Haven't been able to write much lately. Work-Life(what's that)-imbalance actually. There have been so many things on my mind.
Work-Mind Numbing
Pressure-It literally makes my back crackle
Home-Err, where is it?
Books-See them once in a while. New genre on the block
TV-Cricket, Sad-Ass realty shows
Internet-Less of FB, More of Databases, research support
Clothes-Washed vs. unwashed
Food-Bad, Spicey, Overcooked, Tasty, Fattening
Friends-Angered, distant, drifting, close, missed, nostalgic, practical
Words-So few to suffice what is the state of my mind
State of mind-No words to explain that
Movies-Any and every, mostly shit
Poetry-Read a few, wrote none
Truth-Still believe in it
God-umm... For later maybe
Religion-None
Wishlist-Huge, unaffordable, and sometimes, over-ambitious
Dream-To wake up
Things-Rose coloured spectacle
Issues-Many, from traffic to future tense
Finances-Gone with the wind
Axis-Numbness
Music-Transit radio, random songs, caller tunes
Clients-Idiots
This post-Irrelevant, unnecessary
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Indian Premier League and the Grand Analogy
Have been pretty inactive on the blogging front lately. Sheer lack of time and laziness I must say. This is just another tiny, lazy attempt to write something about which I have got to thinking lately.
Cricket. It's not the first time I have thought about writing about this sport. Honestly, on a scale of to 1 to 10, my cricket abilities and knowledge is very close to 2, or at best 3. But I am an enthusiast nevertheless, and well, India is democratic country (last time I checked), so I can write, comment, criticize all that I want to.
It must feel weird to be English. It's like you invent something, form it, nurture it, develop it, gift it to the world, and then, you suck at it. Such is the state of English cricket and football most days. (Note: England just won the T20 World Cup, so some might not agree to the statement here, but nevertheless, T20 is hardly cricket, and England is hardly all that talented, and we all know it)
Every time I see the coveted Indian Premier League, and the abysmal amount of sixes and 200+ scores being generated on the batter's heaven grounds, I get a feeling that, whoa, this is the way cricket should be. The more the adrenaline, the better. I also feel the overall bowling standards also will improve this way, because competition always brings out the best, and this principle of modern economics works (almost) everywhere.
So here comes the analogy. For the past two years, the IPL champion teams have been contesting the Champions League T20. The top 3 of the biggest cricket league ever (i.e. The IPL) haven't been able to scratch much in the larger, much macro version of T20. These teams broadly fail to convince us that they were the same lot who zapped the score boards a few months back. This phenomenon reminded me of the English Premier League. (Now before you smart the wise-arse comment about the IPL being based on the EPL, please read on) I have seen Indian cricketers and teams perform at humungous levels in the IPL and then cutting a sorry figure at the champions trophy and the International T20s when the represent their clubs or countries at a higher level of fair competition. I can't but draw a comparison to the club players like Rooney, Ronaldo, Lampard, Torres who perform like they have no compare in present day football. They triumph the English Premier League.
So what is it that makes Rooney in Man Utd. a different person than Rooney in the England? Or for that sake any of the above players? I don't intend to criticize any of these players, Man Utd. being my favourite FC, I picked them up as an example. A similar inroad can be carved about cricket. Players like Manish Pandey, Ambati Rayudu, Robin Utthappa who mesmerized the crowds in the IPL, failed to do so on the international avenue. I am sure they are full of talent, but there has to be a catch why these players have fumbled on more than one occasions.
England football team, and English Premier league hence can be compared to the Indian cricket team and the Indian Premier league. The otherwise star studded team of England (based on the EPL performance) couldn't manage to make it big in the Football world cup and the absolutely unbeatable Indian Side (based, again, on the IPL performance) collapsed like they would give shame to a pack of cards easily.
A lame analogy many would say, but an analogy nevertheless. I fail to understand why, and how the most talented of a certain tournament fail to even register as 'watch out' players in another of the same format.
For now, I'll just wish that in another format, namely the forgotten One-Dayers, the Men in Blue make the mark and bring home the long awaited glory. As for the analogous English Football team, honestly, I don't give as much a damn.
Afterall, Cricket is what this post is about, and Football is just the analogy!
Cricket. It's not the first time I have thought about writing about this sport. Honestly, on a scale of to 1 to 10, my cricket abilities and knowledge is very close to 2, or at best 3. But I am an enthusiast nevertheless, and well, India is democratic country (last time I checked), so I can write, comment, criticize all that I want to.
It must feel weird to be English. It's like you invent something, form it, nurture it, develop it, gift it to the world, and then, you suck at it. Such is the state of English cricket and football most days. (Note: England just won the T20 World Cup, so some might not agree to the statement here, but nevertheless, T20 is hardly cricket, and England is hardly all that talented, and we all know it)
Every time I see the coveted Indian Premier League, and the abysmal amount of sixes and 200+ scores being generated on the batter's heaven grounds, I get a feeling that, whoa, this is the way cricket should be. The more the adrenaline, the better. I also feel the overall bowling standards also will improve this way, because competition always brings out the best, and this principle of modern economics works (almost) everywhere.
So here comes the analogy. For the past two years, the IPL champion teams have been contesting the Champions League T20. The top 3 of the biggest cricket league ever (i.e. The IPL) haven't been able to scratch much in the larger, much macro version of T20. These teams broadly fail to convince us that they were the same lot who zapped the score boards a few months back. This phenomenon reminded me of the English Premier League. (Now before you smart the wise-arse comment about the IPL being based on the EPL, please read on) I have seen Indian cricketers and teams perform at humungous levels in the IPL and then cutting a sorry figure at the champions trophy and the International T20s when the represent their clubs or countries at a higher level of fair competition. I can't but draw a comparison to the club players like Rooney, Ronaldo, Lampard, Torres who perform like they have no compare in present day football. They triumph the English Premier League.
So what is it that makes Rooney in Man Utd. a different person than Rooney in the England? Or for that sake any of the above players? I don't intend to criticize any of these players, Man Utd. being my favourite FC, I picked them up as an example. A similar inroad can be carved about cricket. Players like Manish Pandey, Ambati Rayudu, Robin Utthappa who mesmerized the crowds in the IPL, failed to do so on the international avenue. I am sure they are full of talent, but there has to be a catch why these players have fumbled on more than one occasions.
England football team, and English Premier league hence can be compared to the Indian cricket team and the Indian Premier league. The otherwise star studded team of England (based on the EPL performance) couldn't manage to make it big in the Football world cup and the absolutely unbeatable Indian Side (based, again, on the IPL performance) collapsed like they would give shame to a pack of cards easily.
A lame analogy many would say, but an analogy nevertheless. I fail to understand why, and how the most talented of a certain tournament fail to even register as 'watch out' players in another of the same format.
For now, I'll just wish that in another format, namely the forgotten One-Dayers, the Men in Blue make the mark and bring home the long awaited glory. As for the analogous English Football team, honestly, I don't give as much a damn.
Afterall, Cricket is what this post is about, and Football is just the analogy!
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Recurrences
I have a feeling, there is someone around,I look to be sure, and there's noone to be found, It's funny to be, so very spell bound, Trust me I am sane, crazy I might sound.
Technology can do, strange things to you, It really is just, my point of view, You're closer to people, in your life who are new, Still those who were dear, are just a few.
Being pragmatic, I know its just a passing whim, I know I sound, even to myself, little dim, So what, can't I fall prey to the same, ol' adversary, Why do I believe, everything in life is contrary?
No sermon delivered, no brain cells beleaguered, I have come to believe, my value system's disfigured, I think I need to change, have my faith transfigured, Lets see, they say, Time can get, everyone delivered!
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Lyf'z Lyk Dat..
I do read a lot. In fact, a better and more truthful way to put it is I used to read a lot. Lately, have had really less time to read on much. Work life can actually suffocate a lot of your leisure activities. During my reading days, I would gobble up anything with interesting written on it. I read novels, periodicals, blogs, encyclopedias and what not. Of everything I read though, I miss reading the comic strips the most.
Talking about comics, I would like to stress on three specific ones, namely Calvin, Garfield, and Dilbert. There is a strong reason why I (and possibly you if you are like me in any strange way) feel an association with these three in particular. Let's view them:
Calvin: My Gosh what a vocabulary this kid has. And what imagination. As a kid, while reading Calvin and Hobbes, it took me pretty long to realize that Hobbes was actually an imaginary friend of Calvin. What catches my attention the most is the ease at which our friend Calvin correlates small things in his life with the imaginary life he has. Very conveniently, he converts his classrooms to space stations and his backyard to an unknown terrain of an alien planet.
It strikes me that as a kid, I had a supreme sense of imagination, which I probably lost in the process of growing up. Hats off to Bill Waterson's work and his decision to never let Calvin grow. I don't want him to lose his streak.
Garfield: I remember a signature quote from Garfield. "I can, but I won't". This more or less sums up what Garfield stands for. He is like the valiant warrior representing what we all long to do. Garfield represents the part of us which while coming back from a rafting expedition full of thrill would be considering the same time that could have been spent lazing around in a bean bag doing nothing. Garfield represents a theology of being, and just being without doing much, lazy not because you can't move but because it's against your value system to take too much of an effort.
Garfield's relationship with Jon would represent what most pets would feel for their owners. I mean come on, which pet would ever like to be made to walk so much in the morning or just sit around and chase mice all day. Garfield is the revolt. The vision to break free of the stereotypical pet image. He's the one who runs the show at home, not his boss (oops, did I just write boss here). The ultimate thing about Garfield is his sense of Superiority over all other forms of existence. Jim Davis, I believe, has understood cats better than any animal psychiatrist ever.
Dilbert:Statistics say that Dilbert is on the softboards of 12.3% of all employees in the world. Whoa! I think the rest of them either haven't read about Dilbert or lack a basic sense of understanding (or say sense of humour). Scott Adams has penned down what each and every subordinate feels about his organization and in particular about the (two-horned) boss. What I fail to understand is how Dilbert has been through nearly all situation a normal employee has been through.
Dilbert is not a name or a word. It's a voice that reverberates in the corporate world today. It's a million employees who want to say, "Ok.. I've had enough from you, you slimy, fatso, two-horned monster. I give two hoots to your POAs and I couldn't care less about how you feel that my Reporting formats and Timesheets aren't adequate. I DON'T GIVE A DAMN", but eventually end up saying, "Alright boss, no problem." Dilbert represents the frame of mind between doing the right thing and saying the right thing. Dilbert is just awesome.
Talking about comics, I would like to stress on three specific ones, namely Calvin, Garfield, and Dilbert. There is a strong reason why I (and possibly you if you are like me in any strange way) feel an association with these three in particular. Let's view them:
Calvin: My Gosh what a vocabulary this kid has. And what imagination. As a kid, while reading Calvin and Hobbes, it took me pretty long to realize that Hobbes was actually an imaginary friend of Calvin. What catches my attention the most is the ease at which our friend Calvin correlates small things in his life with the imaginary life he has. Very conveniently, he converts his classrooms to space stations and his backyard to an unknown terrain of an alien planet.
It strikes me that as a kid, I had a supreme sense of imagination, which I probably lost in the process of growing up. Hats off to Bill Waterson's work and his decision to never let Calvin grow. I don't want him to lose his streak.
Garfield: I remember a signature quote from Garfield. "I can, but I won't". This more or less sums up what Garfield stands for. He is like the valiant warrior representing what we all long to do. Garfield represents the part of us which while coming back from a rafting expedition full of thrill would be considering the same time that could have been spent lazing around in a bean bag doing nothing. Garfield represents a theology of being, and just being without doing much, lazy not because you can't move but because it's against your value system to take too much of an effort.
Garfield's relationship with Jon would represent what most pets would feel for their owners. I mean come on, which pet would ever like to be made to walk so much in the morning or just sit around and chase mice all day. Garfield is the revolt. The vision to break free of the stereotypical pet image. He's the one who runs the show at home, not his boss (oops, did I just write boss here). The ultimate thing about Garfield is his sense of Superiority over all other forms of existence. Jim Davis, I believe, has understood cats better than any animal psychiatrist ever.
Dilbert:Statistics say that Dilbert is on the softboards of 12.3% of all employees in the world. Whoa! I think the rest of them either haven't read about Dilbert or lack a basic sense of understanding (or say sense of humour). Scott Adams has penned down what each and every subordinate feels about his organization and in particular about the (two-horned) boss. What I fail to understand is how Dilbert has been through nearly all situation a normal employee has been through.
Dilbert is not a name or a word. It's a voice that reverberates in the corporate world today. It's a million employees who want to say, "Ok.. I've had enough from you, you slimy, fatso, two-horned monster. I give two hoots to your POAs and I couldn't care less about how you feel that my Reporting formats and Timesheets aren't adequate. I DON'T GIVE A DAMN", but eventually end up saying, "Alright boss, no problem." Dilbert represents the frame of mind between doing the right thing and saying the right thing. Dilbert is just awesome.
***
Phew! Too much I've said I guess.
Disclaimer: The post above has got no correlation with my life or my work life and any of the characters above don't represent any of the situations that have occurred or keep occurring in my life. They are totally work of a creative mind's indulgences.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)