Restrictions on speaking with the media

I was seeing a one hour cricket programme on NDTV called ‘cricket controversies’. Apparently the Indian team has decided not to speak with the media for the time being to avoid controversies. A sort of media ban. Only Chappell, Dravid and the media manager will speak.

Sidhu was vociferous in defending it. That he said the Indian players are not articulate enough as a point to defend his stance was hilarious. But coming back to the point.

If players do not speak with the media how do they defend comments which may slur their reputation. Like Hayden felt during the Ashes and reacted so strongly. Specially in a scenario of former players – some of the team mates of the current lot having a say at almost every thing.

Also, why should some players be denied of monetary benefits of writing columns etc in the media for the talk of specific players in the team.

Should Bangladesh be allowed to play test cricket

The allowing of limited overs international status for more teams is the way to go. This means more matches between comparable stature teams and less of tri nation series involving two top nations and a Banladesh or a Zimbabwe. It also means financial rewards for the teams which the ICC has specified. This more than any thing is the biggest plus point.

But test cricket is a different ball game. In an excellent article in the August issue of Wisden Asia Cricket on why Bangladesh should not be allowed to play test cricket, Ramachandra Guha – one of the best modern Indian writers, conveys with conviction my firm beliefs.

26 out of 26 test defeats if tests versus a depleted Zimbabwe and West Indies are excluded. Many of them innings defeats. As Guha goes through the emergence of star players, results of other teams like New Zealand, Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka, the situation was never so pathetic. And Kenya should have got the status before Bangladesh if based purely on results. Known points all of these and many others but after the one off vctory versus Australia, people have taken it as justification of the test status.

Guha recommends an 8 team structure – top 7 plus one from the second tire promoted every three years; the last of the 8 after 3 relegated. I recommend the last of the 8 and the top of the second tire play a test or a three test series or 2 tests in each country or any such play off to decide the 8th team or a way to include a new test team.

A common argument is how will the second tire improve. The depression and negativity which sets in with constant losses is definitely not the answer. Play versus A teams of the top countries, play in the domestic tournaments like Kenya did a few years back. The improvement will gradually come.