Desicritics Author: Pratyush Khaitan

Movie Review: Spiderman 3 - Dark Promise Unfulfilled

Pratyush Khaitan — Fri, 4 May 2007 00:39:57 EDT

I had gone for a premiere show yesterday. The story is very dark which is a great thing. I loved the graphics, the villains and the character depth people had in the movie. What I didn't like was the trying to please every one, be it the kids or the romance lovers or the audience which likes movies a bit lighter - an aspect that comes into play with many bigger budget films.

So you had kids scenes which weren't needed and looked very cheesy given the dark plot of the movie. Then, while the romance angle was a key aspect in the plot and adds depth to the movie, it was handled horribly. There were trillions of cheesy scenes related to the romance angle, so much so that some people walked out of the theatre even before the ending credits started rolling in.

The Venom moniker is used differently in the movie compared to the comics. In the comics, Venom has a life of it's own; in the movie, it brings out dark inner desires out in the open and makes characters more aggressive. This subtle change provided great scope for exploring a darker angle in the movie. Inner tribulations of Spiderman could have been emphasized upon. Instead, we see Peter Parker in a couple of egotistical comic scenes which, while funny, are a light diversion rather than a big addition.

The darker scenes were shot superbly and the plot provided immense
potential for this to become a great movie. This is distinct from Spiderman I and II where the plots weren't as dark. A bit more focus towards the darker side would have added a lot to the movie.

Scrap the Duleep Trophy

Pratyush Khaitan — Fri, 13 Apr 2007 00:09:05 EDT

Among the steps the BCCI announced to improve Indian cricket were many related to domestic cricket. Sidharth Monga dissects these initiatives. I share the view with Monga that the Duleep Trophy should be scrapped. He writes:

The Duleep Trophy, supposed to be the highest-level first-class tournament, is robbed of gloss because of its timing. An inter-zone tournament should have the best performing players of the season participating but, by being staged at the the season's start, the selections are based on the previous season's numbers. Also, the Duleep Trophy was the step between the Ranji Trophy and international cricket, and was a prize of sorts for doing well in the Ranji; instead of diluting the identity and character of the Duleep Trophy it's better to scrap it and make the Ranji season a bit less cramped.

There are quite a few other problems with the Duleep Trophy.

Players in Duleep Trophy teams are very different each year. It means that the team system and the benefits these systems bring do not come into play in a Duleep Trophy team. For instance, if we take the North Zone team assembling to play a game versus the East Zone, the Delhi players in the North team will hang out with their Delhi buddies, the Punab guys with their Punjab team mates, so on and so forth.

You come to play. Game finishes. You go back to your states. The sole goal of individuals is to notch up big scores or take truckload of wickets so that they can impresse the selectors. Aspects like team spirit, playing as one unit and developing together over the years are lost.

It also clogs up the calendar and eats up into the Ranji Trophy season. England faces a similar problem of too many and indistinguishabledomestic tournaments.

Matthew Engel speaks about them in the 2007 Wisden Almanack editorial:

The current set-up is not merely the worst that has yet been invented, but possibly the worst that could be imagined: the Championship interspersed with three one-day competitions, turgidly organised and distinguishable from each other only by the length of the matches. The destruction of the once-beautiful knockout cup should be used as a case study of blithering administrative idiocy. In Washington, politicians get impeached for less...

...Sport needs above all a narrative, a straightforward storyline that the public can grasp. Ashes cricket has it - and how. The World Cup will probably get one. So do all successful sporting events. Going along for the spectacle of a Twenty20 may be one thing; but the county cricket enthusiast is vanishing - turned off by the hopeless mish-mash.

Why should we, in India, need millions of tournaments? Duleep Trophy, zonal one dayers, Ranji Trophy and Ranji one dayers - the list never ends. Have a tight 10 team top division and lower divisions with a promotion/relegation system, one each for first class and one day cricket, and that should be enough. The Irani Trophy match has tradition and is a nice curtain raiser to the domestic season and so keep it but that should be it.

Australian first class teams play 10 first class games in their domestic competition each year. It provides tough, hard fought contests which benefit the players and builds up a story which people can follow. Ensure that the games are scheduled in such a way that international players can play at least play in half of the domestic matches (BCCI has indicated it will ensure players play more domestic matches in the future) if not more.

Years ago, we scrapped the Quadrangular/Pentangular. Now, it is time to scrap the Duleep (and stuff like zonal one dayers) and take a step forward.

RIP Bob Woolmer

Pratyush Khaitan — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 09:15:44 EDT

Bob Woolmer's death has come as a huge shock. As a keen follower of South African cricket in the 90s, I had the opportunity to see how brilliant Woolmer's cricketing mind was. Cricket is a game which has plenty of room for strategy and innovations if some one is creative. Cricket suited Woolmer perfectly in this regard. He brought innovations and thought about the game with a modern perspective for which he was widely regarded as the best coach in the world.

As a coach he had success with Warwickshire county club and then reached great heights with South Africa. Australia has been the best cricket team in the world for what now seems an eternity. However, for a period in the 90s - 1996-99, South Africa had the best one day side in the world. No small credit for that goes to Bob Woolmer. Woolmer always had that new point of view no one could have thought about and it was evident every where - whether it was team strategies, field placements or team compositions.

All rounders and lower order batsmen started getting a new meaning in international cricket. South African lower order batting would have guys like Shaun Pollock, Lance Klusener, Nicky Boje. Even Pat Symcox made runs and was contributing to the team apart from his bowling. I remember a match versus Australia where Woolmer opened with Lance Klusener and brought Pat Symcox in at number 3. Klusener made 92 and Symcox made 26. South Africa ended up with 301 and won comfortably in the end. That's just one match which shows how brilliant Woolmer was.

Many people suggested that Woolmer shouldn't coach Pakistan but he followed his beliefs. Not that long ago, the team was progressing exceedingly well. Woolmer was creating depth in the batting and bringing in more options for the team in bowling. Woolmer always had a vision with a team and specific players were backed if it was believed that they could do a job which would add to the over all team strength of the team. So Shahid Afridi was brought back when no one gave him much of a chance. There were many other interesting things done in Pakistan cricket in that phase where they were looking good - things like Shoaib Akhtar being disciplined and then brought back which could extract the best output out of him. In his short time with Pakistan, Woolmer managed to create an attachment in the hearts of the common Pakistan cricket fan just like he had done in South Africa.

In 1999, Woolmer couldn't win the world cup with South Africa. Pakistan in 2007 was to be Woolmer's redemption. Sadly, Pakistan cricket went from one low to another in the past months culminating with the exit of Akhtar and Asif from the world cup. Without the bowling spearheads, there was little chance of Pakistan winning the world cup.

First as a player, then as a coach, Woolmer served cricket and added a lot to the game. RIP.

French Open: Last Four Preview

Pratyush Khaitan — Wed, 7 Jun 2006 12:56:18 EDT

The French Open is my favourite grand slam ahead of Wimbledon - the battles fascinate me more than the quick matches we see on grass. This year though, the football and NBA has meant I haven't been able to talk much on the French Open.

On the women's side, the stories so far have seen Hingis outsed by Clijsters - showing she has a lot of work still left to do in her tryst with destiny. The biggest story has been Nicole Vaidisova though. Is she the next big thing in women's tennis? Defeating Amelie Mauresmo and then striding over Venus Williams is no mean thing. The last four sees Vaidisova face the real test when she faces Svetlana Kuznetsova - the in form player at the moment and likely to go through to the finals. The other semi has another Belgian battle between Clijsters and Henine-Hardenne. It is a match for which no one seems to have any clue about who will advance - the ingredient which makes Clijsters-Henine encounters exciting prospects.

The big action is happening in the men's side though. The top 4 seeds have all reached the semis. When you consider the history of players from no where reaching the last 4 - be it Michael Change, Thomas Muster or Gustavo Kuerten, it is amazing to have the four best players on paper coming to the party. More importantly, Nadal and Federer look all set for the show down of the clay court season. Before that, Federer has to defeat a challending David Nalbandian, one of the best clay court players in his own right.

Nadal faces an easier challenge against Croat Ivan Ljubičić. Ljubičić has overcome Julien Benneteau, the first local hero to reach the last eight since Sebastian Grosjean in 2001. Can the out of the norm Ljubičić cause Nadal trouble? Maybe, though I seriously doubt the Nadal winning streak will be halted in the semis. There is the greater possibility of Nalbandian playing the spoil sport and depriving us of the match we have been waiting for from the moment the clay court season started. Nalbandian fans aside, every one will be hoping that does not happen.

The clay court detractors should start watching now and experience for themselves why clay court tennis is enrossing like nothing else in tennis. If you cannot watch and still want to have fun, you can always listen to the live commentary at the official French Open site. The guys there are hilarious. For example, at the break between games, one of the commentators started singing the fool on the hill by The Beatles. On a serious note, when was the last time in men's tennis two players battled like Federer and Nadal have this clay court season?

We have seen the Graf-Seles finals where it was certain the two would face each other in the tournaments they were taking part in. In phases, we have seen Agassi-Sampras beat the competition. When have two players faced each other final after final in the tournament they took part in over a season or specifically a clay court season? Who knows what the future will hold for these two. Regardless, it has been a memorable season and the next few days promise much more.

Champions League Final Preview: The Night of Love for Football Fans

Pratyush Khaitan — Wed, 17 May 2006 01:51:27 EDT

It is here then! The match which promises so much. The match every one - particularly the Barcelona and Arsenal fans have been waiting for.

Arsenal, in their best years in the recent past (a couple of years ago when they were winning domestic titles) were performing very miserably in Europe. It was a very good team but critics said that it could not be termed great until it won the big ones in Europe. This, the performance so far, is probably a couple of years late. It was totally unexpected that Arsenal would reach the Champions League final in the year it almost finished 5th in the English Premiership - some thing which exemplifies how it has been a crazy ride of emotions for Arsenal fans. The ride isn't over. There is still pondering regarding Henry going to Barcelona (some thing I, as a Barcelona fan am very much over excited about). Regardless of that, the season could be perfect for Arsenal if they do manage to win the Champions League.

There is one problem though - FC Barcelona. Barcelona play their own style of attacking one-touch football which is so difficult to replicate and so wonderful to watch. There is possession. There is passing. There is a lot of brilliance. Add to it, there are a lot of goals - just some of the aspects which make Barcelona the best football side in the world (though Chelsea and English fans might still disagree). Messi might stage a return if he passes the fitness test. That Barca dominated last season without him and have managed to reach the Champions League final despite him not being there for crucial matches shows how the team relies more on team work and less on individual brilliance - despite brilliant Ronaldinho being ever present.

A champions league win would crown the young Rijkaard-era perfectly. It would be almost tragic if Barcelona fail to win the Champions League this time around. It was unbearable when the loss to Chelsea occured last year - it will be much more painful this time around. However, the threat from Arsenal is real. Arsenal has a solid defense and play attacking football very much like Barcelona does. More so, even if they do not dominate possession, a Thierry Henry special can never be ruled out till the last moment when the referee blows his whistle - which means that the match is always on.

Arsenal and Barcelona, both, play beautiful and mostly clean football. Both teams like to go for goals and keep up the attack - which makes the game very exciting and pleasurable to watch. When the two teams play against each other, regardless of who wins, football fans are likely to go home happy. The game is also a chance to watch some of the bigger names in world football ahead of the World Cup in all their glory. Expect at least three goals and some brilliant football. How far Joga Bonito will be applied on the field during the World Cup remains to be seen. A lot of that spirit is likely to be present in a romantic evening in Paris.

Nadal-Federer: Agassi-Sampras II?

Pratyush Khaitan — Tue, 16 May 2006 00:08:34 EDT

Nadal has equalled the record of Vilas.

CNNSI Reports:

Rafael Nadal equalled Guillermo Vilas' record of 53 consecutive claycourt wins when he beat Roger Federer 6-7 7-6 6-4 2-6 7-6 in the final of the Rome Masters.

Nadal's victory, his fourth in a row over the Swiss world number one, made him the first player to win back-to-back titles in the Italian capital since Thomas Muster of Austria in 1995-96.

Was it one of the best matches ever on clay? Probably. The stakes were high as I mentioned yesterday. I said then:

This one promises to be another cracker.

It sure was! Federer came the closest he has ever come to beating Nadal on clay. That Nadal won was only apt though. It would have been a shame if he would have failed to equal Vilas after such a tremendous run. The setup - facing Federer for the Rome Masters finals against the backdrop of Federer in the midde of a losing streak to Nadal could not have been better scripted.

This is brilliant for tennis too. Now, tennis has a rivarly to match the Agassi-Sampras rivarly of the 90s. Agassi was a little more than 15 months older than Sampras. With a gap of more than 4 years between Nadal and Federer, the age gap is bigger - some thing which makes the rivalry all the more intriguing. The Agassi-Sampras rivalry hardly saw the two players battle it out versus each other at their best. We very much are seeing Nadal and Federer face each other in top form - it would be wrong to judge when was actually their best till both the careers are over.

Their games are perfect contrasts - always a key ingredient for memorable rivalries. While Federer is brilliant on grass, Nadal has so far been unbeatable on clay. This does not mean neither of the two players will be able to battle each other on other surfaces. Federer (as shown in the recent matches versus Nadal for those who didn't know) is one of the better clay court players - something we could never say of Sampras. Nadal, meanwhile, is proficient on hard courts. Though we don't know yet completely how well Nadal will fare on grass, with the talent and the attitude he possesses, it is unlikely that he will be a miserable failure.

Most importantly, these two players are champions in their own right and hate to lose a point, let alone a match. So when different games and fight-till-death attitudes meet, it is bound to produce matches of the highest quality. At the stage of his career where Federer was beating everyone quite easily, the rivalry is a sheer joy for tennis and a trigger which can boost the Federer game even higher. Federer is down 1-2 versus Nadal even on hardcourts. Can Federer match Nadal, particularly on clay? How will Nadal fare on grass?

Riveting questions which are bound to form the foundation of a memorable rivalry.

Rang De Basanti: Detractors Taken to Task

Pratyush Khaitan — Sat, 6 May 2006 00:03:59 EDT

I watched Rang De Basanti (RDB) only yesterday. There is something about much talked about movies because of which I want to watch them only when I have the mental space to be able to give proper attention. This meant that I watched Sarfarosh four to five months after its release.

That is beside the point. I started reading a few reviews of the movie and was surprised at the reasons pointed out to say that RDB is not a quality movie:

• RDB says kill people/politicians and take revenge;

• RDB is not relevant today as democracy exists in our country;

• RDB is unrealistic. How can one even compare freedom fighters with college-going kids. Hell, how can you replace each person from history with a character. It is high on fascination and thus it is crap;

• It is not a clearly defined movie and fails to know what it really wants to put across;

• RDB hasn't actually created change. So it is just some thing people like to hear and is a failure;

A lot of reasons are given for RDB not being a quality film. None of the reasons seems to have a strong arguement, I am afraid.

Firstly, RDB DOES NOT tell or send the message to the youth to kill politicians and kill when wronged. When Karan Singhania (played by Siddharth) is asked during the last scene of the movie, "Who else is on your hit list?", he retorts that no one is. Is that not clear enough for people to understand that revenge is not the motive behind the killing?

We have to decide first whether our nation is doing very well or we have to have changes. Right, we at least agree on some thing - that changes are required.

The question is, Who will create the changes? The older generation or the nation's youth? History shows that it is usually the youth who enact change, who are the real change agents in any society. So hopefully we agree on another point - that youth would be needed to play a vital role to alleviate the problems of any nation.

Are the youth doing that? Not really. Does the youth feel frustration at the state of the nation? Yes. Else, we would not have people ruing over how x is bad or y is not good enough. A part of it is an entertaiment and time pass factor. The sadness at the state of affairs of the nation felt by the youth can only be discounted to an extent and no more.

The youth isn't doing enough though, is it? Is it because they are not brave enough or is it because they are not awakened? Awakening is necessary. Which is why there are revolutionaries and freedom fighters. The mass supports the revolution and the freedom movement. However, a force or an event or a few people have to exist to light the torch.

The youth are the same age as the freedom fighters back then. The freedom fighters fought for independence. These group of people potrayed in the movie are shown to create an awareness for people to fight for another movement to truly free India. The symbolism is very much relevant - India has many issues which have to be resolved - corruption being the prime one.

To be politically safe, Karan Singhania is made to say that he made a mistake. In an American History X, that did not happen and it is in those aspects that RDB missed a few icings on the cake. Why did Mehra kill the group of youngsters? Could he have not shown them alive? It would have meant less impact. However, it would have meant answering the more difficult questions - how the changes could really take place.

Being a part of the system is advocated by the group, and rightly so. Showing a sort of a revolution in 5-10 minutes and not just students showing support on television in the end would have been a much better ending according to me.

There is the Gandhi versus Bhagat Singh ideology clash. I really do not know where ideology comes into the discussion. People can differ on ideologies. However, given that the ideology adopted has been the Bhagat Singh one, should the issues handled be taken at face value rather than pointing flaws because you do not agree to the ideology of the Bhagat Singh way? Another movie could have been made to cleanse the nation a Gandhian way - equally as powerful.

Some smaller detractions: Changes are occured too fast in characters - my contention is that the characters already felt for the nation - only an awakening was necessary. Another one - the beating up of the people at the peaceful protest was too unrealistic (with media cameras, ministers and what not). Actually, such incidents are common place. The trouble makers are shown going and sitting with the peaceful protestors and creating agitation. Next, the police intervened to control the angry mob. A setup which can take place in real life.

There is another point which is being raised by the detractors of the movie - no change is occuring. So the movie is just beating about playing with the sentiments of the people. So it was crap and my point is validated. This shows that it is you, the detractor who raised the stakes of the movie more than any one else. For, no movie has in the past, nor in the future, will create a revolution. For it, real actions have to be taken in real life.

Reality is much more powerful than any cinema or drama can hope to be. The movie does call on the youth to act. However, it won't happen till the senses are truly awakened. For that, a revolutionary has to create noise - an impact like Bhagath Singh and those with him created - perhaps by violent actions such as placing a bomb in the Assemby, as he did. Do we have some one as brave, fearless and insightful? I do not see it yet.

The Flipper: Women's Tennis and Equality With Men Edition

Pratyush Khaitan — Wed, 26 Apr 2006 00:06:55 EDT

The pay issue in tennis has all the ingredients to captivate the mind - authority versus player, man versus woman. The issue has reached a boiling point with the announcement of the All England club. Reports CNN:

The All England club announced on Tuesday that its singles winners would receive a four percent increase, but with the men's champion receiving 30,000 pounds ($51,000) more than his female counterpart.

This leaves Wimbledon as the only Grand Slam which gives away less prize money to its women's tournament champions. The French Open announced equal pay for its champions earlier this year. However, they still give more money to the men compared to the women. The US Open gives its prize money down the middle though as seen by the 2005 prize money distribution.

The women are fuming. Former players Chris Evert and Billie Jean King's views from the same CNN article:

Three-time winner Chris Evert called the decision "a black mark for the sport."
"Wimbledon should do the right thing and award all women's players equal pay to the men," added the American.

Six-time winner Billie Jean King said: "Wimbledon needs to join the modern world on this issue."

The current players are making no small talk either. Venus Williams says, almost threatening:

"We want to be treated equally as the men. This is not just about women's tennis but about women all over the world," she told BBC Sport. "At Wimbledon we would like to have equal prize money to prove that we are equal on all fronts.
"We will keep lobbying on the matter. We don't want to deprive fans from seeing women's tennis but we are willing to be extremely proactive in our stance."

Maria Sharapova has logic to back her:

"Women's tennis players are getting as many sponsors and media coverage as the men, and I understand that our TV ratings at the Grand Slams are pretty much equal to and often better than the men so I don't understand the rationale for paying the men more than us."

All England Club chairman Tim Phillips counters the views. From Fox sports:

Phillips said the WTA Tour paid 63 percent less to players in an average week than the ATP Masters Series did.
"Whereas we're 87 percent," Phillips said. "So it seems to me we are much closer to equal prize money than they are on the rest of the tour."

One issue, a lot of statements and a lot of layers if the surface is scratched a bit. Women give as much effort as men. So why should they not be paid equally is one arguement. Well, I am sure the curling players also give as much effort. So why not pay them money too then? Or why not pay all the women equally then as they all put as much effort?

The second arguement from the other side borders on insanity. Women play 3 sets and not 5. So they are bound to be played less. Michael Jordan does not play basketball any more. Still he earns more than many women players. So maybe Jordan should come out of retirement? Or what about boxers. They box far less compared to how much time tennis players play. So maybe they should be paid less then?

The air time question comes up. As women occupy less air time because there matches are shorter, the sponsors get much less exposure. So it is justified that the players are paid less. Well, women have played 5 set tournaments in the WTA season ending championships. So it is not as if the women aren't capable of playing 5 sets. So do women have to play 5 sets at Wimbledon to get equal prize money?

The question I want to ask is, why is the WTA paying women lower compared to the ATP if we exclude the Grand Slams? Should not the WTA, champions of equality, pay women equivalent to what men get by the stand they take? The opposition to this is on the lines - 'it is the WTA's business what it does in other tournaments. When men and women, both play, we should get equal prize money.'

I scoff at the idea. The issue is not about women's rights. The issue is not about equality. The issue is about market worth. If women's tennis is more sellable, I would not grudge it even paying more than men's tennis does. I do not like that the other three Grand Slams have succumbed to the pressure tactics in one way or another, at one point or the other other.

Women's tennis and men's tennis are different sports. So if one has more spectators than the other, one gets more revenue and distributes more to the players. The issue of equal prize money is not new. A feedback to BBC from 2002 looks as relevant now as it did back then.

I spoke on the issue with blogger Sujatha Bagal who could give a woman's angle:

The market forces theory is good, but it does not take into account so many other relevant variables. Market forces can be created if there is the will. Equal prize money is about recognizing women for the effort they've put in, acknowledging that they've reached the pinnacle of their sport and rewarding them for it. Why are women's finals played on Saturdays while men's are on Sundays?

Why are the market forces not created then? If I were a promoter of a tournament, I would look at maximising the demand. Or is it just a case of revenues not going back to the players who generate them?

The WTA stars certainly believe they deserve higher pay. Wimbledon would bear huge losses if the stars do not turn up. With three Grand Slams agreeing to the demand of the women, Wimbledon stands weak on the bargaining table regardless of how fair this is. The women know it and are letting Wimbledon know it as well.

I do have an issue with equality though. Female prostitutes get paid a lot more than the male postitutes because there is higher demand for female prostitutes. It would look very silly if the male prostitutes ask for equal pay. The platforms are different but the point of contention remains the same.

RIP: Fardin Qayyumi

Pratyush Khaitan — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 12:55:32 EDT

16 year old Fardin Qayyumi was funny, enthusiastic, passionate, lovable, confident and a wonderfully nice guy. I just came to know about his passing. A 16 year old cricketer from North California, Fardin played in the North California Cricket Association (NCCA) league.

Ganesh Sanap, who played with Fardin, recalls:

He had his own way of dressing up for the game and it was fun seeing a 15 year old among us. He was our future Captain designate. He had an amazing will to succeed. Some of us can only dream about possessing as much talent as him.

About halfway through last season Fardin started opening the batting for Valley Cricketers and showed tremendous defensive techniques. During this year's team meeting Fardin asked what's his batting position going to be this season and I asked him what position would he like to bat. He mentioned that he would like to open and then I told him that he didn't even need to ask about his position. Such was the kids manners and attitude, he didn't take things for granted. One of the most important aspects for anyone to succeed, not just on the field, but off it too.

I came to know Fardin from his posts at the cricketweb forums. Fardin proclaimed that he had defense like that of Dravid and spin like that of Vettori. His enthusiasm was there for all to see. The way Fardin spoke about his exploits would not make people go angry at him for bragging. He was just too lovable.

Fardin won the hearts of many people through his humour as well. People loved Fardin for who Fardin was.

Fardin's younger brother, Farhad Qayyumi, recalls:

Farhad Qayyumi, 14, said that in between his brother's wisecracks -- of which there were many -- Fardin also taught him to take his education seriously.
"He wanted me to graduate, study a lot," Farhad said.

Whether it was his friends, team mates, coaches, internet folks or any one else Fardin came in touch with, Fardin touched hearts. His MSN Space says that he has only 118 friends. I am sure there are many, many more.

I can confidently say that every one who even interacted with Fardin will remember him for the rest of their lives.

***
Tribute threads for Fardin on the NCCA Cricket site, Cricketweb and Planetcricket.

***

Ganesh Sanap wrote on the NCCA Cricket site:

Fardin's family has migrated from Afghanistan in recent years and has very few means. The family is still to come to terms with the reality. Fardin's father has made an appeal for financial assistance for immediate expenses and more. Valley Cricketers / East Bay Cricket Club and a few well wishers have pledged some amount but we need a lot more. I would like to request all NCCA Clubs and Cricketers to donate generously for thisnoble cause. Please contact me for details. Every dollar will count and no amount will be too small. Your privacy will be maintained. Please forward this to as many individuals as possible.

Shounak Ganguly has created a paypal fund account and people are encouraged to donate to it by clicking here.

Alternatively, cheques in the name of Shoaib Qayyumi, Fardin's father, can be sent at the following:

Ganesh Sanap

4240 Ramshall pl.

Santa Clara, Ca 95054

For more, check here.

The Plight Of The Chinese Sportsperson

Pratyush Khaitan — Sun, 23 Apr 2006 12:47:57 EDT

Chinese woman footballer Sun Wen first made her debut appearance for the national team at the age of 17. She played 13 years for the China. During the period, she was part of the team which won the Olympic Silver medal in the 1996 Atlanta games, took part in 4 the inaugural four women's FIFA World Cups, won the Golden Boot and Golden Ball for the 1999 World Cup (where China finished runners up) and shared the FIFA Player of the century award with American Michelle Akers.

What is Wen doing now? At 33, Wen is washing her own kits. China Youth Daily reported it initially and an English report on it can be found in Malaysian The Star:

Sun Wen and her teammates are accommodated in rooms no more than six square metres with dirty sheets on tiny beds, malfunctioning television sets and air-conditioning and a leaking toilet, according to a report in the China Youth Daily.
"I buy a plastic basin to do my laundry wherever I go," the 33-year-old Sun Wen told the newspaper. "I'm afraid I'll have to bring my own bedclothes next time."

Wen's life was going well till a few years ago. She was signed in 2001 by the Atlanta Beat of the Women's United Soccer Association (WUSA) and living the life her talent deserved. WUSA, of course, started with much fanfare roping in the top plight women's footballers in the world in 2001 before folding up shortly thereafter in 2003, but that is another story. Wen was then recalled home to China. She joined the Fudan University in Shanghai, China to study journalism and looked forward, rather than back at this crucial juncture of her life. In December 2005, Wen announced her comeback and returned to the women's national team.

If an extra ordinary talent in Wen reaches the situation she has, why would any one take up or want to take up football in China, at least as far as women are concerned? What about the situation of the men's football team and sport persons in general in China? China expects world standard performers. It is focusing on building young sports stars to perform internationally. But why should some one follow sport in the country seeing the situation some stars find themselves in?

A few weeks ago, news emerged of former weight lifting champion, Zou Chunlan. At 36, Zou is nearly destitute and working in bath houses. Reports Yahoo:

Zou Chunlan, 36, won several gold medals in China's National Games between 1987 and 1993 but following retirement was unable to find steady work due in part to poor health she blames on drugs taken during her athletic career.
"I said to my coach... I'm now always growing a beard, during training I was always made to take a 'power supplement', now I've become like this, you won't get me work, what am I to do?" she was quoted by the Beijing News newspaper as saying.

"I was once very proud of these medals but now they only give me painful memories."

I am not going to go the drug story path as that is an often repeated story. Also, it is a story which is speculated upon about many countries and not just China with the degrees of usage varying. What I am concerned about is the Chinese Sportsperson. Often, a reason for lack of money in a sport is linked to lack of success or lack of demand among the general public ceasing to bring sponsorship to the sport and it's athletes.

In China, the demand for sport is there as people love sports in the country. There is even the success, as shown by the tremendous achievements of Wen and so many others. The recognizable example would obviously be Yao Ming and his NBA success. Why then, does the money not come to the sport or the sports persons? Things are changing in China, but they aren't obviously changing enough. Else stories such as the two stated would not have arisen in the first place.

The good news is that with the internet and the speed at which information travels, knowledge increases. How else could I have known about all this? How else could you be reading this piece? The internet is a medium impossible to get rid off completely. The China Youth Daily, which reported this for example, is the first independent newspaper existing in China. As information travels, questions are asked. People become answerable when earlier they weren't. Changes occur. I hope changes occur more swiftly though.

***
Additional links:

Profile of Wen from the official World Cup site ahead of the 2003 World Cup.

Another news item previewing Wen before the same tournament.

CNNSI announcing Wen's deal with Atlanta Beat and Wen's comments back then.

Wen's profile from Fifa.com.