Permanent links
Daily links
Journal sitefeed
Movies sitefeed
del.icio.us sitefeed
RSS
20 June 2005
Four defeats and a slap
The five tremors that shook California last week were mere metaphors for five other earth-shaking events of greater potence and more consequence -- each of the four in Southern California either set in by or portending Australia's four consecutive losses in England numbering amongst them one against Bangladesh, and the one in the Bay Area that provoked even a precocious tsunami warning carrying with it tell-tale signs of the shameful episode at the United States Grand Prix in Indianapolis. Australia's loss against England at the novel Twenty20 format was brushed off as a case of stiff muscles and its loss against Somerset put down to Sanath Jayasuriya and Graeme Smith -- not indicative of any future hurdles in the Ashes against England, the real deal. But then, Mohammed Ashraful scored a masterful century off McGrath, Gillespie, Hogg and the useful Australian part-timers and that too in chasing a not-unreasonable total of 250-odd runs to help his team score what is being viewed as the greatest upset in the history of the limited-overs international form of the game. There may be some contentious debate as to that claim but I suspect it will not be too loud and persevering. Finally, the Australians lost handily to Kevin Pietersen, not even England. For somebody who had no knowledge of how highly regarded Kevin Pietersen was and how much he was being raved about both by the stodgy cricket columns and the tabloids looking for a poster-child following Andrew Flintoff's tidying up, I was perhaps the best treated by the transformation from his 30 runs off 38 balls to 91 runs off 65 balls. What has now become a regular spectacle for the ardent cricket follower betting obsessively and with wild optimism on the fortunes of Indian cricket -- the whiplashes, the unabating clichés, the calls to arms and 'sensible cricket', the urging to reinforce team spirit and lastly the counsel to do as the Aussies -- will now be curiously inflicted upon the ruffled Australian cricket fan, including the last bit as Steve Waugh reminds his team and country.The Indianapolis episode deservingly calls for stinging rebuke at all those concerning themselves with the administration of Formula One. Notwithstanding any accusation of senseless ad hominem arguments, I shall ask if it should come as any surprise that Europe has not been able to come to a consensus with regard to either the constitution or the budget when a matter as trivial as allowing the construction of a chicane to allow cars with Michelin tyres to compete in the race was overridden by petty self-interest, mangled bureaucracy and sheer arrogance. Is it a matter of pride after yesterday's incident that the FIA stuck to their guns and stayed with their rules instead of making some concessions towards the larger end of ensuring a race, or is that a matter of sheer ostrich-headed stupidity? What seems so unworkable about allowing the chicane, reducing the speed limits at that particular corner to ensure driver safety, nay even allowing the Bridgestone drivers to take up the first six positions in the grid and at least ensure that all 20 cars raced? Could the matter of penalties not have been taken up following the race? In the true spirit of Coasean economics, could the FIA really have been so thick in its collective thinking that it opted in favour of transaction costs including such appalling and suicidal consequences as the closure of the much-coveted United States market over imposing stiff monetary penalties on Michelin in lieu of the specific amendments to the lofty regulations? Is it really the case that the FIA is Ferrari's lap-dog that in spite of nine out of the ten competing constructors companies agreeing to the chicane, the FIA stubbornly vetoed the proposal because Ferrari alone objected? To paraphrase Andy Dufresne, how could they be so obtuse? Could they really have not foreseen how much of their marketprice they have squandered away by their pigheadedness? Do they really expect organising rights to subsequent Grand Prix events to sell for upwards of $10 million or the television rights in England to sell for a whopping £120 million? More immediately, as Vijay Parthasarathy points out tongue-in-cheek:
In a country where fast-food companies are successfully sued when klutzy customers spill hot coffee on their laps, a perfectly tenable case could be made out for compensating the paying audience; but whether Formula One itself will even survive until such an action can be brought upon is debatable.Sure enough, a disgruntled fan from Colorado Springs has indeed hired a lawyer to file a class-action lawsuit against everybody from the FIA to Ecclestone's Formula One Management, Michelin and the Indianapolis Motor Speedway. Up until now, the razzle-dazzle of Formula One was sustained by the mean machines, the money that goes into them, Schumacher, the tifosis, and the millions and millions of drooling fans -- I counted myself as one amongst them at one time -- but now is when it begins to be fun, if you may pardon the cliché. All that talk about a rival championship looks more threatening and the prospect itself looks more imminent, and I daresay, more than welcome. The rich and spoilt lifestyles of men such as Bernie Ecclestone who have the gall and temerity to pass off comments such as:
"Yep, she did a good job, didn't she? Super. Didn't think she was going to make it,'' (On Danica Patrick's coming fourth at Indianapolis)
"You know, I've got one of those wonderful ideas. ... Women should be all dressed in white like all the other domestic appliances.''
"[If a woman were to compete in Formula One], she would have to be a woman who was blowing away the boys. ... What I would really like to see happen is to find the right girl, perhaps a black girl with super looks, preferably Jewish or Muslim, who speaks Spanish.''-- and all this in full public view in authorised fora for commentary as opposed to private video-showings -- will never be so lavish, if not for the lack of material wealth, at least for the lack of face. This mindless, juvenile and immature act of theirs shall surely not go unpunished and it is about time that happened.
