Feeling Inspired by Cinema :)

So, 3 idiots has almost rocked the nation. People have responded (or moved) by the concept, the humor, the performance, the music, and of course the message. What the movie says is obvious but it is the presentation that makes it a perfect toast. We are touched; we feel like appreciating the actors, the director and producers, the script writers, and in fact the whole unit. We feel connected with the subject. Some movies catch the pulse, and so does ‘Aaall izz Wellll’. Even if some of us are not ‘moved’, we feel as entertained well.

Cinema is a medium for such film makers to ‘say something’. In Rang De Basanti, R. Mehra did not just want to make a movie, he wanted to say something. In Heroes, the objective was to convey a message; cinema is again only a medium. (Unfortunately though, it is not true for many film makers.) Even when we feel entertained and get value-for-money after watching a movie, it is only a by-product of watching the movie. Most often, we are moved somewhere, in some sense. Same is true of writers or painters. Did Chetan Bhagat write ‘Five Point Someone’ only because he wanted to be writer? No. He wrote it because he wanted to say something.

Even the most extrovert and outspoken person has something to say ‘differently’, to a ‘specific’ audience’ at a ‘specific’ time. Think why we are hooked to social media (FaceBook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Blogs)? Staying connected is secondary objective. The primary objective is to ‘say something’. This is true for even a 12 year old child who is enjoying schooling and has all the privileges of a happy childhood. And a 28 year old male who lost his first love in plane crash. And for a 38 years old happy and rising entrepreneur. Or for a 55 year old bed-ridden cancer patient. Words, canvas, pictures or screen give such an opportunity. Think about it. Pick the pen, camera or brush and say something.

I like most of the movies that I watch, may be that I feel connected with most of their subjects. But there are few that make me feel that I too should make movies. Yes, it happened when I watched Lagaan, Rang De Basanti, Black, Heroes, Dilli 6, and now ‘3 idiots’. This is not because I am ‘moved’ by these movies but I feel ‘inspired’ and ‘privileged’ to be part of such cinema’. Yes, audiences too are part of cinema.

I have applied to few institutes to learn film-making and I can see a long journey (on bumpy road) ahead. And like technical documentation, it will be a collaborative effort. Any volunteers who too are ’inspired’ for film-making are welcome to share their thoughts.

ODI Cricket in 2000 decade; and Dravid

In decade 2000, look at comparative form and 50+ scores of some players who played at least 200 innings:

• Ponting: 79 times 50+ scores in 230 Innings
• Tendulkar: 70 times 50+ scores in 207 Innings
• Kallis: 69 times 50+ scores in 206 Innings
• Yousuf: 69 times 50+ scores in 235 Innings

 Dravid: 67 times 50+ scores in 212 Innings

 And few others who are considered as premier ODI batsmen of the decade:

• Sangakkara: 61 times 50+ scores in 245 Innings
• Gilchrist: 56 times 50+ scores in 205 Innings
• Yuvraj: 54 times 50+ scores in 225 Innings
• Jaywardene: 56 times 50+ scores in 258 Innings
• Jayasuriya: 56 times 50+ scores in 242 Innings
• Sehwag: 47 times 50+ scores in 209 Innings
• Gibbs: 52 times 50+ scores in 199 Innings (just on the verge of 200 innings)

And do not forget that most often, opening batsmen have more chance to score 50+ score (such as while chasing smaller totals, and of course field restrictions).

Please do not post comments on strike rates, fading age and similar-irrelevant factors.
Statistics reflect only the partial ability and skill. Look at the value such players add to the team and then justify rationally if you do not agree about Dravid’s place in Indian ODI team. Only 6 batsmen scored more than 10000 ODIs runs in the decade, INCLUDING Dravid. And that too when he is missing the action for last 2 years.

Courtesy www.cricinfo.com.

Cricket: Traditionalists vc Moderns

As we welcome 2010 in a few days, purists and experts have started reflecting back at how the game changed in current decade, as to what went off (Sharjah and ODIs in whites) and what emerged (20-20 and 400 runs in an ODI innings). A few are there on cricinfo; by Sambit Bal at (http://www.cricinfo.com/decadereview2009/content/story/440411.html), and by Sidharth Monga here at (http://www.cricinfo.com/decadereview2009/content/story/440362.html). We recall loss of pure fast bowling by stalwarts like Ambrose, Donald, Akram and McGrath. And more of how we let Sharjah go, or how Aussie dominance started fading, or how all-rounders in test cricket are becoming a rarity and how Murli and Warne exchanged test cricket record for most wickets… it would only mean re-reliving the words and pictures in these two articles on cricinfo.

It is also the time to reflect at how drastically the test cricket has changed. The pace of game, the fearlessness among opening batsmen, the batsmen’s front-foot-bent leave and shouldering arms while playing fast men is gone, teams’ reluctance to enforce the follow-on even with lead of 350-400 runs, the tendency to produce a result, and so on.

We have seen how Sehwag and Gayle Butchered the bowlers while in whites, in last few weeks. It excites fans as well as commentators who shuffle their posters than ever before, to see the score at lunch time as 117 for 2 in 26 overs, rather than 61 for 1 in 28 overs. Not only for batters, the shift is seen in bowlers as well. I don’t see bowlers playing with batsmen’s patience, la Ambrose or McGrath. Blame it on pitches, or decreased quality of fast men around, or 20-20; the approach is here to stay. It has been injected as IV in current and possibly in next generation too who are brought on staple diet of 20-20. However, no credit taken away from test cricket as the Centurion match between SA and Eng, last two WI-AUS tests and the Pak-NZ test series has reaffirmed that test cricket is safe, at least for the moment. And then there are people like me, who like the traditional approach, watching Andy Flower, Dravid, Atherton, or Steve Waugh grinding the bowlers for hours on a wearing pitch.

While the comparison or debate goes on, on the merits and pleasure of traditionalists vs the modern, the Atherton vs Sehwag, I wonder how a team of Traditional players would fare against a Modern, Aggressive bunch of players. Realizing my fantasy, I could not stop myself but compiling two teams, each with a different character and philosophy. I am sure that the dressing rooms of these two teams bear a completely different look in team meetings before the day’s play. Before you see the teams, a few points:

• It was difficult for me to draw the timeline as to which players I should select. So, I picked up only those players who have played at least one test match in the current decade, that is after 01 January 2000. (So, Walsh is eligible but Mark Taylor is not.)
• I was not too tempted to select an all-rounder. If Kallis is there in a team, it is not with an intention to have an all-rounder but he is there purely as a batsman.
• Among all important factors while selecting a player (such as performance in/against different countries, different bowling attacks, adaptability, records and reputation), I have also considered Longevity.
• I used the standard team model of 6 batsmen, 1 wk and 4 bowlers.
• Important: It would have been tricky to let conservative bowlers face aggressive batsmen and attacking bowlers going all over traditional batters. So, teams are structured in such a way that Traditional batters’ team has aggressive/attacking bowlers and Modern batters’ team has traditional/conservative bowlers.

Regarding selection:

• Sehwag over Gayle because of his ability to play long innings (he got 10-11 successive 150 in tests whenever he scored a hundred, amazing!)
• Tendulkar was suitable for both the teams, but has been placed in Moderns, almost arbitrarily.
• A few names that closely missed out are: Mark Waugh, M. Jayawardene, A DeSilva, M. Yousuf, VVS Laxman, D. Martyn, K. Sangakaara, Mark Taylor, G. Thorpe, A. Stewart, C. Walsh, W. Younis, A. Kumble, M. Ntini, D. Vettori, M. Boucher, A. Flintoff, M. Vaughan. While leaving these out, it was my own judgment; no statistics, no preferences.
• Players who missed out on longevity (including lack of opportunities of playing in different countries) are: D. Steyn, S. Bond, S. Akhtar, T. Taibu, Gambhir, and few others.
• Selecting players who have at least played one test match in current decade does not mean that player must have played well in the current decade. It is just to define the timeline, and player’s overall career and his impact and contribution (beyond stats) are considered.

Now the real thrill is to imagine if these two teams take on each other, at lords, in 3^rd week of July. Trust me, it was mouthwatering experience for me, and the joy of loving the game so much.

Traditionalists vs Moderns                                               Played at: Lords cricket ground, England
Traditionalists win the toss and they decide to bat                             JULY (Wednesday to Sunday)

 

Being in the Traditional camp myself, hence the result.
I will appreciate readers’ comments.

STC Jinx?

Attending STC events seems to have become a jinx for me. Being at a remote location (Yes, Chandigarh is a rural area for technical writers) doesn’t help either. Be it learning sessions in NCR, or the Great STC Annual Conference I always miss it for *some* reason. In 2007 (Goa), I was not well. In 2008 (Pune), I had an external release and could not get leave (see http://vinishgrg.wordpress.com/2008/12/15/this-too-is-writers-mental-block/ to revisit my disappointment). And this time (2009, Bangalore), again missing it. I planned extensively only that *fate* planned otherwise.

I am disappointed (read ‘annoyed’) to miss it, when I imagine India’s best technical writers gathering in Bangalore today. The documentation project plans, Arbortext Styler, editing, publishing, task analysis, customer orientation, program management, and what not. The non-stop emails (by Gururaj, Sandhya, Akash Dubey, Makarand, and other selfless contributors) on topics and benefits, awards and prizes, contests.

The carnival like feel and spirit.
The hand shakes.
The shared laugher.
And the *pride* of being part of this community.

It is the most disappointing time for me, and sometimes I feel if I will ever get to it! But then I recall Indian cricket team’s Sharjah jinx against Pakistan. The team came over it. I too hope to break this jinx.

Tendulkarisation or Dravidisation of Cricket?

So the world celebrates Tendulkar’s 20 years of international cricket. Experts, former and present cricketers who has played with and against him, media, theorists have poured in their highly-emotional tributes to the man who almost seems as old as the game itself in India, at least to the current generation. It is almost like Tendulkarisation of Indian Cricket!

However, there are others, a different set of fans (and experts and former cricketers) who had a different opinion about the master, (at least they thought so in the period from 2004 to 2007). Who like the batsman Tendulkar, while disagreeing with many tributes such as ‘being the best ever’. I too feel that he is not.

Personally, I know him as the batsman as any other cricket follower, and of course I too feel privileged to have watched him during Chennai 1998, Sharjah 1998, or Centurion 2003, And I am enjoying the process of all this adulation on little master. I too watched him as the God of cricket, but only till 2003. I feel that somewhere, he has not been doing what he should have or could have done for himself, and that would been automatically rewarding for Indian cricket as well.

By coincidence or otherwise, I suspect that all such different set of people (at least in India) must be Dravid fans.

Not a single 300 in test cricket and only five 200 plus scores is a huge under-achievement by his standards. We talk of his records but these come when you play for 20 years, longer than anybody else from contemporary players.

That he is not a selfish cricketer is of course true but he has not been selfless either. There was time when experts including Ian Chappel and Ravi Shastri questioned his contribution to the team, around 2004-07 (though I do not believe that he was playing for statistics). But unlike Dravid, he has not gone out of the way, offering something extra (of which he is capable of, and is as good a manner as anybody else) to help the team cause. Many a times, when India was struggling to find a opening batsman in test cricket, Dravid was ‘ready’. Notably, test tours in South Africa 2001, Pakistan 2006 and Australia 2007. Remember, Dravid was the captain during Pakistan 2006 he took the initiative and challenge to open the batting despite his not-so-good record as an opener. Dravid did that in ODI also, West Indies 2006, and most recently Sri Lanka tri-series 2009, so that other players could play freely assuming that Dravid will keep the other end safe. And most often, he did.

On Australian tour in 2007-08, team again moved Dravid to open the test match to ‘accommodate’ Yuvraj Singh, who failed. Dravid too failed and the process repeated in next match and by that time Australia were leading the series by 2-0. Ever since India have tried to fill an open middle-order slot (Kaif, Yuvraj, sometimes Laxman, whose neck had been invariably on the wire), I always felt that Sachin Tendulkar should have been pushed down at 5 or 6 when less experienced batsmen were trying to be regular in the team. And I am very surprised at his dislike for not moving from no. 4 position (if you looking at stats, please exclude all such instances when night watchman made him bat at 5). Over the years, Border did it for Steve Waugh, and later S. Waugh did it for brother Mark or Martyn, to groom fluent and less-established players and he himself was better able to play with the tail. Azharuddin demoted himself to five bringing Tendulkar to 4, Ranatunga did it for D’ Silva, Cronje did it for Cullinan and Kallis. Tendulkar has never taken initiative to make adjustments for the team. On the contrary, when he failed in first 4 innings during Australian tour in 2003, he was moved to no. 5 position so that he could find form. Isn’t it interesting?

I suspect that he does not believe in process, and his belief is ‘I will score more will help team more’ isn’t always true. Sometimes, I sense that he plays (and scores well) as if he is oblivious of team problems (batting order, opening slot) which is not good for the team. His No to captiancy in 1997 and 2000 were understandable, and his decision is respected. But his decline to captaincy when Dravid resigned in September 2007, particularly when there was no other suitable candidate at that time, again raised a question on his attitude towards the ‘process’.

He has openly heaped praise on Ganguly and Kumble as captains, and Sunil Gavaskar as a batsman. I wonder why he doesn’t talk about Dravid. India’s fortunes have changed in last few years for different factors including Ganguly’s captaincy, team’s better adaptability to foreign tours, and of course Dravid the batsman. I have rarely heard Tendulkar talking about Dravid, neither as captain for our series triumph in West indies (2006) and England (2007) or the glorious run in ODIs prior to world cup 2007, nor for Dravid the batsman. I was very surprised that a few days back, he took Bangar’s name before Dravid during that infamous Headingly test in 2002 and it was because he himself scored a hundred. And may be that is why he did not mention Adelaide 2003 or Kingston 2006, both pioneering moments in their own respective sense. Dravid as captain, emphasized on having the process which doesn’t work in India, and so he resigned. He was dropped from ODI, quite unfairly twice. It is fine if Sachin has nothing to say on his ‘dropping’ but now when he ways that ‘batting order’ was the reason for world cup 2007 debacle, I can read it between the line. And so many others can.

So, I feel that though we should enjoy this moment of little champion’s 20 years of cricket, and we applaud him, though the process could have been better, punctuated with the spirit of ‘growing together’.

(C) Copyrights Vinish Garg.

Meri Ye Do Ankhen…

Copyrights Vinish Garg

To be continued…

A Flaterring Experience

Yes, I am flattered

 This is the title page of a magazine that I designed for our anniversary. Yes, it was a flattering experience..!! A few snapshots are available in an album on Facebook – vin.jyoti.ish.  Login into FB and find me at: 

http://www.facebook.com/Vingar#/vinish.garg?ref=profile

The complete online edition is available to those who have a cup of coffee with me. Plan it  :).

Moments that make Cricket the game it is…

When emotions rule over common sense

MCG is quite intimidating for visiting teams

A fast bowlers’ emotions

India-Pakistan’s first ever encounter in a world cup: Emotions, Anger, Passion, Moment of Madness

The ‘Openers’ walk-in

Lara on reaching 500: Will somebody ever raise his bat again for a 500?

Hussain’s cover drive was the best I have seen – all poetry

Dravid – cricket will never be same without players like him, so orthodox and yet so classy

A once in a generation cricketer who redefines the way the game should be played

I watched the first cricket match in 1987, 22 years back. The first names that I recall hearing was Raman Lamba, Arun Lal, Kapil and Shastri. I started watching it regularly in 1991, the tri-series in Australia with infamous 126 tie-match at Perth against West-Indies. I remember it as much for Sachin’s over as for Azhar catch to leave it a tie. I felt I was obsessed with it in 1993, during Hero Cup, and I wrote the first post on this gentleman’s game in 1999. From Arun Lal to Sidhu to Sehwag, from Vengsarkar to Manjeraker to Dravid, from More to Mongia to Dhoni, and from Kapil to Srinath to current brigade… I have seen all, along with of course generations from other countries as well.

www.cricinfo.com is the best thing to hook a cricket enthusiast like me but more than anything else, I like the collection of photographs available on this site (Courtesy Gettyimages because of their recent alliance with cricinfo).

Reconnecting… Is it Nature?

Reconnecting with old and forgotten friends after years is an amazing experience, a feeling of joy, fulfillment, and of ecstasy. Particularly for those whom you have lost hope that you will ever meet or chat online. It never happened with me so frequently as it has happened in last few months. People whom I would invariably remember – the moments that we shared together, the classes, coffee or career, the curriculum, customer calls or jokes, sometimes with smiles or with moist eyes.

First it was Neha – the prime character in my first book was inspired from her. I never thought that I will ever chat with her after 6 years were passed. But we did.
Then it was Renu, my class-mate during MCA. She is settled in Germany and again it was 5 years since we had a chat or message.
Next was Daya ma’m, we worked together in Spice, and we reconnected back after 5 years.
And today, it was Sanjeev. We studied together way back in 1991-94, 15 years back.

I do not believe that it is ONLY technology that is helping (la orkut/facebook). It is something in nature. Something that wants us to not to give hope, to embrace positivism, to have will to love and connect with more people, to share joy and laughter, and to love yourself and back yourself. Imagine how you feel/react when you are about to reply to a client email (that you don’t want to), or planning to cook rice (wishing someone else could do that, just for today), or waiting for a cab/bus (wishing your colleague could pick/drop you along the way, again just for today), or you are stuck in traffic (when an important cricket match is about to be over)… I guess nature has its own ways to pay back. And reconnecting to loved ones is one of those.

I long to reconnect with a few more people and I guess the route has been planned. It must be on the way. I can see it coming. Soon. God Bless Me.:)

Technical Writer and Pen/Pad?

“I wish you use pencil and pad also, and not always THE KEYBOARD, at least occasionally.” I was startled at her words. “Pencil? I am a tech writer not an architect dear,” I said.

Her voice had raised, “Even when you are thinking something, you are looking at the screen, with fingers tapping (struggling on) the keyboard. With pencil and pad, sometimes you would see around, left or right at least when you are thinking.” There was no pause… “And you might have noticed that our roof is leaking, door needs paint, fan needs to be cleaned, and blah blah blah…. Can’t u even sense that you can take off your specs at least while ‘thinking’?”

She was right!. How this PC has reshaped our thought process. I have noticed that even while planning tasks or time estimates, why I am (most often) looking at the screen? I recalled that when I was writing a fiction few years back, I would spend time looking at ceiling, or walls or at lawn outside the window. Of course technology has obsessively possessed our heart, nerves, veins, brain, liver, stomach, and everything, even spiritually. I can’t live without it but thanks to my dear wife, now I use pen and pad while ‘thinking’ or ‘planning’ something. God Bless Her.