Where have I heard of Lalit Modi before?

I've just remembered a little story from (roughly) 1984-87. A cousin of mine went to Duke University for his MBA. I spoke to him regarding my plans to go to the US for graduate school. He gave me some advice: don't succumb to the temptations of the US. Otherwise, I might end up like the young Modi boy, who was his classmate, and had got into some serious trouble with the local police.

I should have succumbed; I would have cleaned up millions and hung out with cricketers. But to top it off, I would have had the chance to deliver a rambling, squirm-inducing, spiel at the end of a cricket tournament. On live television.

Yes, some things are worth breaking the law for.

Some thoughts on the IPL

As the third season of the IPL approaches, I've become increasingly convinced that the only way I could get interested in it was if the following conditions were met:

1. I should be the owner of a nice, large-screen television, preferably HD with a quality broadcast to boot
   
   
2. I should be back in India
   
   
3. I should watch the games in the company of a few like-minded friends
   

My cricket-watching environment, solitary, often with headphones on, sitting at my desk, looking at a computer screen, is only conducive to pursuing well-established passions like test matches. One-day internationals struggle in this setting, and it is only major tournaments that manage to retain my interest (in this regard T20 does well for I watched the World Cup last year with keen interest).

So the IPL will come and go, and while I will tune in for some of the games, I'm not optimistic that it will evoke any significant reactions in me. I almost wish IPL had started off as a purely domestic endeavor; I think I would have been quite pumped up about cheering for Delhi then (after all, there'd be the chance that we could stick it to Mumbai, and who wouldn't want that?).

Which leads to me another thought. What if the IPL, instead of starting off as a grand international league, had simply started off as an Indian domestic competition, on a smaller scale with a little less money (but just enough to make it worthwhile for the Indian international stars to play)? Perhaps the league might not have attracted the glamor, the big bucks, the attendant hoopla. Perhaps. But would the interest have been so minimal that it wouldn't have flourished? I don't think so. Given that, I suspect it would have eased into the world's calendar a little more smoothly. And perhaps in the second or third seasons, IPL owners/organizers could have announced that teams were allowed to retain one or two international players, who might have been attracted because of the decent money available for a few weeks work. Perhaps the IPL would have made a different sort of impact on the cricketing world's consciousness then?

What would the world's attitude to the IPL, to Modi, to Indian cricket, to the BCCI, have been then? What would the average Indian fan's reaction been? I'm not sure what the answers are, and I invite your thoughts and reactions.

Modi and Haigh on Cricinfo

No, no, not together. If only. There are a couple of interesting interviews up on Cricinfo. Harsha Bhogle and Sanjay Manjrekar are involved in both; one features Lalit Modi (who has some interesting and revelatory comments to make), the other features Gideon Haigh (who has his history down as always). Check them out both.

Lalit Modi, zip it

Today, I posted over at Different Strokes commenting on Lalit Modi's initial response to the release of the independent report commissioned by players' unions in England, Australia and South Africa that has led to talk of shifting the 2010 IPL to another country. By the time that post went up, I was regretting having ever said anything even mildly complimentary about that man. For Modi had followed up with more.

For I heard that Modi has a Twitter feed (I heard he had tweeted my article; good lord!). When I went to Modis' Twitter page. There, I was amazed to see Modi getting stuck into one and all. His crack at Ponting being "dropped by KKR" was ridiculous and infantile. (See this story, which includes a quote from Saurav Ganguly, to see why thats the case).

To say that I'm dumbstruck would be an understatement. What is this man up to? Why does he spend so much time tweeting, especially when he seems prone to making intemperate statements like the one against Ponting? I'm still having a hard time believing that a man who occupies such a powerful position in cricket spends time on Twitter, getting into juvenile tit-for-tats. I shouldn't be surprised I suppose, but I still am.

Anyway, on more pleasant topics: coming up soon, a post on SRT's double-ton. Either here, or on Different Strokes.

Uh-oh Modi photo-ops are here

Yargh. The IPL is back. Which means, unfortunately, that Lalit Modi's mug will soon be all over the place, as in this Cheshire Cat moment with IPL team owners. I'm going to be have to be careful in arranging my meal timings.

Flogging the ICL players just a little bit more

Why do the ICL players need to be banned for one more year? Because they must be made to pay. What other reason could there be? I wish I didn't have to read about this sort of vindictiveness but so long as Lalit Modi is in charge, we'll get plenty of this. Congrats Modi. The ICL is over. You've won. Set off some fireworks. How I wish I could impose a "cooling period" on you.

How many ways do I dislike thee, Lalit Modi?

Reader Subhash asks (in a rather irate tone of voice) in response to my post below complaining of having to put up with too much Lalit Modi on the television during the IPL:

you have to explain your hatred for Lalit Modi...The man has turned an idea in to a money printing machine. He seems to find ways out of tight corners...Don't give me cop out reasons like, "Oh! It has become all about the money!".. Whether people like to believe it or not, Cricket is a business. People need to get off their high horses!

Phew. Where do I begin? I feel like responding "No, you explain your liking for the man". But let me try. First off, money-making talent is no particular reason to like someone. None whatsoever. Some acknowledgment of talents, perhaps, but liking them? No sir. Donald Trump is a freaking millionaire. But he is an arrogant twat. Steve Ballmer is a billionaire. But he is, guess what, an arrogant twat. I know professors who've published dozens of books and are geniuses. But plenty of them are arrogant twats.

Modi is a zamindar incarnate. If he didn't have to wear a suit, and be bound by law, he'd be running around flogging peasants and repossessing their homes. He doesn't give a rat's arse about test cricket. He doesn't give a rat's arse about developing cricket at the grassroots level in India. Why doesn't he, rather than concentrating all his energies on the IPL, put up a cricket net in every single residential neighborhood in all major metropolitan centers in India? Modi is a corporate suit, who happens to be running a game. He'll make money. Good for him. And his family. If he happens to shit all over the game that matters the most to me, he wouldn't give a damn. Don't expect me to like someone who sounds like a prick, talks like a prick, walks like a prick. Even if he happens to be a rich one.

IPL Balance Sheet

Thus far:

What I like: the little matchups like Flintoff v. Tendulkar; the improbable scorecard lines like Dravid c Warne b Patel.

What I dislike: images of Lalit Modi; images of Lalit Modi; images of Lalit Modi.