|
|
|
|
|
| HOME | NEWS | DEAR REDIFF | |||
|
COMMENTARY
|
|
|
E-mail from readers the world over
Date sent: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 18:02:08 +0000 I am concerned by the report written by Mr Hemant Kenkre on what was discussed in the Bengal assembly on the international conspiracy to exclude Saurav Ganguly from international cricket. I found Mr Kenkre's report was biased against the Bengali people, and he tried very hard to make a mockery of the Bengal psyche. This is deplorable journalism. No motion was passed in the assembly, but was discussed probably for political gain by the parties (not only Marxists but also Congressmen) before the panchayat elections scheduled for May. Such episodes are not uncommon in Indian politics. If I remember correctly, last year one BJP member from Karnataka raised a similar sort of angry/emotional voice when Karnataka cricket heroes (Dravid, Kumble) were excluded from the Indian team. This was just reported in the newspaper but was not maligned as Mr Kenkre did. These kind of incidences are not rare in Indian cricket/politics/journalism. It has happened several times against captains, BCCI, and commentators. I would like to remind the reporter that Kapil's exclusion from the Calcutta Test a few years back was also discussed in Bengal. Politicians should not use such incidents to achieve their goals. It should be condemned without any prejudice, but Mr Kenkre has failed miserably. His article expresses racial slurs against Bengal. Asim K Dutta-Roy Scotland, UK
Date sent: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 12:05:00 -0500 Hemant Kenkre's article is not in good taste and definitely not good for Indian cricket. The issue being taken up in the assembly only speaks for the zeal and involvement of Bengal in national cricket. (I know that the assembly should utilise their time discussing more relvant issues like unemployment, economy etc). I wish we had the same kind of feelings, loyalties in areas other than cricket also. The Indian cricket board is a tragedy when it comes to defending their own players as displayed in the case of Rajesh Chauhan and now Ganguly. What a contrast to the way the Sri Lankans dealt with the controversy regarding their bowler! Having lived in Bombay for years I know the kind of feelings that Bombayites have for Bombay players. Nothing wrong with that. But their glorious days when half the team was from for Bombay are gone. It is quite clear that the decision in Ganguly's case is not an objective or logical one. There is bias involved. As regards fitness of earlier players, perhaps it would do Hemant Kenkre some good to see tapes of earlier matches. He would see that there are quite a few cases where the earlier players had gone off the field for whatever reasons (rest?). And he should realise that the game has become much more competitive and demanding in recent years than a decade or two ago. His statement that 'The way I look at this issue is that if a player is worthy of selection he will be picked ...' is not supported by recent facts, like the non selection of Prasad in the tests. In fact, the third Test would have been ideal to test him if required. How come he is fit to bowl his heart out in other matches, domestic matches, at the nets with no fitness problem and found unsuitable for Tests/ODI. I am sure no such issues will come up if the player is from Bombay. Or maybe we should overlook these 'small' things in 'such' cases? Tapas NJ, USA
Date sent: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 22:18:31 +0530 What is the purpose of this piece of trash? You talk about merit based team selection while criticising Wadekar (I am glad you told us, otherwise we wouldn't have known), while rambling all the way from "conspiracy to Kokinos." Were you trying to be funny by stating "the sufferance of Bengal cricketers at the national and international levels could become an election plank for the next Lok Sabha election?" If so, let me qoute you from your article -- "chuckle chuckle, ha ha!!!!" You blew it just like the Greg Blewett joke. If humour was not the purpose, it must have been an attempt to demonstrate your fabulous knowledge of Bangla by sprinkling few words like "khub bhalo?" Well, stick to English! Mr Kenkre, if you wake up and smell the coffee you will notice that it is not only the Bengalis who are in uproar against the suspension of Ganguly. If you get a chance, read your own Panickar-da's article and the letters to the editor relating to the incident. I think the likes of Hemant Kenkre should have some intestinal fortitude to speak out against arbitrary and inconsistent rulings regarding on-field behaviour in cricket, rather than being sarcastic about those who choose to do so. In addition, the spineless wonders at the BCCI would do cricket some service by lodging a strong protest about this incident with the ICC. Abhijit Biswas
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 23:34:38 +0200 Dear Prem Panicker, After reading the article about Saurav Ganguly I am confident that this is a sure case of racism. If I was there in his place, I probably would have given him my V sign just like Mike Atherton recently gave Philo Wallace. But that's just me, I just wanted to know is there anyway the public like you and me can do anything do anything against this act of racism. Anyway I, for one, like you, am a total Indian and clearly see why you take the Indian point of view when half the world seems to want to go against it, this includes many Indians. Please continue writing your match reports and articles as they are extremely interesting to read. Ankit Mehta
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 13:50:50 -0700 I read Prem Panicker's article regarding the match referee's biased decision of measuring Sachin, Rahul and Saurav's bats. As far as I have seen, all these players use sponsored bats.We get to know which bat the player is using only in cases of players from Australia, England, SA and WI. This may be one reason for the match referee to examine their bats. Venkatesh Prasad Jagadeeshwara Phoenix, AZ
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 15:16:42 -0500 I think Prem Panicker is doing a great job as the cricket correspondent for Rediff. I find his insight into the game extremely useful and his analysis very clear. I also like his unapologetic support for India and Indian cricket, even in the need to be impartial and fair. This is not to say he is partial and biased towards India. But being an Indian staying in the US, I can understand and appreciate his support for India. Keep up the good work and thanks for all the inside information. Anand
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 11:01:41 -0800 I think you are not critical enough of Lele, Peter Van Der Merve, and all those who do their level best to put Indians down. Indians should be more aggressive. Alan Donald used such pretty language against Rahul Dravid, not once but twice, why did he keep quiet? Maybe these players should watch more of Amitabh Bachchan's movies of the 70s...
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 11:45:49 -0600 In your latest column on the Ganguly episode, I loved your tailpiece. Based on the type of reports you write I am going to assume you are in your late 20s and a firebrand. You write-ups have fire and passion in them and that's what is so different about you. As usual, good job, please keep going. Although I do not know you, I would still like to say, sorry about your dad. Make the anniversary go as you would like it to. Taran Minneapolis, MN
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 11:48:21 -0500 Good report. Saurav Ganguly in recent years has been the best player in ODIs. Removing him from the line up gives an edge to the opposition. Maybe I am being devious in my interpretation but, isn't it possible that this was the intention? Instead of simply debating this in the WB assembly, the Bengalis should make their displeasure known to Mr Dalmia whose business interests are located in that state. On the question of dropping Prasad, I would have been more comfortable if the selectors had merely pointed out that he just did not perform well in the recent matches including wickets taken rather than pointing out his fitness. The latter was a bogus excuse. I am happy that Agarkar has been included. Agarkar was regarded by Srikanth as the find of the India A tour of Pakistan. I hope that he gets a chance to play and does well. On the positive side, it is heartening to note that there are several good mediumpace bowlers in India today. Let us hope that some new spinners will turn up also. It seems to me that Ananthapadmanabhan deserves to get more chances to play against international sides. He seems to have bowled well against the Aussies and he can bat too!
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 09:36:35 -0800 According to the information I have gathered it looks like Peter Van Der Merve is being partial (not unusual being a South African) against India. The sad thing about it is that our own BCCI is afraid to question the ICC. India which is fast becoming a cricketing Mecca should have a lot of say in the ICC. It is unfortunate that the BCCI does little to take advantage of it, rather it tries to appease the ICC like a politician seeking votes (Chauhan's case). This is ridiculous. Ramesh Sudini
Date sent: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 00:02:06 +0800 The two issues you've discussed are pointers to the way the BCCI (and the selectorial committee) functions. What is amusing is that while state/district cricket associations battle amongst each other to become part of the BCCI main committee so that they have a greater clout, Dalmiya's ascension of the ICC president has in fact REDUCED India's clout. Venkatesh Prasad's and Dravid's exclusion make little sense. If Dravid was dropped for slow scoring, by what yardstick has Laxman been included? Certainly not age, nor scoring rate, because both are similar type of batsmen. Looking at the composition of the squad, you find that there are: 2 from Hyderabad (Azhar, Laxman) 3 from Bombay (Sachin, Agarkar, Kambli) 1 from TN (Robin) 2 from Haryana (Jadeja, Sanghvi -- if he is from Haryana) 2 from Karnataka (Srinath, Kumble) 1 from Maharashtra (Kanitkar) 1 from Orissa (Mohanty) 1 from Punjab (Sidhu) 1 from Baroda (Mongia) It looks as though Ajit Wadekar's hand figures prominently in THREE players from Bombay (and consequently 5 from West Zone -- Mongia and Kanitkar) making the grade while the number of players from South Zone is also 5. No of players from North Zone -- 3 and East Zone -- 1. Thereby the South Zone and West Zone lobbies have both been satisfied, rendering Dravid's or Prasad's chances of a comeback virtually impossible unless there are South zone vacancies, which in the current scenario with Azhar being skipper, Robin a being a useful allrounder, Srinath and Kumble bowling well, is improbable. Poor Laxman. So, more than injuries being a factor, I think the quota system is the reason for Dravid's and Prasad's inclusion. If Agarkar was included to try out fresh blood, then why are Robin, Jadeja, Sidhu etc. still being persisted with? There are MANY opening and middle order batsmen ready to try and fill in!! A good team for the 1st ODI would be: Sachin, Sidhu, Azhar, Kambli, Robin, Kanitkar, Agarkar, Mongia, Kumble, Srinath, Sanghvi. Jadeja's selection is faulty, he had an average of 35 last years in ODIs at a strike rate of 65. Coming in at #6, it does seem a ridiculous strike rate. Dravid had an average of 40 in ODIs at a strike rate of 65, a reasonable, if on the slower side, strike rate for a #3 batsman I'd think.
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 09:49:49 PST As always an excellent article from Prem as always. I think you have told it like it is and how I wish this article could be splashed across all national newspapers in India, and for those who accuse you of "being a flag waving jigonist." They can read newspaper reports in the western press that explains defeats of their team as being a result of "smog" etc etc etc etc... Way to go Prem... this Indian cricket fan(atic) is with you all the way!!! Sidney
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 08:23:59 PST People like Van der Merve and Jarman are racists. Otherwise how could you explain their behaviour? Or is it some form of camaraderie between Australia and South Africa that makes them act in such a fashion? No wonder Hansie Cronje gets away with just a reprimand for breaking the umpires's door in Australia. The ICC surely needs to look into this.
Date sent: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 19:04:19 EST I read Prem Panicker's article with interest. I think he is one writer who does not hesitate to call a spade a spade and he more or less echos the sentiments of an average Indian. The decisions taken by the third umpire in the recently concluded Test series were blatantly one sided, and I am at a loss to understand why the officials of the BCCI are silent about it when the whole of India is crying foul. There is an urgent need to reconstitute the BCCI and people who know the game and who have some self respect and pride (which is apparently lacking in the present set up) be put at the helm, and also alter the present BCCI rules to make their activities transparent and accountable. I hope Prem's articles wake the officials from their slumber and prod them to take some immediate remedial actions so that nobody else take us for a ride in future as this "gentleman" has so conveniently done. Hey, how about presenting the third umpire with the tapes of the incidents involving Aussies and Indians, and a deluxe edition of the Websters dictionary with the word dissent underlined so that next time he knows what he is talking about? Sreenivas
Date sent: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 13:32:53 -0500 I have been constantly in touch with Indian cricket through the INTERNET for the last four or more years after coming to USA. You are doing a great job of providing us with all the information and I am very thankful for that. The Indian team has been performing extremely well these days and it looks like we are going to see some very good cricket in future. But few things are bothering me, first of all this match refree from SA who is trying to demoralise players like Saurav and Nayan, whereas the behavior of Ponting, Reiffel and Waugh is unoticed. This, in my mind, is racism. We, Indians, are known for our tolerance but it does not mean that we should tolerate such kind of discrimination. He can't just get away with it. Secondly, Rajesh Chauhan is a great player and whenever he has played for the country we have seen positive results in favour of India. I think he brings good luck to the team. I am not saying that he should be included in the team just because he brings luck to the team, but because he is a good performer with the ball and sometimes with the bat too. If he keeps getting excluded from the team he will start deteriorating. I hope to see a good result from the triangular series.
Date sent: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 06:18:03 -0500 In your article you had said -- "I have news for that section of readers: I AM an Indian. As were my parents. And grandparents. All the way back to the ape which, if Darwin is to be believed, we must have descended from. As such, pray tell, whose point of view am I supposed to put forward? That of Timbuctoo?" I say, great job, Prem. Go Prem. We need an unabashed "Indian" point of view. I see nothing wrong in your presentations, and read your articles with great interest. If the Sydney Morning Herald can comment unkindly about Harbhajan Singh's action (forgetting in the process that one Max Walker, while bowling, could probably generate more electricity than a windmill :-) ), and yet go unscathed, then why should we worry about putting our point of view? We need you Prem. Go On !!!
Date sent: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 00:46:00 -0800 I found your piece titled the "Ganguly Fiasco" quite rational and quite reasonable. What I would like to get is the e-mail address of the ICC and of the match referee in question so that I can let them know what I, as a not-too-unbiased cricket fan think of all this. Keep up the good work. Jagan Sunnyvale, California
Date sent: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 14:15:28 +0800 Panicker's article clearly points to the racism which runs in the blood of South Africans. Van der Merve, being a South African, has lived upto what can be expected of him. We need not feel bad about the racist remarks against the whites of his calibre. South Africa officially denounced racism but the whites over there (majority of them) are mentally still brutally racist. In cricketing terms, there is only one way. Play well and win these whites just like what West Indies used to do in those days under Lloyd. Of course, India did well to win against the white Aussies, but should do all the time against Australia, England, South Africa, New Zealand, Zimbabwe. That should be the spirit. Sathyan
Date sent: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 00:47:05 -0500 Hey hey! that's a very nice article! Ganguly fiasco and selection. Prem you are the best. You should e-mail this to the ICC. Saurabh
Date sent: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 05:30:51 PST The BCCI has no guts. They can't stand for their players. Has the Government of India been strict about such issues? Can such a thing happen to the Pakis in Pakistan? NO. Excellent article. Don't get discouraged by those who write such letters to you. We are on your side. Dravid Roy
Date sent: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 05:25:48 PST Your article was awesome. As per your work, keep going, we are with you. You are Indian and so are we. We go with you all the way. Excellent article. The BCCI is a loser organisation. Priyank
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 21:26:45 -0600 Good job on the recent series between India and Australia. Your article on Ganguly's suspension was interesting, as was the revelation (to me at least) about the bats being examined. Anyway, thanks, and keep espousing the "Indian view."
Date sent: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 01:44:54 +0000 It seems that Prasad has been declared "unfit" since one particular warm up game against the Sri Lankans. It was during that game, he was captain, the selectors had wanted him to field first on winning the toss. He did otherwise (and the selection committee was pretty miffed about it) as the pitch was not a bowlers paradise, especially bowling to Jayasuriya and Co. After that game I have noticed that Prasad has been declared either "unfit" or "not up to the mark". Manoj
Date sent: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 00:39:02 EST I fully agree with your views on the Ganguly episode. In fact as soon as the veridct was given by Merve, I had e-mailed Rediff about the blatant inconsistency in the whole issue. It seems other foreign teams can get away with absolutely anything against the Indian team, eg: the Ganguly issue; Donald issue; Cronje; non-availability of practise bowlers in South Africa and poor medical facilities there (Sunil Dev's interview). At the same time when the Aussies or South Africans come we treat them with great respect, show hospitality and in the end they complain about dust, food, lack of facilities etc.. Again we listen to that quietly. Is this the Indian attitude of tolerance? If so, in today's world it does not work, particularly while dealing with non-Indians. The Indian Board should realise this and come out and support the players. Remember the ACB sending officials to inspect the different arrangements prior to the Aussie tour?
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 16:29:05 -0800 (PST) Kudos on your excellent reporting on cricket matches and cricket in general. This mail is in response to the Tail Piece and you have definitely done us Indians proud. Way to go! We need to wave more flags and be proud of being Indian. I for one, need only the Indian point of view with regard to your articles. If I need the Australian perspective, I will read the Sydney Morning Herald and if I want the Pakistani point of view, I will read the Dawn. We shouldn't be shy of our patriotism. I never used to have an Indian flag at home in India but today in the US the first thing that anyone notices in my living room is our national flag. I feel Indians ignore fellow Indians and are not proud of their heritage. I am glad that you added the telling Tail Piece in the article. Again, keep up your excellent work! Rajeev Muralidharan
Date sent: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 10:28:33 +1000 (EST) I agree with Mr Panicker's statement that the punishment handed down to Saurav Ganguly is too excessive, since the Australians did not even receive reprimands after questioning the umpire and continuing to stand at the crease after having been given out. Mr Harsha Bhogle was right when he mentioned on ABC Radio during the recent Test that the way to not get reprimanded by the match referee (even after hitting the door of the umpires with a stump) is to be called Hansie Cronje. It is a shame that the BCCI accepts such actions without even a slight murmur. When will the policy of appeasement of the foreigners stop? Pushkar Maitra
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 17:06:49 -0600 First let me thank you for all the good commentary and match reports, not to mention the write ups on the selectors, match referees ... Please don't be bothered by the nasty mails sent by some loggerhead who don't have any respect for their identity, think lowly of our great country and its citizens. Living with an NRI status doesn't make them not Indian which they would like to be. In fact, we are one of the most fair and sporting nations, sometime more than what is required and the West Indies is the only nation which can compete with us for that. Sri Lankans also have had their part but again they are relatively new to international cricket. South Africans have actually surpassed many countries in this regard. They have a great team and I for one don't see the need for them to resort to such tactics. In the current Indo-Aussie series, the decisions made by the match referee have been very bad. Should the colour of his skin be the only deciding factor for ruling a decision in his favour? He is supposed to be an enforcer of some rules laid down by the ICC, and I would definitely like to see his decision being questioned. As specatators, fans, sponsors (money made by ticket sales is a very sizeable sum) of this sport we should establish a school of thought which can ensure that these decisions are answered in a cricketing forum to the people. One of the most questionable things in the history of Indian cricket has been its selectors. Irrespective of their remarks, team selections, they have been able to live with their heads held high. These people are paid by the BCCI which are directly under the ministry of sports. These people are paid by the money collected from the tax payers in India and we definitely should have the authority to question their actions. Why is this not done? Why do they always lie to the press, public ... and get away with it time and again? In fact, I don't believe they are cricket literates at all. Their actions have been worser than that of novices. If we the people of this country, the fans, the spectators who care some much the game and the outcome of games for this country don't do anything about this then who will? As a person of respect in the cricketing world, as a member of the media, as an INDIAN with great regard for our country's pride I think you should lead a brigade against these people. I have a small suggestion : A team of cricketing professionals with a lot of exposure to international cricket (not like Shivlal Yadav with little experience or Jayant Lele or Mr Rungta with no experience) with media persons namely: 1. Sunil Gavaskar 2. Kapil Dev 3. Krishnamachari Srikanth 4. Bishen Singh Bedi 5. Ravi Shastri 6. Prem Panicker 7. Rajan Bala More names are welcome. The selectors selection should be examined and cross examined and the results should be published in all the leading dailies in India. Their stupid decisions should be openly criticised and they should be asked to resign if they are not able to carry out their responsibilities. I am sure many Indians abroad who spend sleepless nights following cricket commetaries on the Net and millions of cricket lovers who follow the game from their work places and stadiums, and above all the citizens of this great country have the right to know the truth. We all would like it if these ideas can be channelised to improve cricket in our country and take the game to the highest level. Tyagarajan Iyer Birmingham, Alabama
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 10:14:53 -0800 My first thought, on reading about Ganguly's suspension, was that it was racially motivated. A follower of cricket will note that: 1. The Western media coverage of teams from the subcontinent takes on a condescending tone -- if they lose, it's expected, if they win, it's a fluke. Note, especially, the comments of Roebuck in the Sydney Morning Herald. Also note the coverage Pakistan gets when they paste England in England -- they get labelled as cheats! 2. There seems to be a sharp division in the ICC -- one group, consisting of England, Australia, New Zealand, and West Indies at loggerheads with the subcontinental countries. They always seem to oppose each other on important issues. 3. The punishment meted out by match referees -- from what I've read, it seems that Indians always get punished, while the other Western teams (including SA) get away free!
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 09:38:55 -0800 (PST) It's interesting to read your articles from here in the USA. It also shows our Indian cricket board in real poor light which is very much true and I completely agree. This is regarding the selection policy and also the blatant bias shown by match referee in handing out sentences to Ganguly and the Indian players alone. I don't think any of the articles that appear in the newspapers are really as clear and forthcoming as yours which bring out the various flaws. I was just wondering whether your articles are just one of those on the Net or does the Board really get to read these at any point of time?? If the person who really matters doesn't see the light of your argument, I don't know how it will serve the purpose. Raj
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 11:41:54 -0500 "I have news for that section of readers: I AM an Indian. As were my parents. And grandparents. All the way back to the ape which, if Darwin is to be believed, we must have descended from. As such, pray tell, whose point of view am I supposed to put forward? That of Timbuctoo? " That's good stuff, Prem. Don't get pressurised by such writers. I don't understand why we have a board like the BCCI which cannot stand for its own players. Abey
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 16:00:37 +0000 Though I am an expatriate for quite some time, I still am passionate to the point of being hopeless, towards India and cricket. I read your engrossing articles from time to time and have come to respect your candour in calling a spade a spade. I was reading your latest article regarding Saurav's plight, and read the tailpiece, regarding how people are terming you as a flag-waving JINGOIST. Well, let me be the first one (or the 950 Millionth one, atleast I hope so ) to commend you on taking all the dirt and still continuing with the job you have undertaken. You are definitely a true Indian and so am I, and if somebody can't understand the subtle difference between being Jingoistic and Patriotic, so be it. If one looks around, one can easily find the out pouring of nationalist sentiments from writers of such repute that they have become living legends. If it is okay for them to wave a flag or two, why is it deemed Jingoism when it comes to an Indian, doing the same. Well, carry on the good work, lad and don't let the barking dogs bother you one bit.
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 09:54:27 -0600 Your article on the Indian team selection for the one dayers against Australia and the incident involving Saurav were awesome. It's sad that the selectors think otherwise when they have to consider the case of Venkatesh Prasad who is one of the leading seam bowlers in India, and an ideal new-ball partner to Srinath. I hate to see the Indian cricket going the Indian hockey team way. Though the Indian hockey team is on the verge of recovering and though it might be argued that India just has won a Test series, I think it is time the answered questions on the selection of the national side. If Sachin scores a century in Eden Gardens, does the crowd sit silent since he is not a Bengali? People don't think about a player being from a particular zone. They just see that a INDIAN has scored a century and applaud it. Doesn't this make some sense when the selectors sit down to work. No Indian will object to more players from one zone if they really are good enough. And the selectors sidelining of Prasad clearly is a case of racism. Though not in the mould of the treatment meted out to Saurav and Mongia. In short, what an international referee does on a higher level to Indian players, the same kind of treatment is meted out to players during team selection -- a blaring example being Venkatesh Prasad, who has as much killer instinct as anyone. It was proved in the World Cup in Bangalore when he got Sohail out the next delivery after his inciting gesture.
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 16:25:55 +0100 I couldn't agree with you more. It's about time readers of your column realised that you are not merely "reporting" cricket, you are actively discussing and presenting a "feature" every time you write a story. And a feature ALWAYS has a viewpoint. If they do not like an "Indian" viewpoint, they could go read Peter Roebuck's comments in the Sydney Morning Herald. Anand PS: Any guesses as to the nationalities of those who complained about your viewpoint?
Date sent: Sat, 28 Mar 1998 10:48:14 +0530 Ganguly's suspension smacks of the blatant double-standards of Peter Van der Merve. That an ICC referee can be so openly partisan without so much as a whimper of protest from the Indian team mangement, is shameful. But is it surprising, considering the South African background of Mr Van der Merve?
|
||
|
HOME |
NEWS |
BUSINESS |
CRICKET |
MOVIES |
CHAT
INFOTECH | TRAVEL | LIFE/STYLE | FREEDOM | FEEDBACK |
||