If you chose to become a cricketer, you have 15 to 20 years of professional life. That's the max, Tendulkar is an exception. After you retire, you harly have any skills to take up any other profession outside cricket.
So when a player is still playing, he wants to earn money. There is nothing wrong in being ambitious. Who does not want to make money? There is nothing greedy about thinking to make money, they are only being ambitious and thoughtful about their future personal and family lives.
So, Mr. Kambli, you have not only lost your hair on your head, you have also lost your brain inside it.
How about making another controversial statement about your childhood friend, Sachin Tendulkar? That probably will get more attention than these statements.
The right person to advice younsters how to manage theor career. He was one of the most talented bstaman of his generation, had a great start and then lost focus! He should first find out how he screwed up his career before blaming youth and IPL.
Now even Azar, Ajay & even Phabhakar will also speak. As all these made money by fixing and got caught behind wickets. As the young players are making money in proper legal way....so this is simple called as big "J".
Of course, we can understand feelings of Vinod Kambli, as he has no choice left only to speak. I think IPL is good format to learn for the youngsters. Every youngster dreams is that to be a part of Indian Cricket Team.
For a youngster, there are two options, reject IPL offer and its money and pursue for very unlikely opportunity into Test 11 (at any point in time 5-6 players in the team are fixed, search will be on for remaining 5-6 players of which openings for the skills matching this youngster could be atmost 2) or choose IPL, get money, get exposure with international cricketers, get notice of the selectors but loose very important time in honing skills and technique.
While, both have pros and cons, one needs to be ready to sacrifice life for cricket to get into Test team. Unfortunately, in India, it is not practical.
By the way, when ICL was launched by Kapil & Co, was it not to supplement the budding players monetorily and with out disturbing their cricketing career plans?
Grapes are so sour by loser fox. This moron will be always remembered for his innings he played in 1996 world cup semifinal against sri lanka. He scored a massive 10 runs in just 53 runs and was crying like a small girl whose diapers were stripped in public.
Must say cricket, there is no fast running like soccer except for fast bowlers who rest when team is batting, no jumping like basketball, no contact like american football or american hockey. Not sure if cricket players can be considered real atheletes. Gentle sport I must say. Does the coach even do anything while the game is on?
Re: lousy sport this cricket is.
by kiran kumar on Oct 19, 2011 11:02 PM
It is not fair to compare different sports. If we have to compare, all the sports you listed do not need reflexes of Table Tennis or endurance of a marathon or tour de france.
Cricket is gentle (and it is called gentlemens game). But that doesnt make it lousy game.
If we look at soccer in your own logic, it is played for 90 minutes, of these around 15 minutes are lost for interruptions, fouls, arguements, celebrations, free kicks, spot kicks, corner kicks, wall building etc. There are 22 people who share the remaining 75 minutes which makes each player getting ball for about 3 minutes 24 seconds, and if we add the contribution of the substitutes that goes even below. With this perspective, would you call soccer also a lousy sport?
And specifically to your last question, what does a captain do in a basket ball match, over and above what other players do? If nothing, why should there be a captain at all? for the toss? Why, coach cant do that?
Philosophy is, at any given point in time, for a team to perform, instructions should come only from one point. In cricket, once the match starts, it is from captain. Cricket being a start-stop game like that of archery, captain (who is on the field) is considered to have better visibility and access to the things on the ground has been handedover this job. I hope that explains.
And remember a point before talking loose, If Paris is 340 Km from London, London is 340 Km from Paris.
Re: lousy sport this cricket is.
by kiran kumar on Oct 19, 2011 11:02 PM
It is not fair to compare different sports. If we have to compare, all the sports you listed do not need reflexes of Table Tennis or endurance of a marathon or tour de france.
Cricket is gentle (and it is called gentlemens game). But that doesnt make it lousy game.
If we look at soccer in your own logic, it is played for 90 minutes, of these around 15 minutes are lost for interruptions, fouls, arguements, celebrations, free kicks, spot kicks, corner kicks, wall building etc. There are 22 people who share the remaining 75 minutes which makes each player getting ball for about 3 minutes 24 seconds, and if we add the contribution of the substitutes that goes even below. With this perspective, would you call soccer also a lousy sport?
And specifically to your last question, what does a captain do in a basket ball match, over and above what other players do? If nothing, why should there be a captain at all? for the toss? Why, coach cant do that?
Philosophy is, at any given point in time, for a team to perform, instructions should come only from one point. In cricket, once the match starts, it is from captain. Cricket being a start-stop game like that of archery, captain (who is on the field) is considered to have better visibility and access to the things on the ground has been handedover this job. I hope that explains.
And remember a point before talking loose, If Paris is 340 Km from London, London is 340 Km from Paris.
Re: lousy sport this cricket is.
by kiran kumar on Oct 19, 2011 11:03 PM
It is not fair to compare different sports. If we have to compare, all the sports you listed do not need reflexes of Table Tennis or endurance of a marathon or tour de france.
Cricket is gentle (and it is called gentlemens game). But that doesnt make it lousy game.
If we look at soccer in your own logic, it is played for 90 minutes, of these around 15 minutes are lost for interruptions, fouls, arguements, celebrations, free kicks, spot kicks, corner kicks, wall building etc. There are 22 people who share the remaining 75 minutes which makes each player getting ball for about 3 minutes 24 seconds, and if we add the contribution of the substitutes that goes even below. With this perspective, would you call soccer also a lousy sport?
And specifically to your last question, what does a captain do in a basket ball match, over and above what other players do? If nothing, why should there be a captain at all? for the toss? Why, coach cant do that?
Philosophy is, at any given point in time, for a team to perform, instructions should come only from one point. In cricket, once the match starts, it is from captain. Cricket being a start-stop game like that of archery, captain (who is on the field) is considered to have better visibility and access to the things on the ground has been handedover this job. I hope that explains.
And remember a point before talking loose, If Paris is 340 Km from London, London is 340 Km from Paris.
Re: lousy sport this cricket is.
by silver mani on Oct 20, 2011 06:01 AM
Yes Rahul Coach do Something.Cant you see Fletchers Six Pack .Also have u forgotten Rajesh Powar the Great Indian Spinner with Athletic Bofy.
Must say cricket, there is no fast running like soccer except for fast bowlers who rest when team is batting, no jumping like basketball, no contact like american football or american hockey. Not sure if cricket players can be considered real atheletes. Gentle sport I must say. Does the coach even do anything while the game is on? Any input, strategy like other world sports? I must say Jai Ho Indian hockey you are the real atheletes.
Must say cricket, there is no fast running like soccer except for fast bowlers who rest when team is batting, no jumping like basketball, no contact like american football or american hockey. Not sure if cricket players can be considered real atheletes. Gentle sport I must say. Does the coach even do anything while the game is on?
