All said and done, is not cricket to the Indian masses what the Great Circus was to the peoples of ancient Rome? It keeps us from paying too much attention to the eddies and whirlpools of democratic misgovernance, to the forging of strange political alliances and stranger financial deals.True, the proceedings of Assemblies and Parliament provide an alternate source of entertainment; but these institutions are so rarely in session, and the quality of coverage so poor when they are (the video footage being obscured by footwear of assorted size and party affiliation), that the lowly citizen seeks solace elsewhere. And what could be more satisfying than a televised cricket series? The season extends throughout the year, which is more than can be said for our governments. The one-day game, in refreshing contrast to national plans and inquiry commission reports, guarantees a result at the end of the day. And above all there is hope, hope in the humble spectator's heart that perhaps this time, just this one time, India might get get its act together and prevail.The hosting of cricket series even amidst political turmoil illustrates the truth that cricket knows few boundaries. Alas, the same appears to hold true for Indian batsmen. High-level studies have been conducted into the matter; scribes have scribbled reams of advice, experts have expectorated columns of critical comment, but at the end of it all they and the objects of their appraisal remain stumped for an answer. ``The crux of the problem,'' remarked a senior spokesman of the Cricket Control Board on condition of strict anonymity, ``appears to be a marked reluctance on the part of the ball to meet the bat.'' Others opine that the roots of the malady lie in the inability of bat to meet ball; still others pitch the blame on pitches and umpires. All agree, however, that Steps, if not Runs, Need To Be Taken.The nation is anxious. We fret, we worry, we chew our collective paan-stained nails as we contemplate the Indian team's recent and abysmal track record. And now, to cap it all, a learned statistician has sought to lay the entire responsibility on the Indian captain's shoulders by announcing that in the last fifty games lost by India, Sachin Tendulkar scored low or nothing in no less than thirty-eight! The inference is obvious. If Sachin doesn't score, India loses; if he scores, India could win.Stung by this unfair singling out of the best player we've ever had, we decided to investigate the matter ourselves. Eagerly we pulled out our well-thumbed compilation of cricket statistics for the past five thousand years. We employed slide rule and abacus, calipers and computers in our analyses. And now, gentle reader, the results stare at us from crumpled A-4 sheet and grubby PC screen. They mock us even as do the raucous parakeets that sit on yonder tree blowing raspberries at all humankind.We have discovered that the much-maligned Sachin is in fact free from any blame, malfeasance, tort or misdemeanour in the matter of India's cricket losses.Consider our findings. In the last fifty games lost by India, Venkatesh Prasad never scored more than sixty runs in any! In no game could the wicket-keeper take more than nine catches, nor effect even six stumpings. And if all this weren't damning enough, consider the fact that in each and every one of these games India failed to score as many runs as their opponents; and what is worse, our bowlers failed to capture as many wickets!What, then, is the cause of India's repeated failures? Further research will no doubt be carried out by specialists in the field (and off it) to provide an answer. In the meanwhile, we may consider the setting up of a judicial inquiry to go into the whole issue, besides making a formal case before the International Cricket Board for increasing the diameter of cricket balls, or alternatively the width of bats.
