Sorry Mr. Ted, it is very pathetic

I have been tracking Ted Corbett's articles written in 'The Hindu' for a while and I have not seen anyone write in such a biased manner towards any country. Each article was more biased in favour of England than the previous one. In fact many times, I have lost interest half-way through and stopped reading it completely.

I was very happy last night as South Africa won with ridiculous ease at Headingley and was very eager to read Ted's excuses and gloatings. But, what I read this morning was too shocking for me to not write about it.



If you didn't know the result and you started reading the match report, you'd think that England managed to do what South Africa did at Lord's - bat out of their skins for a draw. Over the years that I have followed cricket, I have read so many articles and heard commentary where the bias is pretty obvious. But Ted Corbett has blown away the competition with this piece when he talks highly about Broad and the pyrrhic 61-run tenth wicket partnership which is not even the best for England at home.

In fact, I was half expecting him to point out gleefully that South Africa took 7 balls to win, rather than getting the 9 runs in 2 balls.

All this, after South Africa have just managed to claw back to a draw in the Lord's Test, thanks to a splendid display with the bat and then adding insult to England's injuries by wrapping up the Leeds test in four days.

It should be very interesting to continue reading more such excuses from England.

Labels: bias, comments, england, south africa, ted corbett

Thus spake Ganesh @ 3:25 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

South Africa beats Scotland

SA beats Scotland in a match that was another convincing victory.

Probably not more so than the one against the Netherlands. But maybe not... they were after all batting at 8.05 runs per over. That is a lot.

In fact, someone at lunch the other day said... you don't need bowlers if your batsmen are good enough. And in ODI's that is true. Again SA didn't take 10 wickets. Again there wasn't a spinner that could baffle the opponents. Again the all pace attack was predictable. But if you can bat at 8.05 runs per over for 23 overs consecutively then I guess your bowlers are doing a good job if they are not going at more than 6.00 an over.

Australia will be SA's real first game, and it will be a measure on how exactly they stand. Between those two teams, they are probably favourites and second favourites. With Sri Lanka and New Zealand probably being the 3rd and 4th places.

I am biased, but if I try to be unbiased, I still think SA is the top team there. And people who disagree are biased towards whatever team they think are the top team.

Labels: 2007 world cup, batting, bias, scotland, south africa, world cup

Thus spake Reenen @ 12:26 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Reality TV and cricket

Simon Hughes writes in 'The Daily Telegraph' about a reality TV-cum-talent hunt show in India called Cricket Star, the prize being a contract with Leicestershire CCC. The judges include Kapil Dev, Sanjay Manjrekar and Ajay Jadeja.

The eviction, involving Manjrekar stepping forward to remove the Cricket Star badge from the doomed player's breast pocket, before he is cast out through the studio door, may sound brutal but it does make great TV.

Simon Hughes also alludes to voting on religious lines.

The first eviction episode threw up another dynamic in Indian cricket – racial bias. It has often been alleged that players of a minority religion have trouble getting recognition in certain states. The left arm quick bowler Zaheer Khan, for instance, a Muslim, initially couldn't get a game for Hindu-orientated Maharashtra. In the studio, two players were up for eviction – Agha Ali Hasan, a Muslim from Hyderabad and Ranjan Singh, a Sikh from Lucknow. They had all got on famously for the two weeks they'd been together. But as his team-mates filed down the Parkinson-style stairs one by one with the name of their nomination written on a card, a strange thing happened.

The first four were all Muslim: they voted to evict the Sikh. Then came three Sikhs and a Hindu. They voted against the Muslim. It was 4-4. The captain, Mohammed Abbas, had the casting vote. Sensitive to the situation and in an impossible position, he closed his eyes and selected one of the two cards at random. The name he picked was the Sikh.

Labels: bias, racism, reality tv, religion

Thus spake Jagadish @ 2:25 pm | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]