Where did the facts go?

Sriram Dayanand had written a very fine piece titled "Where did the opinion go" in Cricinfo recently. In his beautiful words, he raised many a question that every Indian cricket follower would have in his mind:

"Live commentary, a well-established source for opinion and analysis, was scrubbed clean too. Erstwhile opinionated voices were now contracted by ratings- and revenue-obsessed cricket boards, and matches were accompanied by the voices of cheerleaders. Too wary of saying anything substantial, they concentrated on honing their clichés and giggling away with their co-hosts. Even the once edgy and opinionated-by-nature Sunil Gavaskar had begun to sound like a chirpy choirboy as the decade ended."

But as much as I find the article to be persuasive, I can't completely sympathize with Sriram, as he seems to be concerned about a higher order problem. I am bitten by a more fundamental bug. The fact that the commentary scene has been so poor for the Indian viewer for so long, that I have even stopped expecting anything better. But now, even my relatively low expectations are in danger of being denied its due. Stereotype - fine, Cheerleaders in disguise - ok, I don't have a choice but to live with it. But facts?

I have noticed that a few times in this IPL, where commentators were guilty of creating a misalignment between my different senses. What I see and what I hear of what I see are at loggerheads. For instance, in today's match between Chennai vs Punjab, Irfan Pathan tried to hit Balaji out of the ground with an agricultural heave, played down the wrong line and was bowled. That's when the legend of Ravi Shastri was in full flow - "Through his defence... Sound of timber" he screamed. What? Through his defence? in which game is that called defence? sound of timber? the bails were just about dislodged man, not like Michael Holding uprooted the stumps which landed near the wicket-keeper or something. Calling a spade a spade is no crime.

There was a similar piece of commentary from Ravi Shastri again, in the CSK vs Deccan match. Justin Kemp danced down the wicket and lofted Pragyan Ojha over long off for a six. Next ball Kemp comes down again, Ojha pulls back the length a bit and bowls it a little flatter and Kemp is deceived by the length and gets stumped. Ravi in his eloquent style said something to the tune of "that was brave bowling by Ojha especially after being hit for a six of the previous ball". Oh really? What's brave about bowling it flat & short if you were hammered for a six of the previous flighted delivery. Isn't that the natural reaction? If you had just heard the commentary by Ravi and not seen the video, you would have thought that Ojha bravely tossed another one up and deceived Kemp in flight. At the same time, I am sure that if Kemp had stayed back for the same ball and cut it for a four, the same Ravi would have said "Ojha over compensates for the previous delivery and Kemp makes full use of it". He's just a template of a commentator, a hard-coded template at that.

If Ravi is so good, would LS stay far behind? No. When Virat Kohli's run-out decision was referred to the third umpire in RCB's match against MI, the replays very clearly suggested that Kohli was short of the crease, when the bails were dislodged - as obvious as it can ever get. But LS said something like "it'll take a brave umpire to give that out". Despite repeated viewing of the replays, he continued to reiterate that there was an element of doubt. Doubt? If this is doubtful, I am glad you are a commentator and not an umpire - bring back Steve Bucknor I say, even if he is in his Sydney form, its fine.

These are just the top of the mind recalls. We are filled up with such masterful commentary almost through out the IPL. Scyld Berry wrote about the importance of Neville Cardus' writing and how he transformed cricket reporting completely in the "Turning Points" column in Cricinfo. In that he points out a controversial angle to Cardus' writing: " He had no television to say he was wrong. He could wander round the boundary at Old Trafford, or even not watch the game at all, and write in the evening that the ball had spun viciously all day and Makepeace had batted to perfection, without anyone contradicting him."

As debatable as that aspect of Cardus' writing was, the output was sure as hell enjoyable, even though you couldn't cross check the reality. But these commentators get away with output, which is neither enjoyable nor accurate, though we get to watch the match live and cross check. And guess what,despite such a pathetic performance, their job is as secure as the Great Wall of China - so much for a market oriented league! Is there any hope? IPL has made me a Cricket nihilist. Sriram, you are in queue. Let my lower order need get satiated first.