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 ...

First thoughts on the Ashes

The only minor surprise for me in the 2013 Australian Ashes squad announced last week was the selection of James Faulkner ahead of Moises Henriques as the second all-rounder. Minor because given  the Shane Watson shenanigans of recent times, I would have thought that Inverarity and co would have opted for a second batting all-rounder (which is what Henriques clearly is). Instead they've gone with a bowling all-rounder in Faulkner and it'll be interesting to see what happens if Watson's batting woes in Test match cricket continue in the first two Tests. As for the rest of the squad, given the way the inexperienced batting performed in India, Rogers and Haddin were always going to make it in to the team and the choice of Khawaja over Smith appears sound too given that the latter's strength is in playing spin bowling. The batting still looks as unsettled and shaky as the Indian fast bowling line-up and its here that the series will be won or lost for the Aussies. The retu...

Much ado about a run-out

Judging by the amount that's been said and written about Ian Bell's run-out-that-wasn't at Trent Bridge, you would think that it has been the most significant occurrence of the series so far when nothing could be further from the truth. Andrew Miller  and Samir Chopra seem to be of the opinion that it was the crucial turning point in the match, which I completely disagree with (the post-tea sessions on days one and two were far more critical and momentum shifting). Andy Flower says that if Tendulkar had been run-out similarly in Bombay, it would have caused an international incident. He's clearly feeling the effects of having been in the England cricket set-up for too long given that a) its very improbable that Tendulkar would do something as daft as Bell did, and b) when a controversial run-out (but within the laws) did happen to him (against Pakistan at Eden Gardens no less), Tendulkar went out to the crowd and appealed to them to calm down and let the game proceed...