A Derby you don't want to miss

6th February, 1958, is a date that would live on forever in the hearts of true Manchester United fans' hearts. An aircraft ferrying Manchester United players, amongst other people, from Belgrade to Manchester crashed on take off from Munich, where it had stopped to refuel. The team was returning after having played a European Cup game against Red Star Belgrade. This year marks the 50th anniversary of the tragedy, and the club has announced their plans for the occasion, in memory of an occasion that truly defines the club's history.
On 1st February that year, United played what some people believe to be the greatest game of football played on English soil, when they beat Arsenal 5-4 at Highbury in front of 63, 578 fans. Little did they know that this would be the last match they played on England. United beat Belgrade 5-4 on aggregate, and were ecstatic due to their triumph. But celebrations were cut short when tragedy struck. Seven players died there, while another died fifteen days later of his injuries. Miraculously, Sir Matt Busby, hailed as one of the best managers ever, survived and led United to an FA Cup final appearance that very season. They may have lost to Bolton at Wembley that year, but the fact that they made it so far having lost such a large, and vital, portion of their team is nothing but astonishing. United then enterred a transition period, and returned to winning ways when they lofted the FA Cup in 1963. Two successful League Championship campaigns later, the first in 1965 and then in 1967, United went onto win their first European Cup in 1968, just ten years after the Munich air crash.
This year, on 10th February, United will mark the occasion by playing their nearest home match to the date of the anniversary in retro 1950s-style kits. The match is against their city rivals, Manchester City. City provided considerable assistance to United in the aftermath of the tragedy. Their own former goalkeeper had perished in the crash. A memorial service, involving survivors of the crash and family of those who were lost will also be held. Old Trafford's famous South Tunnel will be renamed the Munich Tunnel.
Why should you keep the evening of the 10th of February free? For one, the Manchester Derby is as exciting as any in the world. Two, this is certainly a once in a lifetime opportunity to see the likes of Ryan Giggs, Wayne Rooney and Cristiano Ronaldo playing in kits that seem to be half the size of their present ones (Ladies, even you wouldn't want to miss out on Cristiano Ronaldo running in tight shorts that barely cover half his thighs, do you?). All in all, a remarkable way to commemorate a historic event of football.

Debate Over Excess Foreigners in the BPL is all Bosh

The talk over the impact of excess foreign players in the Barclays Premier League seems to have started all over again, with Sepp Blatter, President of FIFA, iterating his concerns on the trend of the English clubs to import talented youngsters. Surely Mr. Blatter is more qualified to speak on the topic than I am, but I can't help but feel that he is missing some very important points here.
England failing to qualify for Euro 2008 is undoubtedly a shame. Imagine a major footballing event being played without the country that gave birth to the sport participating in it (or at least the country that hails to have given birth to the game. Any Scottish reader should know that I am not saying for certain that football was first played in England and not Scotland). But I can't particularly blame the number of foreign players in England to have been the cause for the team's debacle. Critics of the BPL feel that this prevents several youngsters from gaining top footballing experience since top teams are loaded with foreign players. But can you place the blame on the lack of talent?
Rio Ferdinand, John Terry, Steven Gerrard, Frank Lampard, Wayne Rooney, these are certain players in the England squad that may as well as walk into any lineup they so desire. As for the upcoming youngsters, you can't find many better talents than Micah Richards, Aaron Lennon and Theo Walcott. Add to these the likes of David Beckham, Owen Hargreaves and Gareth Barry who lent quite some credentials to the team's talent pool. The last time England failed to qualify for a major tournament was back in 1994, when they barely had a handful of players from outside the British Isles in the League. So why didn't England qualify?
1. The FA. They should have waited for the World Cup to get over before announcing Sven Goran Erikkson's successor. Had they done so, the could have gotten a World Cup winning coach with much, much better credentials in the form of 'Big Phil' Scollari. Scollari didn't want to come to a situation where the team he managed, Portugal, faced his new employers. That was, perhaps, the only reason he refused. As a result, the reins are handed over to Steve Mclaren who decides that he wants to shake up the system a little so that it seems like England are finally working to get beyond just the quarter final stage of competitions.
2. Like him or hate him, England does not have a better player at right midfield that David Beckham. Steve Mclaren's decided that he didn't want Beckham to figure in his scheme of plans, maybe because of his proximity with his predecessor Sven Goran Eriksson, or perhaps his celebrity lifestyle. Shaun Wright-Phillips, for all his speed, does not have as threating a final pass as Beckham, as Beckham proved in the loss against Croatia that ended their chances of qualifying.
3. Englands 0-0 draws away at Macedonia and Israel. When you're competing against two other strong teams for qualifiers, you can't afford to drop points against the minnows. Then the loss to Russia away after leading by a goal. A draw would have sufficed, but that doesn't mean you play for a draw when you're leading.
4. The friendly against Austria right before the Croatia game. An utter disaster. Yes England won, but why on Earth were they playing this match and risking injury to their players before the all-important game? What happens? Owen gets injured, and with Rooney already out, England loses both their strikers.
5. For all the money pumped into the New Wembley, the FA couldn't provide a decent pitch for the the England-Croatia match to be played on. Undoubtedly the FA want to start getting some money back for their investment, but the main purpose of the stadium is to host Football events, not concerts.
6. England 2-3 Croatia. Israel miraculously beat Russia to give England's qualifying chances a second chance. A draw would have seen England through, and probably saved Steve Mclaren's job. Scared of the prospect of a loss, and probably not expecting Croatia to have a go since they had already qualified, Mclaren presents a line up with negative 4-5-1 formation. You're at home, go for the win!!!
7. Bad Luck. Injuries hampered England's campaign. John Terry, Rio Ferdinand and Wayne Rooney missed the match completely, while Ashley Cole wasn't 100% fit. Then the audacious divot which caused the ball to bobble up just as 'keeper Robinson was about to kick it, and he ends up missing it completely. Result: a Gary Neville own goal and Croatia win 2-0.
8. The big names failed to fire. None of them took the lead to inspire their teammates when the team was down and out. Russia and Croatia both deserved to beat England, since none of the English stars were willing to take the game to their opponents. Except Wayne Rooney. His passion is admirable, but even he was forced to help out his defense more often than threaten the opponent's defense.

So, what is required? A wake up call. This may just be good for the English team. The last time they failed to qualify for a major competition was for USA '94. The next European Championships saw them put up the best performance in the team's history of the Championships. Who knows, England may just get beyond the quarter finals of South Africa 2010.

Aussies and ICC, Feel Ashamed

Seven contentious decisions during five days of cricket. Six in favour of the Aussies, one in favour of India. Shivnarine Chanderpaul once said, during an informal chat, if umpires don't rule all the 50-50 decisions, and is some cases even 40-60, in Australia's favour, most of the Test teams can beat them. OK, that could be said to be exaggeration, but Australia would certainly not win as many games as they do.

I personally have always felt that we should consider that umpires are also human, and that they can have a bad day, but Steve Bucknor and Mark Benson did a horrendous job. Why oh why did Mark Benson not ask the Third Umpire whether or not Michael Clarke's catch off Ganguly on the final day was clean or not? What on Earth is the Third Umpire for? To sit in an unconditioned room and to watch the match from any angle he wants and get paid for it, without having to do any work? Benson asking Ricky Ponting whether or not the ball touched the ground before the catch was taken was like asking a child whether or not he broke the glass. I'm even disappointed with Ricky Ponting. As skipper of the best team in the world, he is a representative of the the sport. As a true sportsman, he should have asked Benson to ask the Third Umpire whether or not the ball carried to Michael Clarke. Ponting has said that nobody can question his integrity, but sadly, he has given us reasons to. The Indian team management let the Umpires off when they decided not to lodge a complaint against them after Day one of the match. I don't see how the Umpires would escape their ire this time around.
As for Michael Clarke, all I want say is the he is a disgrace to the game. He exemplifies the fact that cricket is no longer the gentleman's game. He should have told the umpire he is doubtful whether or not he took the catch and asked him to check with the third umpire. He has been hailed as Ricky Ponting's heir as captain of the Australian team. This incident makes me feel worried that in the future the World Champion's (if they remain so) skipper would not be an ideal person to represent the sport. He would be idolised by thousands of wannabe kids, who would unfortunately learn anything but how to play the game fairly so cricket may be the winner at the end of the day. And not just this incident alone, looking back at the moment he was caught off Kumble's bowling on Day IV, he stood at the crease waiting for Steve Bucknor, who seemed to have gone to sleep, to adjudge him out. Surely he couldn't have thought Bucknor would not give him out for that, unless he had bribed Bucknor. Maybe it just goes to show that, after the umpires poor performance during the match, he was hopeful that Bucknor may just decide that the ball somehow magically turned towards Dravid at slip in mid air, without any contact with the bat.
The last bit I have saved for the Third Umpire. With the amount of replays he had at his disposal, giving an incorrect decision is absolutely unacceptable. The only areas where human error can creep in in his job is eyesight, and pressing the right button. If the case was the first, sack him immediately. If the case was the second, still sack him immediately. He ruined the match with that blooper. Symonds would have been out on 48, well before the 162he went on to score, and Australia would have been reeling. In that case, the final day would have probably seen Australia trying to snatch a draw rather than India. Shamefully, this match would be remembered not for the cricket played, but for the poor standards of umpiring.

Does the BCCI give a damn?

Firstly, I want to applaud John Gloster (Indian cricket team's physio) for his report on how the lack of physical conditioning has become a serious issue for the squad. I, for long, have felt that there is way too much cricket being played by our team. Like it or not, the effect this is having on our Men in Blue is there to see, with Zaheer Khan being declared unfit to play in the New Year's test. Just when I thought that the board would finally look at the scene seriously, BCCI's secretary Narenjan Shah's response to the report has made me doubt whether the Board even cares about the players.
Narenjan Shah told news reporters that every team has to face several small injuries, and this is not an important issue at all. Forgive me if I sound disrespectful, but how on Earth does Shah can Shah think he is a better judge of the issue than a trained professional. Look at any top team from any sport, the first priority for all of them is the player's fitness levels. If BCCI feels that their bunch of bruised and battered players are good enough challenge the might of the Aussies, then I'm sorry, I just can't see how India would ever be able to achieve anything. I guess I may as well as stop wasting my time supporting the team. For one we don't have any fringe players to boast of. If these set of players aren't going to be taken care of, then God help us.

To Narenjan Shah, I would like to ask this: where are players such as Lakashmipati Balaji and Ashish Nehra? They both unfortunately faced injuries at crucial points of their careers. If their rehabilitation had been carried out carefully, along with Zaheer Khan's fragile ankle and Munaf Patel's injury woes, today, India's pace department would have had several options. Add to the names given current bowlers like RP Singh, Ishant Sharma, Irfan Pathan , VRV Singh and a bunch of players from the domestic circuit waiting for their opportunity, we would have a good talent pool to choose from. And, more importantly, the players would be able to fight it out longer and would be less prone to visits to the Doctor. Does an F1 team race with a car whose wing is out of shape because of an accident? No. Does a football team let a player suffering from a minor niggle risk causing him serious damage? No. Does the Indian team field players suffering from shoulder strains? Yes.

Did Jol deserve the boot?

Almost exactly two months after first denying that his position at the club was in danger, Tottenham announced the sacking of their manager Martin Jol on Thursday. Sevilla boss Juande Ramos is set to replace the Dutchman.
According to reports, Jol was informed that he has been fired prior to Spurs UEFA Cup match against Getafe. Although the news wasn't made public, rumors were already widespread, and the White Harte Lane faithful showed their support to Jol by chanting "Stand up for Jol" during the Getafe match. Jol's last match in charge of the Spurs symbolized the season for Spurs, as they took the lead through Jermaine Defoe early on, but went on to lose the match 2-1. When Defoe scored, videos showed Jol uncharacteristically somber, not celebrating unlike his previous demeanor, further fueling the rumors that were flying about at the time that his rein had come to an end.
Whether the change would bring about positive results at White Harte Lane would only be know in the next couple of months, but one things for certain- Tottenham were horrible in their handling of the situation. Back in August, they did no favors to Jol by clearly approaching Juande Ramos and offering him Jol's position, barely three months and a couple of matches after Jol lead them to a second consecutive fifth place position, even threatening to break into the top four. Although the Spur's Board denied any move to bring in Ramos, and said that Jol enjoys 100% support from them, Ramos accepted that he had been approached.
Jol's former colleagues showed sympathy to his removal, with Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson saying that Jol would be rather "relieved" that it's finally over, and added that his impressive record as manager would make it easy for him to find another position quickly. True this season Spurs had the worst start to their campaign in nineteen years, but back in 2005-06 also they never started well, only to finish fifth in the League. The problem lied in the fact that Jol had lost the respect of his players, as a result of being too "light" with them. ESPNStar's Steve McMahon said on a show that Jol was being punished for mistakes made by the players, and not him, since they never showed any drive to perform and improve during their matches this season.
"You can't just turn up and expect to win", McMahon was quoted to have said.
What future are the bookmakers predicting for Spurs? The odds are equally in favor of them getting relegated as they are for them to make the Champion's League. Many experts said that by sacking Jol, Spurs have lost a chance to create a dynasty, similar to Nottingham Forest's back in the 70s, and the ones at Manchester United under Sir Alex Ferguson, and at Arsenal under Arsene Wenger.
"There seems to be a far less patient approach in football now but Arsene has been there 10 years and I have been here 21," Ferguson said in an interview," I think you can see there have been rewards for both managers and clubs."

You call that insult???

Yet again, Indian sportsmen are being booked for having insulted the national flag. Remember Sachin Tendulkar and Narain Karthikeyan being barred from wearing the tricolour on their respective helmets back in 2005? This time, it's the turn for the Indian T20 World Championship winning squad.
In probably the most ridiculous story I have yet heard related to Indian T20 team's victorious South Africa sojourn, the Chief City Magistrate of Nagpur Nagar accepted a complaint against the team members for "insulting" the tri-colour during their celebrations. The person who filed the complaint was seemingly "offended" when the Indian players wrapped the tri-colour around themselves and rolled on the ground when some of their mates jumped on top of them.
Meaning no disrespect to the complainant and the Indian judiciary system, but, for heaven's sake, does Team India's actions show "disrespect" to the national flag? In 2005, the reason given to Tendulkar on why he couldn't sport the tricolour on his helmet was that, since his helmet was kept in a bag with his other sporting accessories, namingly his pads, guards, and so on, it wasn't fit for something as important to national sentiment as the country's flag to be kept alongside with them.
Rewind to Athens 2004. Maurice Green wore spiked shoes in the colours of the U.S. flag at the Olympics. Germany 2006. Wayne Rooney showcases his boots at the World Cup which had a miniature English flag at the back of the heel section. Both are lauded for their patriotism and passion. What if an Indian sportsman had shown his pride in representing his country in a similar way? Based on the cases that have already occurred, he could have easily faced a jail term or a huge fine.
The judiciary and the government has to realise that sportsmen do get very sentimental when they represent his country, and like to show that to the public. They have major restrictions on the gear they wear, and don't get many options wear to showcase their passion. For a cricketer, all he can personalise is his bat, shoes, helmet, and any additional accessory such as wrist bands. A Formula-1 driver gets no other option but his helmet. When Narain Karthikeyan was told to remove the flag, he did nothing to hide his disappointment at having to do so, and said that now all he can do is sell that portion of his helmet to some sponsor. This in a year when Narain Karthikeyan had spent each Rupee of his income to be able to represent India on the F1 circus, yet was willing to sacrifice some additional earnings to show how much he loved his country.
No sportsman, in their sound mind, would do anything to upset the national sentiment by disrespecting their nation's flag in front of such a large crowd, and when being watched by millions of viewers. Give these guys a break.

Sport and Racism

In South Africa, racism and sports have been intertwined right from the end of World War II, largely due to apartheid, which crushed the hopes of so many sportsmen of color (for example, see "The First Great Indian Golfer" below this post). But even though apartheid is long gone, racism is very much still a big factor in South African sport. Post the Springboks first World Cup triumph in 1995, many legislators voiced to the country's rugby federation to take the opportunity to showcase South Africa's racial mix. The debate of racial quotas has been raging ever since.
Sports is undoubtedly an ambassador for a country in its own way, basically because more people tune into watch a mega sporting event than any news program presenting the the visit of an "official" ambassador from another nation. The South African government certainly tried to take advantage of this to show that they were well and truly over apartheid and that blacks from the country had as much scope in sports as the whites. But, in following a selection process that includes race as an important attribute, are they running the risk of fielding teams consisting of players that don't deserve to be a part of it based on their abilities?
This topic first hit the Indian sporting circles back in 2005, when South African-born English cricketer Kevin Pietersen hit three centuries in their tour ODI series on their of South Africa, and in turn picked up the Man of the Series award. Whenever the Barmy Army would give Pietersen a standing ovation for his heroics as he would walk back to the dressing room on being dismissed, the home fans would stand up and show their backs to him, calling him traitor for having left his home country. But Pietersen didn't bother about his reception, and never said he made a wrong decision to change in nationality. He hailed that, despite some amazing performances, including a warm-up match against Naseer Hussain's England side in 1999, when he took four wickets and scored 61runs batting at No.9, he was dropped from his state's first team. He was never shy to say that he believed this was because of the racial quota system. He moved to Britain searching the opportunities he believed he deserved.
Now back to rugby. Unlike cricket, which adhered to the government's desire to field a team of diverse races, the rugby federation never let the officials interfere with the team's composition. Due to their stand, the Government has always been at odds with the federation. At one stage, the head of the parliament's sports ministry even suggested to impound the Springbok's passports till they take a more favorable stand to their desires. Although the team won the recently held World Cup, it wouldn't have gone unnoticed to the President of South Africa, Thabo Mbeki, that when he congratulated both the English and his country's team, that Engalnd had as many black players as the Springbok's had. Whether that would result in a push by the South African administration to bring in more black players into the team, or accept that the the best crop are the ones wearing the country's colours at the moment, remains to be seen.