Skip to main content

The IPL at ten (Hindu)

In an ironic, yet vivid way, the Indian Premier League has held up the mirror to cricket

A week after India clinched the Test series against Australia at Dharamsala, the memory of both the fine victory and the bad blood that marred those matches can be pushed to the sidelines. Such is the nature of frenetic cricket calendars that the Indian Premier League has already rolled in, its tenth edition commencing with the match between the defending champion, Sunrisers Hyderabad, and last year’s runner-up, Royal Challengers Bangalore, on April 5. Spread over 47 days and featuring 60 matches, the IPL has over the years blended the instant gratification of the Twenty20 format with a sense of longevity, having prospered since its inception in 2008. On the field, suspense and sixes, upsets and consistency, flair and acrobatic fielding have all combined to energise the league. The inaugural event witnessed a classic reprise of David vs Goliath. Unheralded Rajasthan Royals stunned the fancied Chennai Super Kings (CSK), and ironically both teams are currently serving a two-year suspension, a just punishment following ghastly violations that negated the spirit of the game. If S. Sreesanth, Ajit Chandila and Ankeet Chavan’s alleged forays into spot-fixing dented the Royals in 2013, further damage was caused to the league when CSK’s Gurunath Meiyappan was deemed guilty of betting. Even Rajasthan Royals co-owner Raj Kundra fell in the same category, and tragically for the IPL, the thrills on the ground were marred by the problems that shadowed its fringes.
Ironically, the IPL has actually held a mirror up to and drawn more scrutiny into the affairs of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) than have the game’s longer, more traditional formats. The cosy-club atmosphere that sullied the richest cricket board, the nepotism and an indifference to probity, all came into full public view, with the Supreme Court sitting up and taking notice. The repercussions of the 2013 spot-fixing and betting controversy are even now felt as it sowed the seeds for the wide-ranging reforms suggested by the Justice R.M. Lodha Panel, and now the Committee of Administrators appointed by the court has its hands full. A summer sporting carnival, a domestic tournament with an international flavour, as Rahul Dravid described it, had inexplicably gone beyond its pulsating cricket and virtually prised out the BCCI’s heart. The IPL not only changed the way cricket was played, increasing the tempo and adding big bucks to the players’ kitty, it also inadvertently ushered in a course-correction for the BCCI. Surely, the league has come a long way since it started with a leg-bye when Kolkata Knight Rider’s skipper Sourav Ganguly squared up to Royal Challengers Bangalore’s Praveen Kumar in the first match in 2008 in Bangalore. It was the lull before the storm unleashed by Brendon McCullum’s savage unbeaten 158 off just 73 balls. There have been many other storms since and as for what will happen this time around, no one can hazard a guess.

Popular posts from this blog

NGT terminates chairmen of pollution control boards in 10 states (downtoearth,)

Cracking the whip on 10 State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) for ad-hoc appointments, the National Green Tribunal has ordered the termination of Chairpersons of these regulatory authorities. The concerned states are Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Uttarakhand, Kerala, Rajasthan, Telangana, Haryana, Maharashtra and Manipur. The order was given last week by the principal bench of the NGT, chaired by Justice Swatanter Kumar. The recent order of June 8, 2017, comes as a follow-up to an NGT judgment given in August 2016. In that judgment, the NGT had issued directions on appointments of Chairmen and Member Secretaries of the SPCBs, emphasising on crucial roles they have in pollution control and abatement. It then specified required qualifications as well as tenure of the authorities. States were required to act on the orders within three months and frame Rules for appointment [See Box: Highlights of the NGT judgment of 2016 on criteria for SPCB chairperson appointment]. Having

High dose of Vitamin C and B3 can kill colon cancer cells: study (downtoearth)

In a first, a team of researchers has found that high doses of Vitamin C and niacin or Vitamin B3 can kill cancer stem cells. A study published in Cell Biology International showed the opposing effects of low and high dose of vitamin C and vitamin B3 on colon cancer stem cells. Led by Bipasha Bose and Sudheer Shenoy, the team found that while low doses (5-25 micromolar) of Vitamin C and B3 proliferate colon cancer stem cells, high doses (100 to 1,000 micromolar) killed cancer stem cells. Such high doses of vitamins can only be achieved through intravenous injections in colon cancer patients. The third leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide, colon cancer can be prevented by an intake of dietary fibre and lifestyle changes. While the next step of the researchers is to delineate the mechanisms involved in such opposing effects, they also hope to establish a therapeutic dose of Vitamin C and B3 for colon cancer stem cell therapy. “If the therapeutic dose gets validated under in vivo

SC asks Centre to strike a balance on Rohingya issue (.hindu)

Supreme Court orally indicates that the government should not deport Rohingya “now” as the Centre prevails over it to not record any such views in its formal order, citing “international ramifications”. The Supreme Court on Friday came close to ordering the government not to deport the Rohingya. It finally settled on merely observing that a balance should be struck between humanitarian concern for the community and the country's national security and economic interests. The court was hearing a bunch of petitions, one filed by persons within the Rohingya community, against a proposed move to deport over 40,000 Rohingya refugees. A three-judge Bench, led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, began by orally indicating that the government should not deport Rohingya “now”, but the government prevailed on the court to not pass any formal order, citing “international ramifications”. With this, the status quo continues even though the court gave the community liberty to approach i