. Yet, out of 1483 out-of-competition testing that it carried out, just 12 tested positive. The low percentage of positives is an indication that there is something seriously wrong with NADA’s testing programme. To start with, NADA must ensure that the samples are not replaced.

(This article first appeared in The Economic Times on Sunday, July 10-16, 2011)

There is nothing wrong with that, really. But now, much of India is groaning in disappointment, shock and even anger that three of these are among the eight athletes who tested positive for banned substances. Sadly, there is a mad rush to point fingers in all directions but not where it really matters – the system as a whole that seems to encourage winning by hook or by crook.

It is time for the sports community to introspect. For long, as a nation, we have paid lip service to and been callous about a vibrant anti-doping programme. The Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports will point out to the setting up of the WADA-accredited National Dope Testing Laboratory and the National Anti Doping Agency to curb the menace of doping. And if it believes that it has done its bit by sacking an overeas coach, it is wrong.

NADA’s work comes across as weak in planning and in implementation. For example, in 2010-11, NADA carried out as many as 2684 tests across all sports and found 122 samples positive. Yet, out of 1483 tests in out-of-competition testing, just 12 tested positive. Out-of-competition testing is the best way to curb the doping menace but the low percentage of positives is an indication that there is something seriously wrong with NADA’s testing programme.

At least one athlete has accused chaperones of taking money to change urine samples collected at the National camps. And until Mandeep Kaur and Jauna Murmu’s samples turned up positive in tests carried out by the sports top body, the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF), Indian sportspersons were suspected to be slippery customers as far as out of competition tests went.

It is not very difficult to understand why athletes feel encouraged to take recourse to short cuts. A champion thrower once asked me – and in all earnestness – if I believed that Indian sportspersons stood a chance of winning at the international level. “Do you know how much time someone from the lower strata of society would take to make Rs 50 lakh?” he asked.

Even as we await the report of the enquiry committee that will be set up, let us take up the one big question: Who is responsible? To be honest, it is the athlete who is responsible for keeping himself or herself clean. Ignorance, illiteracy or even semi-literacy, are all no excuses. Simply stated: if a banned substance is found in an athelte’s urine sample, only he or she is responsible. No elite athlete, however illiterate, can take recourse to ignorance as an excuse.

We must not forget that they alone are responsible for what they ingest or use.  Indeed, in accordance with WADA Code, athletes are responsible for any prohibited substance being found in their bodily specimen. This means that a violation  occurs whether or not the athlete intentionally or  unintentionally, knowingly or unknowingly, used a prohibited substance or was negligent or otherwise at fault.

Yet, if weightlifters and athletes test positive when training in national camps run by the Sports Authority of India at its centres of excellence, how can the National Sports Federations be held responsible? If the coaches are employed by – and paid by – the Sports Authority of India, should the athletes and officials of National Federations alone be accountable?

It can be argued that the Sports Authority of India has played the role of the silent conspirator in the doping programme for some of our elite athletes. It can also be argued that those who fund the training of these athletes – and therefore fund the intake of supplements – are also responsible for not delivering the right products to them.

And, the net widens to include us. Indeed, it is a social problem but until all of India collectively admits that it is not a sports-conscious nation, it really should not expect its athletes to conquer the Asian firmament. Once the pressure on the sports fraternity – athlete, coaches, sports officials and the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sport is reduced – the pressure may come down. Alternatively, our society, including India Inc, must awaken and ensure that our elite sportspersons do not have to find it hard to follow their dreams.

It is a pity that the popular media – and the nation – wake up to the looming menace of doping only when it has got along shame. There is a need for the media to be vigilant at all times so that our athletes – elite and casual alike – tread carefully when it comes to finding ways to enhance performance..

It can only be hoped that the current spate of positive results from track and field will spur the nation – its policy makers, athletes, sports officials, media and fans – into asking itself the question: Do we really need medals at any cost? Are we so desperate that we are ready to put the health of young athletes at stake?

If we answer these questions honestly, we will able to cherish hard-earned victories for a long time rather than cast our minds back to wonderful times and wonder if those were the result of smart short cuts adopted by the system, with the athelete at the centre of the universe. And only then will the cheers echo as such.

The page in Prabhat Khabar where this article (translated of course) appeared

You may shut your ears to the raging debate on corruption in the country but there is no escape from the argument over the International Cricket Council’s recent decision to implement a watered down version of the Decision Review System in all forms of international cricket and over how the Board of Control for Cricket in India has called the shots in getting ICC to drop ball tracking technology (Hawk Eye) from the list of aids for TV umpires.

And I paused to think if anybody has been able to stop the march of time or the advent of technology. We have come a long way from using valve radios to transistors to digital radio; from using typewriters to computers; from telephones to mobile phones; from cars that guzzled fuel to machines that are fuel efficient. Yes, technology touches our lives in every which way possible and it is natural that it makes its presence felt in cricket too – not just with making the TV viewing experience a memorable one but also in ensuring that umpires make the right decisions.

Before anything else, let us try and understand why the Decision Review System (DRS) came into being.  A little bit of history of the advent of the TV umpire will help. Back in 1992-93, cricket embraced TV technology to help umpires with line decisions – stumping and run out dismissals as well. Gradually, umpires started looking at replays for catches taken in the close in cordon to see if the fielder caught the ball cleanly or if a portion the ball hit the ground before being scooped up.

With the quantum improvement of TV technology, umpires’ mistakes were exposed and scrutinised like never before. So, sitting in your drawing room, you would get to know the mistakes they committed. Even if the percentage of correct decision-making was 92 or 93 per cent, the wrong decisions would get noticed and talked about at length in various media platforms.

So the mandarins of the game felt a need to improve that percentage to 97 or 98 by using a system that allows television technology to be used in a way that would not result in too many delays, would not de-skill the umpires and would take some pressure off the umpires. They carried out some trials and when they noticed improved player behaviour and a significant reduction in the number of umpiring errors,

A number of technological aides are available for use to assist the third umpire arrive at a decision. These included slow motion replays, super slow motion replays and ultra motion camera replays from all available cameras, sound from the stump microphones with the replays at normal speed and slow motion, approved ball tracking technology, the mat, generated by the provider of ball tracking technology and not by the broadcaster, Hot Spot cameras and other forms of technology subject to ICC being satisfied that the required standards of accuracy and time efficiency could be met.

The ultimate aim was to make sure clear mistakes were avoided. And there was a firm belief that this system would help alleviate the problems created when mistakes – which appeared obvious on replays – were made. With feedback indicating that the majority of players and umpires were behind the system, ICC persisted with its implementation.

The popular New Zealand umpire Billy Bowden believed that having the DRS was the best thing since sliced bread. “From an umpires point of view I embraced it, lived it and loved it. The effect was all positive for me but I wasn’t surprised one iota. Why? Well, it gave me confidence to make good, strong umpiring decisions and I did not fall in to the trap of relying on the DRS to bail me out. I felt in control and relaxed. I didn’t lose confidence when two of my decisions were reversed in two Tests. Instead I felt good that the right decision was made. It also gave me strength to get back in the zone again and concentrate on the next ball knowing I wouldn’t be criticised in the papers the next day,” he said.

Why then has been there so much debate? The Indians – skipper Mahendra Singh Dhoni, legend Sachin Tendulkar and the Board of Control for Cricket in India – have been quite vociferous in their opposition to the use of only technology for the DRS. Their line of argument has been simple. Hawk-Eye’s ball tracking technology is inadequate. “We don’t have any problems with the Snickometer or Hot Spot but Hawk Eye is yet to convince us. This technology is based on assumption,” BCCI Secretary N Srinivasan said. “We welcome technology when it is 100 per cent error free. In this case it is not, so we would continue to oppose.”

It is not clear how much research BCCI conducted into Hawk Eye’s technology. On the other hand, Hawk Eye Innovations, part of Sony Professional Solutions Europe, have spent considerable time explaining the system’s accuracy. The South African team had reservations about the prediction model, more so after Mark Boucher was ruled out leg before to Stuart Broad in a Test match in January 2010 but overcame them when Hawk Eye produced documentary evidence to back that the umpire and the TV umpires’ decisions.

Talking of skeptics being won over, it is ironical that Sachin Tendulkar – arguably one of the staunchest critics of Hawk Eye technology – took recourse to winning a verdict in his favour after he had been ruled out leg before wicket to Saeed Ajmal in the ICC Cricket World Cup 2011 semifinal between India and Pakistan at Mohali.

What are the solutions? The ICC has agreed that further independent and expert research will be carried out into ball-tracking technology and its accuracy and reliability. The continued use of ball-tracking technology as a decision-making aid will now depend on bilateral agreement between the participating Boards. But more importantly, it must be realised that it is not as if only the technology counts. The men who make, control – operate, if `you please – and use technology to make decisions matter a great deal.

Much as the cricket romantics would like the complete elimination of technological aids for umpires, it is inevitable that it will gain a larger role in helping umpires make the right decisions – and, more importantly, ensure that the cricketers and their teams do not suffer because clearly apparent wrong judgments have been passed.

Mahendra Singh Dhoni’s dimissal off a no-ball in the Bridgetown Test is a case in point. During India’s first innings, Dhoni was out caught at mid-on off Fidel Edwards. Umpire Ian Gould suspected that the delivery could have been a no-ball and sought confirmation from the third umpire Gregory Brathwaite. Upon review, Brathwaite was shown a legitimate delivery by the host broadcaster and so Dhoni was given out. It was subsequently established that Brathwaite had been shown the wrong replay and that the delivery that led to Dhoni’s dismissal should indeed have been called a no-ball.

“The host broadcaster for this series, IMG Media, acknowledged the mistake and has apologised,” ICC Match Referee Chris Broad said.  “Having looked into the situation, I am satisfied it was an unfortunate but honest mistake in what is a tense and live environment. It is worth pointing out that the umpires followed the correct procedures and are without blame in this matter. “

Indeed, we have to acknowledge human error will be a part of everything that we do – whether it is in space programmes or aircraft crashes or train accidents. And if, as many of us believe, cricket is a microcosm of life, it is inevitable that there will be an element of human error in the use of any technology to make and confirm decisions. Yes, technology has to be embraced because it can ensure a greater accuracy in decision making but it must not take away from the charm of the game or interrupt its flow.

It would be foolhardy to dismiss technological aids to enable umpires make the right decisions. However, it is imperative that event owners (host cricket Boards, ICC) tell the rights holders not to air footage that has not been available to the umpires. More importantly, they must stop the former cricketers from leading an attack on umpires based on slow motion footage that is made available to them well after a decision is made.

After all, the debate has been fuelled in the main by TV producers stumbling upon evidence well after judgments have been passed and by willing former cricketers dwelling at length about these umpiring decisions. Before the advancement of broadcast technology, any criticism of the umpires was based on feedback from the players involved in the contest rather than those who were earning a living by commenting on the game.

Gautam Gambhir was one of the stars of the chase (Photo courtesy: Google Images)

What a night! A night to beat all other nights hollow! A night when the Men in Blue took centre-stage, with a performance none can find flaws in. It was incredible to see a team which was faltering during the World Cup, gain momentum and produce a less than a perfect performance, but still good enough to stun Australia in the quarterfinal, a doddering performance to stamp out Pakistan in the semifinal and come back strongly to reduce Sri Lankan grit to dust in the finals.

The night was incredibly perfect, as the calm, cool and collected captain MS Dhoni received the Man of the Match award and the flamboyant Yuvraj Singh the Man of the Series prize, but I could not help but feel sorry for the man of the moment Gautam Gambhir for not getting a share of the recognition with Dhoni. After all, his innings is what made the huge task look so surmountable in the first place.

And to think that like millions of fans, my quaking heart reduced me to a morose, depressed fan through the day. While my head insisted I overcome my sense of loss and prepare to sing paens to Sri Lanka, looking up each time to see Mahela Jayawardhane hit a four, reducing Indian bowling and fielding to naught. The heart triumphed and I decided to leave office to grieve in private, heart sinking to my knees, darkness enveloping me as Virender Sehwag and Sachin Tendulkar fell, even as Lasith Malinga rose to demonic proportions and I prepared for the inevitable.

When I reached home an hour later, Gambhir was still batting and all I could hope for was a decent loss, bracing myself for the crumbling middle-order, which we have all been witness to. Much later, he was still at the crease, raising his bat to acknowledge his fifty. While my heart recovered a little, the head kept saying `Don’t be silly, the target is still a long way off’.

But Gambhir’s 50 and the calm demeanour made my heart believe, maybe there is a miracle waiting to happen here and like a numb, defeated soldier I got up to pray my hardest in years, to beg God to give this incredible team a win. I believed throughout that it truly deserved it and I could possibly not be so wrong.

Though Team India was not performing to potential, it had still managed to tumble its way into the final, triumphing over Australia (when I thought team India was still finding its footing and it seemed too early to face Australia, after all an early knockout a very `real’ possibility) and quelling Pakistan’s rising strength in a thrilling semifinal. On the contray, Sri Lanka had an easy run up to the final, a no result thanks to rain against Australia, beating the West Indies in the quarter finals and then quelling New Zealand a team certainly not worthy of a semifinal place.

Gambhir’s steady and responsible partnership with Virat Kohli pumped my heart back to life, my voice rising in decibels as I cheered him, praying for them to keep going, as the target diminished at an agonizing slow pace of only a run or two off a ball. But what the heck, Gambhir and Kohli knew and the Indian fans knew that it was not a time to hit the big fours…not yet anyways.

And then Kohli fell, to a incredible return catch by Tillekeratne Dilshan and as I watched Dilshan pump himself, my distressed heart nose-dived again. With just 114 on board, the challenge seemed huge. But I am glad Gambhir did not think so and went on stoically. At this point it was a respite to see Mr. Calm himself walk in, instead of the not so bratty now Yuvraj, whose knocks would have lifted the innings but could have also plummeted hopes further.

A miracle still seemed a long way off, as millions of fans sympathised with the captain, as he tried hard to keep the sweat off his eyes, frequenting removing the helmet and adjusting, as he steeled himself to a long innings, which had evaded him through the entire run of the World Cup. I fell in love with the man twice, first when he lay sprawled on the ground, as his physio helped him stretch and release the pain and pressure, only to resume. The second time was when on the last ball, he focused on the ball, his bulging eyes not blinking once, as he hit a massive six to finish off the Sri Lankan challenge. While Yuvraj screamed, the captain simply tucked his bat under his left arm and looked to remove the stumps.

For a second, it seemed so unreal and I switched to victory mode, only when Yuvraj hugged Sachin like a kid and Harbhajan Singh’s tears rolled down, to be soon joined by mine, as an incredible World Cup season ended for me too. A month and a half of making sense of a World Cup, came to an end for me, which has been boring in most parts, only a few games worthy of a World Cup performance, most featuring team India .

With the final against Sri Lanka just two days away, the team itself may have quickly shifted its focus to calming its nerves and preparing for that massive game against Sri Lanka. But it appeared as if all India, unconcerned yet about the preparations for the final, was in a celebratory mood.

Each of us lost no time in picking our favourite freeze frames from the match. And those who had questioned skipper Mahendra Singh Dhoni’s wisdom in choosing left-arm paceman Ashish Nehra over spin bowler R Ashwin quickly overcome such thoughts and joined the bandwagon of praise for his assured captaincy.

There was one frame that etched itself on my mind and I have to thank Shahid Afridi and Zaheer Khan – and their smiles – for that. Afridi chipped Zaheer Khan to mid-wicket and the ball dropped just short of the fielder there and managed just a single. As Afridi complete the run, he must have exchanged notes with Zaheer and they both broke into a smile. It was a lovely sight.

Of course, there were as many such scenes during the game – be it Harbhajan Singh exulting after bowling Umar Akmal or Sachin Tendulkar after taking a catch to dismiss Wahab Riaz or Mahendra Singh Dhoni uncharacteristically rushing to congratulate Harbhajan Singh on his claiming a wicket or Munaf Patel being hugged by Suresh Raina and Virender Sehwag.

Come to think of it, we loved the amazing spirit with which the teams played the match. Despite the unprecedented hype and hoopla that preceded the game, there was not a hint of acrimony on the field that some expected in the high-voltage clash. This was highlighted when Ashish Nehra did not claim a catch after fling himself forward at deep mid-wicket.

Our hearts also reached out when Afridi showed grace at the post-match presentations and poignantly when he unhesitatingly said “I want to say sorry to the people of Pakistan.” He knew India was the superior team and he knew that his team had to do something out of the ordinary to beat India in Mohali – and the closest that it went to that was Wahab Riaz’s incisive bowling.

Quite inevitably, as sonn as the cricket ball found safety in Virat Kohli’s hands to signal the completion of the match, India erupted in joy. The ultra-rich and the poor were all bound by a common thread that delighfully spelt victory. A diverse nation was united by emotions like relief and satisfaction, delight and, above all, national pride.

Cell phones across the country were buzzing, with calls and text messages dominaing the air waves; News TV channels forgot how they had raised questions about this team’s ability when it tied with England and lost to South Africa and tirelessy talking through the night about India’s victory over Pakistan and its after-effects. FM stations joined the festivities, too.

Thursday’s newspapers were expectedly euphoric, with cricket and ‘cricket diplomacy’ taking up most of the frontpage space. “After this… the Cup’s a Bonus” said one headline, reflecting the thoughts of most fans. A dispassionate observer may be forgiven if he thought that India had already won the ICC Cricket World Cup 2011, except of course for some exceptional reminders.

Yet, I would like you to pause for a moment and think: Does it need only a victory on the field of sport for India to feel proud of itself? Should we not seek such success in many other walks of life? Should we depend on cricket alone – and less frequently, other sport – to raise the morale of our nation and our self-esteem? Should we invest all our emotions in cricket?

I remember speaking with a wonderful ad-man Piyush Pandey some weeks ago and he pointed out that we are not competing so visibly against anyone in other areas and hence cricket causes such mass sentiments. Our film stars are not up against their contemporaries from Hollywood.  And when composer AR Rahman wins an Oscar or two, we do break out in some celebrations.

To be sure, cricket has fuelled an aggression in India but we desperately need such success in other streams of life too.The sooner our nation finds them the better it will be for us as we ride the bullish emotion and get ready to take on the world. Until that happens, we have much to thank the Indian cricket team for.

To me, Wednesday night was not just about the emotional outpouring of a cricket-crazy nation. It was about this wonderful country’s eagerness to be bound as one; it is about its diverse peoples collective desire to encourage success. The question is: who or what else is ready to capture the imagination of vast majority of the 1.2 billion people and make their hearts swell with pride.

(This piece has been written for Hindi newspaper Prabhat Khabar)

More than the 341 runs that he has scored so far in the World Cup, it is the manner in which he has scored them that offers us insight into this calming journey. Of the six innings he has played, he has failed to cross the minor milestone of the half-century just once, falling for 12 in that game against South Africa in Nagpur.

Clearly, he has enjoyed being given responsibility and has responded brilliantly, the 11 wickets that he has claimed being of significant value to the home side. But all this would not have been possible had he not understood that the journey inwards to rediscover that cricket was the best form of expressing his unquenched passion for life.

One of the true tests of a sportsman’s character is how well he recovers from being in the dumps, it can be said without fear of contradiction – or the charge of being biased – that YuvrajSingh has redeemed himself and regained his place in the hearts of many fans who were quickly finding new heroes to idolise.

Of course, while he had to deal with the demons plaguing his career by himself, he needed some friendly support too. Some of it came from skipper Mahendra Singh Dhoni who believes Yuvraj Singh is a big match player and performs well in the big tournaments and in the highly-rated bilateral series.

And there has been much support from the man he called grandfather – Sachin Tendulkar. There is no doubt that Tendulkar thinks highly of Yuvraj Singh’s natural talent and makes it a point to share his wisdom.

Perhaps he would not have been driven to do the soul-searching had he not been dropped from the Asia Cup squad in June 2010. Come to think of it, Suresh Raina, Cheteshwar Punjara and perhaps even Virat Kohli nudged ahead of him in the Test match stakes, leaving the 29-year-old to wonder where he went wrong.

Was he paying the price for being dismissed by Muttiah Muralitharan twice in the Galle Test match in July last year? Or was he simply a victim of perception that he was lackadaisical in his approach to playing for India, neglecting his fitness and not being focussed on the preparation needed to compete?

Perhaps it was a bit of all this and more.

Yet, in January this year, when Yuvraj Singh made just one half-century in five one-day internationals in South Africa, some wondered why he was being persisted with and why he was picked to be a part of India’s World Cup campaign. To them, he was a spent force who was searching for the form that made watching him at the crease such an enjoyable pursuit.

Around that time, this writer picked Yuvraj Singh as the stand out performer for India at the World Cup. Read that piece here. It is a risk, in the best of times, picking one player from a squad that boasts of men like Sachin Tendulkar and Virender Sehwag, Gautam Gambhir and Suresh Raina, Dhoni and Yusuf Pathan, Zaheer Khan and Harbhajan Singh.

So what was it about Yuvraj Singh that made this writer stick his neck out at a time when he was still some way from cementing his place in the team. Simply stated, it was his ability to hold the middle-order together or provide the thrust at the finish. He may have slowed down a bit on the field after he suffered a knee injury some years ago but he can still deliver 10 economical overs of his own, thus giving Dhoni the luxury of going into a game with just four specialist bowlers.

“Of course, I am a great fan of Yuvraj Singh as he bats at No. 4. He can change the way he needs to bat according to the demand. And his bowling comes as a big asset, especially since we play with four bowlers and he does the job of the fifth bowler,” Dhoni said about the lynchpin when talking to the media before the team’s league game against the Netherlands in Delhi.

Indeed, his return to the collective consciousness of the nation’s cricket fans has not been easy but it has been worthwhile for Yuvraj Singh himself. Indeed, it is good to see him score runs, get wickets and put that extra effort in the fielding department also. But above all, it is great to see him enjoy his cricket all over again.

The  Hindi version of this  piece  first appeared in a leading  newspaper, Prabhat Khabar

For instance, Mahendra Dhoni’s captaincy – be it his decision (in conjuction with fellow selectors) to retain Suresh Raina in the XI ahead of Yusuf Pathan, consequent to Virender Sehwag’s return or the bowling changes that he rung in – was top notch. The team’s fielding – so often criticised – was rung above the usual.

Zaheer Khan’s response to his captain’s call for wickets or R Ashwin’s nerveless bowling in Powerplay, Sachin Tendulkar’s intensity at the start of the run-chase, Gautam Gambhir’s sheer will power to contribute to the team’s cause despite obvious sluggishness and Raina’s maturity during his match-winning stand with Yuvraj Singh are all more cases in point.

Yet, no team can be satisfied with the old philosophy that said ‘You are as good as your last performance.’ That has to be tweaked to the present times when a team is only as good as its preparation and its current performance.

Yes, it is time to move on – not just for the Indian team as it travels to Mohali but also for fans and critics. The nature of competition in the knockout stage is such that it severely punishes teams every time for playing below par. And the converse is not always true: sides are not often rewarded for raising the bar.

The biggest challenge for the Indian team, therefore, as it prepares to take on Pakistan in its next high-voltage game is to take its collective mind off that amazing effort against Australia and move on. If the squad lingers for long in the afterglow of a fine victory in Motera, its preparations for Mohali can be affected.

I remember how, in 1996, three days after an emotionally-charged game against Pakistan in Bangalore, India capitulated in the semifinal to Sri Lanka at the Eden Gardens in Calcutta. A lot of reasons have been attributed to that loss but I have always suspected that the team was not able to recoup its emotional energy quickly enough.

Yet, I also recall how in the span of three days India beat Australia 2-0 in the best-of-three finals of the Commonwealth Bank Series in 2008. It tells me that the modern Indian teams have evolved and can handle the task of recharging the emotional batteries quite well.

I spoke of how India should have played leg-spinner Piyush Chawla in that game, especially after the team had given him match practice and the opportunity to gain confidence by playing him in the earlier match against the Netherlands. I also spoke of how Yusuf Pathan should be held back for the conventional slog overs rather than be used in Batting Powerplay.

It was hard to ignore Sachin Tendulkar’s hundred but tougher to ignore Dale Steyn’s role in not just picking up five wickets but also in boosting the team’s confidence, going into the innings break and at the start of the chase. I also picked AB de Villiers’ half century as the most critical in terms of South Africa’s push for victory.

Former India wicket-keeper Surinder Khanna was the other guest on the show that was hosted by my colleague Tina Sharma Tiwari.

You have to download a flash player to be able to listen to this track. DD_Sports_12March