Skip to main content

Rohit or Manoj on infinite loop

Sometime ago I wrote about how ESPN Cricinfo, despite still being the best single sport website in my opinion is showing the tendency to slip into mainstream media tendencies of sensationalism. Now they seem to be taking on another facet of it, namely flogging the same issue to death as evidenced by the repeated focus on the Rohit Sharma/Manoj Tiwary debate.

First, after the second ODI, Aakash Chopra (who seems to have let the positive response from readers to his initial writings go to his head and churns out relative drivel these days) writes about Rohit Sharma's temperament and how it lets him down. Then, in the build-up to the third ODI, Abhishek Purohit writes a feature about the two and who should be picked. He then follows it up with a re-emphasizing of the issue in his write-up on the pre-match press conference from Gautam Gambhir, indicating relatively clearly Cricinfo's stance that Sharma should be dropped and Tiwary picked. Fair enough, editors should have an opinion. That's not the end of it however, as in the pre-match build up to the final ODI, a big part of the focus of the pre-match conference again seems to be, yes Rohit Sharma's poor form. Yes, we hear you Cricinfo, you want Rohit benched and Manoj picked. But no, post the final ODI (where surely the big news is how India continue their comprehensive ODI domination of Sri Lanka), we have the feature being about Manoj Tiwary's claim for a permanent spot over you know who. And not satisfied with that, the build-up to the T20 game also has another piece on Tiwary's bench days. At least they mention Rohit Sharma only once in the article.

Apart from decent writing, the only thing I (and I'm sure I'm not alone in this) ask for from journalists is balanced coverage. And yet in this case, not one piece or interview that talks about Rohit Sharma and what he's going through? No one likes to fail personally and potentially let his team down, especially a young man of 25 who's clearly insecure at the moment. Maybe the folks at Cricinfo tried talking to him but from the coverage, it clearly doesn't seem like it. At least, Harsha Bhogle brings some sanity to proceedings and highlights the main problem that Rohit Sharma seems to be having (and nary a mention of Tiwary). The editorial staff at Cricinfo could learn a few things from his experience and wisdom, just like Rohit Sharma could learn a thing or two from his seniors.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Et tu?

As a single sport website, I think Cricinfo has brought about a revolution and the fact that they were bought by ESPN is testament to how highly valued they've become. Their editing and approach to articles/opinion has been refreshing to say the least and even though they seem to have had a lot of editorial staff movement they've usually maintained very high standards. Off late though, both in their headline styles as well as in actual content, there seems to be an occasional slippage of standards and an inching towards the modern media sensationalism which is a bit of a pity. This piece  by Siddharth Monga is a classic example. Granted that the last two press conferences by Dhoni and Sehwag  indicated clearly that the captain and his deputy did not agree on this aspect of selection but "discord", "dissent", "public sniping" feels rather presumptuous and heavy handed. Yes, it is a team sport but there is no reason why everyone on the team needs ...

The Ashes part deux: series preview

While I admire the honest, outspoken style that Ian Chappell has in his commentary and writing I don't find myself agreeing with his views very often. This latest piece on ESPNcricinfo is an exception though. In what is a faintly ridiculous set of back to back Ashes series (to accommodate an ODI World Cup of all things), the build-up to the second round has been laughable almost. Anyone who hasn't followed the game for a few years might be forgiven if they thought that the Australian domination from the 1990s and early 2000s has continued and that they will win in a canter again. For a team that's lost seven of their last nine matches (and it should have been eight really), that's quite a good turnaround on paper (and digitally). The reality though is that unless they show a drastic improvement (especially in terms of scoring runs) and England have a bit of a shocker, its going to be well nigh impossible for Australia to win back the urn. Despite putting Buffoon Bo...

Quick singles: Why the double standards?

I'm no fan of David Warner's but for once, I'm firmly and squarely on his side . Sportspersons are probably treated the most unfairly by public opinion (and often the media) whenever they are involved in pay disputes. "Oh, look these millionaires are complaining about not getting paid enough" seems to be the gist of the general reactions. I find this attitude inexplicable at best and grossly hypocritical if I'm feeling less charitable. Like the rest of us, all athletes have the right to fight for what they think they should be paid. That is the fundamental part. In addition (and unlike many of the rest of us), most sportspersons operate in the knowledge that they only have a short period available as a performer, and therefore only a short period to maximise earnings. Most people that I know would behave exactly the same as Warner and his colleagues are doing. So why all the hue and cry?