The cricket world is an elaborate farce!

I'm convinced, more than even before, that the world of cricket is completely stage-managed. This ICC World Cup of 2011 has been a revelation!

Did you see the match between India and England which ended in a tie despite each team scoring 330 odd runs? Both teams could manage so many runs but fell short by one! And the match between England and Ireland, which also had about the same number of runs, and Ireland chased despite England being the Ashes-winning team they are! 

Both these matches were characterised by sudden and surprising turns, with bursts of high scoring, followed by fall of wickets, all resulting in uncertainty, all the time. This helps in making the game more interesting, resulting in more viewership, more kicks for the same money for the sponsors!

The India-England match, I understand, had the highest ever viewership as per statistics. And I presume that the tie would be because some influential quarters demanded a tie! 

The recent expose of Pakistani players being involved in spot fixing, earlier scams involving Indian players, the Cronje episode were only specific instances that had to be revealed, probably since the evidence was so out in the open and could not be concealed. And some could claim that they've acted on cleaning the game up. And result in more inclusion! I'm saying there is a more elaborate stage management at work here.

Why did Ireland win against England now? And why did Bangladesh shock India in the last World Cup? That is because we have to have more inclusion in the game, more teams have to emerge, more audiences have to be tapped; we have to plan for the future!

I have a theory that the World Cup has to have India in the finals to make economic sense. Else, who will buy the tickets and who will watch the ads during the breaks? And Sachin has to help India win a World Cup before he retires! So it helps if we can facilitate all of this.

I'm not asking for the game to be shut down, and the guilty to be punished. Thats been the traditional approach! Why should we be worried that there is no game left in cricket. We're disturbed only if we view this as a degradation of the game, a loss of purity. But this is no longer a game, but an enterprise.

And if so many are benefitted because of this enterprise, generating employment and work, why shut it down? As long as someone, somewhere is earning something, it's good. We are a free nation!

The only worry is that the common people should not waste their time on this, and while away their lives, earning nothing but excitement. But this is true for so many other such things, like reality shows and entertainment programs. Audiences have to go through this farce and emerge more mature. They have to recognise what they are investing in terms of mind and time in such pursuits, and see if it's all worth it!  

Whose business is it anyway!

Atlas Shrugged, the movie

I'm delighted to hear that Atlas Shrugged is being made into a movie. I would like to find out how they adapt such an intense story and elaborate description into a movie. I just hope they get the idea of the story well. The description will, though, continue to be something to read. A trilogy is planned and the first part is releasing on April 15, 2011. I plan to read up Atlas Shrugged before that once again.

Meanwhile, this is John Galt quoted from the novel 

'The man at the top of the intellectual pyramid contributes the most to all those below him, but gets nothing except his material payment, receiving no intellectual bonus from others to add to the value of his time. The man at the bottom who, left to himself, would starve in his hopeless ineptitude, contributes nothing to those above him, but receives the bonus of all their brains. Such is the nature of the competition between the strong and the weak of the intellect. Such is the pattern of 'exploitation' for which you have damned the strong.'

You're on camera!

CCTV cameras are all around. They've installed about 12 of them in and around my office. And the security guard and the administration manager can watch what's happening around the office and in some select areas in the office. I must say our office is a reasonably closed space with not much scope for break-ins. And above all, there seems to be no real motive to break-in. I've always thought that the CCTV cameras are a waste of money and time. What can you detect or find on such camera output?

The total amount of data or footage generated by all the cameras put together cannot be fathomed by all the security guards, assuming that's the only thing they do. They simply don't have the capacity or bandwidth to review all of it. And to tell you the truth, its pretty boring and uninteresting to watch the footage beyond the first few minutes, leave alone a whole day. Most of the time, nothing happens. But it is the job of the security guards to review it, all the time; well, at least most of the time. And it has to be real-time!

BriefCam, an Israeli company, has come up with this brand new idea in CCTV cameras. It works by separating the times when there is movement and times when there is no movement at all. And it senses those times when there is no movement, and excludes such footage. It uses motion detection algorithm and separates the static background, creates a fixed database and focusses only on the moving images. These moving images are summarised and bunched together for the security and surveillance staff to review as and when convenient.

The process still requires the surveillance staff to go throught the footage manually. But it gives them the option of making better use of the time by editing out the non-moving boring footage. Now that's something! Its amazing how people come up with such small improvements to ease life.

Phase out the senior journalists

The Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, interacted with senior journalists of the media a couple of days back. He handled the media well, considering the amount of pressure he was in. He could not convince his critics, but he stood his ground and managed unscathed, largely, and his performance was especially laudable, considering he is an accidental politician.

In this media interaction, it was interesting to watch the media, rather than the PM. Prannoy Roy, Rajdeep Sardesai, Arnab Goswami were at their stupid best. Prannoy Roy went on talking for 5 minutes, without coming to the point. He spoke about how the first year post elections is a honeymoon period, and how you generally could pass policy decisions without much difficulty, how for Singh this was difficult, and that he would face elections in 3 years, and he forgot his question. He ended with a tame question, that was would he be the candidate in the next elections. How incisive was that?

Singh replied saying it was too premature to comment. Another senior media journalist asked whether Singh would like to see India lift the cricket world cup. What did she expect Singh to say - no? OK, they were bad! But what's the point I'm making.

When journalists reach a certain saturation point, they must be phased out. Just as everything in the world goes through a life-cycle, so does the journalist. And considering that the journalist is a much-watched and followed personality, the saturation is reached even earlier and is much more stark. 

Because, once they reach a certain level of exposure, they stop being dispassionate about and distant from the issue, and they start taking a position. When they meet someone who doesn't agree with that position, they react in a belligerent manner. They hide this media blunder by saying that they provide us opinion and not just the news.

I can surely say that the Indian people are knowledgeable and intelligent enough to form their own opinion. They need only the news, experts' views and not the media analysis, most certainly not of these jaded journalists. So most senior journalists need to take vanvaas, and allow for some dispassionate and unbiased journalism.

How can we shake up this system? Or can't we?

The Day The Music Died!

On February 3, 1959, a small-plane crash near Clear Lake, Iowa, killed three American rock and roll musicians: Buddy Holly, Ritchie Valens, and J. P. "The Big Bopper" Richardson, as well as the pilot, Roger Peterson. The day was later called The Day the Music Died by Don McLean, in his song "American Pie".

When asked what "American Pie" meant, McLean replied, "It means I never have to work again." Later, he more seriously stated, "You will find many interpretations of my lyrics but none of them by me... sorry to leave you all on your own like this but long ago I realized that songwriters should make their statements and move on, maintaining a dignified silence." How profound!

Australian Open serves it up hot!

The Australian Open has been very interesting and eventful this year. The men's final is about to start. The men's tournament has been characterised by stun defeats, with a large margin. Look at the way Federer defeated his friend, Djokovich defeated Federer, Ferrer defeated Nadal, and Murray defeated Nadal, all in a very convincing manner. That makes the margin of defeat cumulatively very large. The winner would actually, theoritically, be way ahead of the others.

There is an emergence of a new breed of good players, so we're able to move away from the Federer-Nadal fixation. Federer and Nadal have both had their best chance this time in the Australian Open. Nadal could've won the fantastic four and Federer could've added to his tally. I don't think both of them would have a chance later. I think their time is about over.

Meanwhile in the women's segment, the final was the highlight. Kim Clijsters prevailed over Li Na, but only after a real contest. The match was more about who would hold on to their serve, rather than who would break the other's serve. It made me think whether, for women especially, the serve is actually a disadvantage. Their return of serve was much better than the serve itself.

There are two reasons for this, as I see it. The serve cannot be done with two hands, whereas the backhand return, why even the forehand return, Nadal would confirm, can be done with two hands. Thats more power and precision at your disposal. The second reason is that the serve is done from high above, and with lesser power of the women, actually goes slower than other shots.

A thought. If the rules permit, why can't the women serve like they play shots. Have to read up the rules of tennis to find out if that is feasible.

The Genius in the gene

As I return back home from office, I listen to Tamil songs on my Sony mp3 player. Its been a while I've listened to my selected list of songs, accumulated over a period of time. There are many songs of AR Rahman and Harris Jeyaraj, and this thought crosses my mind. Harris Jeyaraj, at times, is better than Rahman, especially in the clarity of the lyrics in his songs. Listen to Nenjukkul Peidhidum, Kumari, Andangkaakka and you'll know what I'm saying. And he is good with the instruments and the arrangement. What else can you ask for?

Compared to that, Rahman doesn't focus too much on how clear the lyrics are in the song. He's too busy with experimenting with the music that he ignores the lyrics. After all the music is what is important. And I was reminded of the movie 'Music and Lyrics' in which Drew Barrymore says that the music is important at the start, but for the song to be truly good, the lyrics are also important. I agree with that. And with the lean patch that Rahman is going through, I almost conclude that Rahman is no longer what he used to be.

But then I listen to his songs on the playlist and find that Rahman is not just a good music director. He is a genius who believes in experimenting. Listen to Newyork Nagaram and you'll know the amount of gamakkam he has brought into the song. And not the traditional sort.

I paused to find the meaning of the word genius. And where else to find it except Wikipedia. Genius is ability, creativity and originality that is associated with achievement of unprecented insight. And I realise that only Rahman fits the bill completely.

And I remember the biography presentation I had prepared a few months back about Rahman. I had said then that whatever the state of my mind were, my mood was, I could find a song here and there in Rahman's discography that could put me further into it or pull me right out of it. In some ways, without really defining in words, Rahman's music was like therapy for me. Genius, for me, is being able to touch someone ordinary in a profound manner.

I'm not saying Harris Jeyaraj is bad. I remember how I answered a question during my presentation when someone made a comment that Ilayaraja was better. I said 'A lion is a lion and a tiger is a tiger'. There is no comparison. Having said that let me reiterate 'Rahman is a genius'

Pricing for stags and couples

I was wondering how party entry tickets are priced for stags and couples, and what should drive them. For the new year party we went to, couples were charged Rs. 6500 and stags were charged Rs. 5500. I was thinking why. The most apparent reason is not driven by any logic or formula, but from the fact that more stags are out to get into a party than couples. So why not price it high for them, and thus earn more. But is that the only reason. I'm thinking.

Is it associated with the requirement of bouncers to oversee the party if more stags are around? Thats based on the presumption that stags come to a party to be noticed and looked at by the girls in the couple. So they would require supervision and thus the increased charge to cover costs. But do parties really increase the security and bouncers when there are more stags. No they don't. Their setup remains just the same.

Is it to encourage couples to come, even the stags to find someone to come along with, thus maintaining the sex ratio. That way the club looks good, and we're promoting balance. But can that not be achieved by only saying that stags are not allowed. That will force the stags to find someone to tag along. I don't think club owners have so much to think about.

I didn't need to think too much on this though. I thought why I had asked the owner whether there would be too many stags in the party. It was because I would feel more comfortable with other couples around. Because the males in the couples will be more comfortable without the competition. Thats the reason. The club will not attract too many couples if stags are in the majority.

Many a time, the answers are right in front of you. You just have to see.

Get on with life

I ended 2010 by doing what I hate the most, something I’d give my life not to do! And I began 2011 by doing exactly the same thing. We were at a disco and I was dancing away amid the lights and the sound. And I lost myself in the crowd, not really bothered what the world thinks of me, not conscious of whether they’d think I was being crazy. It all changed less than a couple of months ago, when I got drunk at a friend’s birthday party, and danced away, realising that I did it better than most others who don’t hesitate doing it. And I did it again today, and it was to become a habit.

My leadership guide always tells me to do something that you wouldn’t normally do; that helps in stoking your creativity, she says. I once said I’m not good at picking up languages and that I didn’t have a flair for languages, and she insisted I learn French. I still haven’t tried it, nor have I succeeded in anything like this, but that’s not the point, she says. It only matters how your attempt changes you. And the last thing you should be bothered about is how the world views you. It doesn’t matter, not to anybody of consequence. So here I go... to live the moment... and get on with life.

Commonplace philosophy

Sometimes you can find philosophy at the most unlikely of places. I heard it from a taxi driver recently. I was on the way to the airport on Sunday afternoon and struck a conversation with a Meru Cab driver.

He questioned the extra police bandobast near our area and I mentioned to him that recently a wall of a place of worship had fallen and that members of the community had expressed their anger by assaulting whoever they could place blame on, even if those unfortunate souls had no clue of what hit them and why, just like so many of our countrymen who don't know what they're fighting for.

This was in the backdrop of the impending judgment in the Ayodhya title suit.

He gave his philosophy of how God resides in every person and not in mandirs or masjids. We've heard of this before. He added a new aspect to this explanation which I've not had occasion to ponder over, and hence refrain from agreeing or disagreeing.

He said that before a person is born, he/she has darshan of God every day, and he requests God to release him out of this bondage, not knowing what awaits him in this world, with the promise that he/she would pray and salute the Lord everyday for the rest of his/her life. God has subjected the person to a tapasya which he has to break in order to take birth and experience the world. But once a child is born it forgets this promise, and gets entangled in worldly prejudices. Our true purpose is to find our promise and the earlier we find it, the better.

We could argue about this forever, as to whether what he said was right or wrong, but we shouldn't miss the point. Philosophy is found in the most unlikely of places, and has nothing to do with what strata of society one belongs to or which school one attended.

He also added later that our humilty and politeness define us as human beings. For this he told of a time when he had cancelled a booking of a person who addressed him disrespecfully. It was good to hear a person who was so sure of himself and knew exactly what he is! I have a recording of what he said, which I'd preserve. I can say its no less than what modern-day babas rant about!