Posted on

The brainless think-tank!

We are just a couple of weeks into India’s latest encounter down under. A cricket series in Australia is always something that the fans look forward to due to a couple of facts. First of all, we get to see it only once in four years – so it is something as important as the Olympic games! Secondly, it is a beauty to watch and feel professional test cricket at its highest levels with lively pitches, fans, cricket governing bodies and media playing their own roles to perfection – and sometimes beyond – to make it a mega event. Personally, watching test matches, in which Australia participates, gives me more satisfaction than watching matches involving any other competitive teams. India’s last outing in Australia during 2003-04 has been thrilling for the outcome that we all are proud of but the current series is already turning out to be disappointing due to improper planning.

This series was hyped to be the best chance to beat Australia in its own den as it is probably the last Australian tour for India’s ‘strong’ and prolific middle order men as well as their best bowler ever, Anil Kumble, who happens to be captaining the side as well. However, having talent on paper or executing the same in subcontinent pitches and other favourable conditions alone is not sufficient for tours abroad, especially in Australia.

The Indian cricket board missed a trick or two during the Pakistan tour to India itself. If India genuinely wanted to perform in Australia, they should have scheduled at least couple of test matches in good test cricket pitches like Mohali or Chennai. By not doing so, they managed to escape from Shoaib Akhtar & co and won against Pakistan but miserably failing in Australia. As they arrived late in Australia this time and the lone practice match was disturbed by rain, the preparation at home had to be better.

The next mistake was the team selection and continuing experiments with the batting order. If they had any plan to include (surprise!) Virender Sehwag in the squad he should have been given a chance in at least one test match against Pakistan. Sehwag though not in great form gives some headache to the opposition even though his stay at crease may be shorter. Against Australia, one needs to be mentally prepared and try to offend and attack rather than playing defensive game like Dravid did in the first innings of the first test in Melbourne. If not Sehwag, for sure Dinesh Karthik should have been opening with Wasim Jaffer. Karthik has been a revelation during the series in England and South Africa. It is really surprising that the team think tank decided not to play him due to his couple of failures in dead pitches in India. Ideally he could have played the role that Akash Chopra played in the last series in Australia. On the other hand, the Indian team management decided to sacrifice the stability and composition of the team by not picking the right openers only to include some flat pitch heroes or ODI/Twenty 20 specialists in the batting lineup. To begin a series with positive frame of mind, India had to really attack. The bowlers did it very well but batsmen spoilt all those great efforts. The problem is not really with the batsmen but the roles they are assigned to play. This failure will definitely affect the rest of the test series as well as the performance in the ODIs. For example, Yuvaraj Singh should have been maintained only for ODIs and his failures in tests will also reflect in his approach to the ODI series.

The untimely statements of the selection committee chairman had created a lot of chaos for the players in the past. It is not his job to comment in the press and put players under pressure. I guess, players like Virender Sehwag, Mohammed Kaif, Saurav Ganguly, Dinesh Karthik and now Rahul Dravid are the victims of this wrong statements of expectation. The under-pressure players then react by playing defensive games and targeting individual achievements rather than playing for the team’s cause.

As I mentioned just a while back, having a positive frame of mind is very important to play Australia. Having restricted Australia to less than 350 runs and more importantly getting them all out in less than a day (How often does it happen?), India’s reply was too negative in nature. Rahul Dravid and Wasim Jaffer didn’t make any attempt to rule the Aussies. Another important thing was that probably the in form Ganguly probably should have batted at No. 4. Tendulkar’s attitude in the second innings is always questionable. While chasing huge scores and if couple of wickets are already down he has this ‘why should I waste my time and energy, anyway we are going to loose’ attitude. Another problem is the fielding ethics by the Indians. Even Australia has many players in their mid thirtys but their commitment is far better than that of the Indians. For example, Indians easily allow the opposition to convert their ones to twos and twos to threes. Australians always keep the batsmen under pressure by charging in or by a sudden pick, turn and throw. The bad running between the wicktes have been another example of defensive cricket by the Indians.

If India has to win at least one match in this series, they need to get their basics right from the selection itself. First they needs to pick their best openers and then three or four middle order batsmen followed by a wicket keeper. Depending on the nature of pitch three seamers plus one spinner or two seamers plus two spinners can be picked. It is even worth trying a combination of two openers, three middle order men, one wicket keeper batsman, three seamers (off which one is an all rounder) and two spinners. Ones they get the team composition right, they can plan and pace the game better. This will also reassure and remind each and every person in the team about their roles.

As a long-term step, the BCCI has to really change their mindset to save the Indian cricket from test matches point of view. At the moment, BCCI is more like running a money making business rather than governing a sports body. Due to this attitude, they are concentrating on categories that fetch in money and hence more focus on one day cricket, telecast rights etc. If they are truly worried about the future of Indian cricket, they need to do a few things like providing world class pitches in India, improving domestic itinerary and format, introducing new talent search program, coming up with fair selection policies, forming succession planning etc. It’s a fact that India’s top four batsmen and bowler will retire from international cricket in less than two years time and who are going to fill in there?

At the moment, as a short term goal, we can only hope for a better team composition and better mindsets from the players in the upcoming test matches in Australia. Wishing the Indian cricket all the very best for this new year and their very first match of the year being played in Sydney!

Posted on

Investment strategy in a volatile market

Indian bourses have been setting new and new index highs every other week amidst heavy volatile trading. There are many arguments in favour of the Indian growth story. Some believe that what we are seeing here is a fundamental move where as some others swear that India is a special case compared to other emerging markets and we will keep going up. Some wisemen and analysts even predict targets for the ‘Sensitive Index‘ for not just 2008 but for 2010 and 2020 as well. The weakening dollar combined with the huge market capitalization gains have made Mukesh Ambani the richest person on earth in less than two months time. However, it may be a matter of couple of months before 9 out of 10 retail investors loose out in the market after being exposed to the high-risk game in the volatile market. Having seen and experienced three huge market falls in my investment life, I would like to advise the inexperienced retail investors to be very cautious at this point of time.

Good, bad and ugly…

There are a couple of things that are going really good in India recently. The first and foremost thing is the consistent economic growth rate of 8% and above that the country has been achieving of late. The other good thing (which resulted in the first one) is that there are couple of wise men sitting on top
who are driving the Indian economic story – P, Chidambaram and Y.B. Reddy being the prominent ones supported by other organizational leaders of SEBI etc. Strengthening rupee, low inflation rates, increase in foreign exchange reserve, turned-around PSUs, focus on futuristic infrastructure planning etc are some of the positive results of good overall leadership. The current Indian finance ministry, Reserve Bank of India and SEBI are almost always prompt in rolling out policies for positive growth and also to curb abnormalities like credit or sub-prime issues and indirect FII inflows.

However, there are couple of other things that are not really in favour of a stable economy – the first being the fact that we are having a very unpredictable political alliance at the center that can fall anytime. Many of the economical reforms, tie-ups with developed countries and global capital institutions etc are often thwarted by one or the ally. Secondly, the inability to manage (appreciate/depreciate rupee!) the rupee value at an optimum level against the US dollar has badly affected the export houses and industries like Software, textile and jewelry. Third biggest factor is that the huge FII money that is coming as foreign exchange is not really used for any long term planning. Due to the high volatility, this kind of money is not being used for developmental activities.

Some myths associated to the volatility

India is a special case and the bull run has to continue: Wrong! I personally believe that the fair value for the sensex should be around 13000-14000 at the moment as compared to the PE multiples of other stable emerging markets. The market has been fueled by the FII inflows and it can reduce anytime and India is
not really a special case.

Sensex is so high that I cannot enter now!: Wrong! Sensex is only an indicator of a small set of 30 stocks. At any point of time there are enough value stocks available in the market that you can buy.

PE valuations don’t apply any longer: Stupidity! If a few stocks are shot up because of momentum, it doesn’t mean that we are in a special situation and we can forget the valuations. If Educomp and RNRL are currently being traded at 400 or 500 times forward earnings, they are dangerously risky trading bets and not
any good for investment. Another example: Majority of IT stocks used to trade at 30 to 40 PE multiples for almost ten years now. This does not mean that, going forward Infosys is still fairly valued and be a multibagger!

Momentum trading is better than value buying in a volatile market: Wrong! Value buying is always the best mechanism to invest. Momentum trading may not be there for ever and can wipe out your money at any time.

It’s better to keep booking profits regularly to reduce risk: Wrong! If you have done your homework about your investment portfolio (See long term portfolio below) you don’t need to do this. In fact, booking profits at regular intervals will badly affect your returns. However, it is also a good option if you maintain your investment portfolio and trading portfolio altogether separated. For fun and high risk gambling you could use the trading path while the investment portfolio is probably for your retirement life.

I should book profit on my mutual funds now: No, unless you are in urgent need of money. Mutual funds are long term instruments for wealth accumulation and an ideal way to enter them is via Systematic Investment Plans (SIPs). It is not investor’s job to time the market for MF investment but your fund manager will take care of that part. So never trade a mutual fund.

A few investment tips

If you are in doubt whether you should enter the market now or not, opt for the SIP route of investment via mutual funds. Ideally SIPs should be for subscribed
for a longer investment period of say greater than two years.

Never buy your stocks in bulk: The self managed SIP route can be taken for buying even stocks. ie. You buy larger quantities when the prices go down and smaller quantities when you feel that the prices are a big high. In other words, build your portfolio over a number of months and years and not overnight. Please note that this rule is applicable only to fundamentally strong long term portfolio stocks.

Avoid playing momentum stocks. 8 out of 10 traders make losses on such trading opportunities.

If you want to play volatility then opt for some of the best exchange traded index funds. One great example for the same is Benchmark Nifty Exchange Traded
Scheme. This is a fund that invests in NIFTY stocks and is pretty much reliable in terms of low tracking error.

Don’t buy a stock due to market or analyst pressure or rumours. Do your homework before entering each and every counter.

Avoid having more than 25 or 30 percent weightage on mid and small cap stocks in your long term portfolio.

Identify sectors that have long term value and those sectors and companies that are often affected by government policies, weather, margin pressure etc. For example, textile stocks and software companies are affected big time by the rising rupee and hence they may not yield the same kind of returns as in the past. Another sector which should be almost always avoided is the airlines which are always under margin pressure.

Periodically (every three months or so) inspect your long term portfolio for any fundamental changes or external parameter influence.

Try to diversify your investment across at least four to five sectors and six to ten different stocks. Never put your bulk investment into one or two stocks alone.

Try to diversify in terms of investment instruments. One should have a good mix of Post Office deposits, equities, mutual funds, fixed/term deposits, gold and real estate in their long term portfolio. For long term, gold may be an excellent investment. Again Benchmark’s gold exchange traded fund (ETF) and DSP Merril Lynch’s World Goldfund are excellent picks for low risk investments.

My long term portfolio picks (In the order of portfolio weightage and large cap to small cap order)

L&T
Grasim
BHEL
Punj Lloyd
Reliance Communications
Crompton Greaves
Tata Steel
Bajaj Auto
ACC
SBI
NTPC
HCL Technologies
Voltas
Britannia Industries
Cipla
Kesoram Industries
Bharati Shipyard
EIH Ltd
Apollo Hospitals
NIIT Technologies
Glaxo Smithkline Consumer
Ballarpur Industries
Orient Paper
City Union Bank
Hanung Toys

Note: Some of the above stocks are already fairly valued while some others should be entered during the next correction.

Disclaimer: As a retail investor I may or may not have vested interest in some of the scrips mentioned here. Readers are advised to do their homework and exercise discretion before attempting any investment.

Posted on

Software Quality – Back to basics

Quality Assurance & Quality Control are integral processes of the production/life cycle of any product in most of the industries. While quality governance is an age-old process in the manufacturing industry, it is relatively an emerging topic in the software industry, which itself is only thirty or forty years young. However, of late there has been a surge of too many well-defined quality processes and standards injected into the software development life cycle that half of the production time is eaten up by these measures. In this article, let me try to do a root-cause analysis on poor software quality and see if these processes alone can really drastically improve the product quality. Or is it just that we are missing some basics here?

QA, QC, QE, QM, Q-what?

Quality Assurance (QA) is the overall process innovation and execution part of quality management (QM) where as quality control (QC) is the execution of actual tasks to conform to the quality standards. QA processes starts as early as the phase of rolling in the requirements and it spreads through the design, execution, delivery and maintenance of the software product. QC or the actual process of testing is a thread of the entire QA process. Quality is not just about functional correctness that verifies each and every input => process => output thread as per the requirements but it also deals with the conformance of performance, scalability, compatibility and usability of the product.

SDLC – The past perfect

In the distant past, software projects were mostly done in research oriented labs. The programmers had plenty of time available with them to design and code given requirements into software pieces. Moreover, most of the software products then targeted one single platform (hardware/operating system). The passionate developers used to thoroughly unit test their code before delivering the same for productive usage. To make programmers’ lives easier most of the operating systems and programming languages had a pretty good life expectancy. Coding then was more concentrated around functional correctness than painting excellent graphical user interfaces. The obvious result was quality software products that were more or less bug free, fast on execution and functionally most correct.

Challenges hit

However, the 80s witnessed the proliferation of the cheaper personal computers and also a number of operating systems, system tools and applications. This period also saw the sudden surge of a number of programming environments, frameworks and graphical user interface oriented programming methodologies. The popularity of the world-wide-web also contributed to alternate programming possibilities and scripting environments. With a large number of possibilities available to code the same ‘Hello World’ program, developers were forced to learn new methodologies and programming mediums pretty quickly and most often on-the-fly during a software project execution. The proficiency levels started coming down and so was the quality of code written and unit tested.

Another thing that added to the chaos was the pace at which business establishments computerized their office or factory setup. Sudden implementation pressure and ever-shortening timelines to deliver also resulted in poor unit testing time. Either there wasn’t sufficient time to test or the unit testing culture was partly ignored!

During the same era, system and office products companies like Microsoft started shipping new and new versions of desktop operating systems almost every year. This also meant that the code written for one O/S had to be run or adapted for multiple platforms. Platform specific coding and testing paved way to another level of quality challenge and multitude compatibility and upgrade tests.

Since the hardware was getting faster and cheaper it wasn’t always possible to do proper benchmark tests. It is also a fact that not many cared about fine-tuning the software to make it run at the best possible performance.

Differentiation and introduction of several roles in software testing took half the burden away from the developers – but the wrong way. Many developers thought that unit and module testing are probably not their job but that of the dedicated test crew!

Introduction of many processes – both software project management and quality related – deviated the focus from coding and testing to conformance of these standards, many of which had nothing to do with actual software quality produced.

So, how can we deliver better quality?

With too many distractions around flashy technologies, user interfaces and over engineered products the testers seem to have forgotten one basic thing. At the
end, testing is all about passing the use cases or conformance. The very first thing that has to be passed by a software system is whether the given valid inputs are resulting in expected outputs as mentioned in the specifications. This use-case based testing has to be the main area of interest to every tester.

Regression errors is one area where again use-cases has to be stressed on. Every single time the codeline changes the testers or automated mechanisms has to perform the use case testing. It should not be just a click around test Integrated automated tests are a must along with every build cycle of the software. These days plenty of automated test tools are available in the market. One can also write custom automated test tools via easy scripting options. But since automated testing also revolves around the scripts/code written for the test program, the quality of the automation tools/code itself should be very high.

The success of the manual testing is only as good as the number of test catalogues/cases available. It should be made a habit that developers and
testers discuss, scrutinize and update the test catalogues/cases periodically. This is something that rarely happens in subsequent releases of products.

Performance and scalability validations should be done with proper IT infrastructure set up and/or with the simulation of the actual usage of the
system. It is a fact that many of the software produced are not tested for performance and scalability. Many a time, the first version of the software is the guinea pig using which probably a more realistic version is rolled out later, that is usable.

Finally, developers should not forget that unit testing is part and parcel of the development cycle. You have to be your own tester in the first place! In the planning phase, most of the inexperienced developers and their bosses make the mistake of not allocating the right effort against the modules to be coded. Most of them just think about the amount of time required to code and not unit/module test their code. This planning mistake can finally result in poor quality and blame game (a commonly found phenomenon in any developer-tester interaction).

Six Sigma and what not?

Sometimes I get a feeling that the information technology people have the tendency to borrow incompatible ideas from other industries to the software world and patch upon. According to me Six Sigma and certain other quality processes are not something that fits into software directly. Well, at the end any theory can be made use of but have we got enough examples where Six Sigma (originally from electronics manufacturing standards) has been judiciously and successfully used in any software company? For me, it has been successful only in creating multiple redundant roles in a project team. Come on, this is not martial arts! We don’t need green belts and black belts here in the software teams – nor do we want historic data on defects per million opportunities.

Finally, ‘Quality Engineering’ itself is an oxymoron – at least in the software context. For me, quality is about the conformance or verification of something that is already engineered (Nobody can produce quality as such!). And quality processes itself should not be made too complicated via unwanted processes and methods. The need of the hour is realistic project plans, committed developers (who are also good unit testers), test cases, integrated test automation tools and passionate manual testers.

Posted on

Time to transform the game?

For more than twenty years, I have been an ardent fan and follower of the game of cricket. Like many Indians my contribution to the world of cricket includes playing the game in school, university and even trying my hands at the harmless tennis ball cricket at workplace. Along with my class mates, I bunked classes (and even examinations) to watch India performing against their arch rivals. Memorizing and recalling what exactly happened in 1987 cricket world cup semi finals or remembering how many runs were scored by a favorite batsman in a particular match and how exactly ‘technically’ he was out was a matter of pride. Debating about similar issues in friends circle, at work or even with strangers while watching live cricket in the roadside TV shop was part and parcel of my life.

Having experienced the good and bad that cricket has handed me during my studies and initial work life, of late I started thinking about the pluses and minuses of this sport – especially in the context of a developing nation. My thoughts may hurt readers from all walks of life for whom cricket is a religion. However, I request you to provide your constructive and unbiased feedback on my views.

Most people believe that the game of cricket was originated in England during the 16th century though it became popular only by the eighteenth century. The first official cricket test match was played in 1877. There is also a theory that the British devised the game of cricket based on an ancient Indian game by name gilli-danda. Regardless of the origin, it was the British people – during their colonial rule – who made the game popular around the world. Having a five day test match was probably perfectly fine in the 18th century when life was more laid back in nature. The test match cricket remained – and still remains – the longest form of sport.

The 20th century witnessed the arrival of the limited over cricket game that was more like an action packed single day of cricket. Though, many people predicted that test cricket is the ‘real form of cricket’, the one day matches became more and more popular as time passed by. This also resulted in the formation of a world cup cricket tournament that was played between major cricket playing nations once every four years. It took almost 100 years since the first international test match to change the game significantly to make it more appealing for the mass. However, one whole day of cricket still meant a lot of time though crazy followers always wished that they had more of it.

The Twenty 20 cricket – the latest avatar – took relatively lesser (30 plus) number of years to formulate since one day cricket became so popular. People started realizing that, spending the whole day in front of the TV or in a packed stadium probably meant a bit too expensive in the 21st century. Also, the Twenty 20 cricket is even more action packed and thrilling and this is where cricket is standing as of today. The five day long cricket test match and one day long game is now co-existing with the Twenty 20 version that typically gets completed in roughly three hours.

Now the question is whether this kind of transformation is good for the game as well as the fans. I feel that, definitely it is the way to be. As I mentioned earlier, I have not heard of any other sport or game that spans over several days or for that matter even one whole day. In the modern world loosing so many days means lesser productivity. A developing nation like India needs to bank on its vast human resources to shape up the future. It is a known fact that if there is a live cricket match telecast of an India match, students bunk their classes, office workers and laborers take leaves and sometimes even public security departments and essential services see shortage of attendance and hence interruption. And India plays 50 such one-day cricket matches a year. One can imagine the productivity at work, teaching/learning in schools and hence the overall productivity of a nation!

Any sporting activity relates to some focused action for an hour or two. It refreshes your mind and body, keeps you high on adrenaline for a short time-frame and helps you revitalize. But if it is a day or week long affair, it tends to make you lazier, lethargic and eventually a couch potato. It may be a good lifestyle post retirement but not definitely for the young and active. These days, five day test matches reminds me of those never ending television serials on Indian TV channels, that is mainly targeting the jobless and the retired.

Another India specific issue due to cricket-mania is the way other sports and sports persons are neglected. Cricketers are like stars in India and they make millions whereas most of the other sportsmen struggle to make a good living. Basically it has become a commercial, political and religious set up where cricketers, cricket bodies and their MNC sponsors thrive at the expense of the precious national human resources.

I would not be an antagonist to the game and say that the game should be banned in India. But it definitely needs to transform into something that makes more sense. It could be Twenty 20 format or even shorter form of the game. But definitely, India cannot afford to spend millions of person days almost every other day watching cricket for nothing. The lawmakers of the game and the nation should seriously think about it and act for a better future. This is the era where India is economically booming and we need to fire all our cylinders and mobilize the resources towards becoming a developed nation by 2020.

Posted on

European Union model for Asia?

The outgoing President of India, Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam, has been the first citizen with a difference in many ways. Due to his non-political, non-aligned attitude and being somebody from science & technology background, he was always keen on adopting workable technical, political governance models from all around the world for the benefit of the resurgent India. Some of his dreams included the national river-linking project, two-party political model in India and Asia adopting the European Union model. In the past, several intellectuals around the world have debated over the issue of EU model adoption in the Asian context. In this article, let us analyze how EU was evolved and the preparedness of Asia to adopt such a setup.

History of European Union

The present economic-political setup called the European Union, is the culmination of half a century long planning and consolidation of several trade agreements, treaties and alliances initiated by some of the greatest politicians and visionaries in modern Europe. The call for a ‘United States of Europe‘ was arised due to the huge loss of human resource and money during the World War II, that shook many of the European countries badly. However, due to the differences in cultures, medium of communication, differences in economic status and various alliances during the war, it was not possible for all front
runner countries to come together and arrive at common agreements easily. It took almost 40 years to consolidate European Economic Community, European Community, Euratom etc into one single strong community that promoted free trading and boasted the unity of a federal country that has its own currency, president, flag, national anthem and official languages. As a result the countries that fought each other few decades back became strategic trade partners in the new setup that stood for the common cause of strong economic development.

How EU was possible?

Europe had several political, cultural and geographical advantages that made EU practically possible. First of all, most of the countries that were to be part of European Union already had reasonably stabilized economies and living standards. The disparity between member countries were not too obvious which allowed them to take a leap together for faster economic growth.

Secondly, most of the Europe has similar culture when it comes to religious practices etc. Christianity is more or less the only religion there – with one or two countries as exceptions – and hence practically the religion related issues across the board and within the boundaries are minimal (One may remember that, religion has been the single most catastrophic cause behind almost all troubles that human beings are facing in the earth right now).

The third biggest advantage for the Europe was the geographic similarities such as climate and terrain across almost all nations. Also land transportation across national boundaries was so easily possible with well-connected road and rail (Eurorail) networks.

Is Asia ready for similar model?

Coming back to the original topic, let me analyze the key issues that Asia is facing right now due to which an Asian Union is far away from realization.

Economy

Most of the Asian countries were colonies of European nations midway thorough the 20th century. Many of these countries were looted and were destabilized due to the divide-and-conquer policies of the smarter aliens. Due to the same reasons, with one or two exceptions, none of them really scaled up economically even after 30 or 40 years of achieving their freedom. To make things worse, cultural and religious priorities were took prominence over economical independence.

Cultural differences

Asia hosts the largest number of religions and caste system among its countries. There are countries that call themselves as Islamic nations, Hindustans (Hindu prominent nations), Buddhist prominent provinces and Christian countries. There are a lot more religions that play the second roles in each of these countries. Due to these huge cultural differences within the country as well as across the border, maintaining common rules, regulations and peace is relatively a costly affair. To make things worse, reservation systems, separatist movements and terrorism plays its bad roles – that mainly sprouted out of inequality.

Population

Two of the most populous countries are from Asia (To be precise six of the ten most populous nations are in Asia). The challenges thrown up by almost half the population of the world is far from manageable for India and China. Case is not different with other big countries such as Indonesia and Pakistan. Population explosion has put additional burden on the planning process of these nations, that otherwise are doing extremely good with respect to agricultural production, manufacturing and educational/health reforms.

Uneven geography

The Asian terrain is not exactly the best suited for land or sea transportation. Historically we did not have great relationships with our neighbouring countries that road and rail networks building was never given the due priority. Even the sea transportation is not at its best here. However, this is a minor point compared to others and can be worked upon if required.

Unions for different causes

There are several treaties and unions such as ASEAN, SAARC, OPEC etc in the region that stands for cooperation among selected set of countries that are ‘united’ (if you can say so) for a common cause. However, none of them are really pushing towards achieving that accelerated growth and helping each other to solve similar issues.

What’re the possible models?


I strongly believe that a single Asian Union can never become a reality in the near future. However, what can work is two or three unions that are geographically, economically and culturally similar. For example, a West-Asian union and East-Asian union are very much possible. The west Asian countries are mostly oil producing nations that are also culturally similar Islamic nations. It may be good to have a trade union among them that stands for more than oil. Similarly an East or South-East Asian Union between countries like Singapore, Japan, Malaysia, China, South Korea etc would definitely make Asia a strong player such as European Union. However, what is not practically workable at the moment is any association between the spin-offs from old USSR and its neighbouring nations. The case is not different with South Asian (SAARC) countries – there never seems to be any smooth relationship between these nations.

So dearest Kalam, your dream – of uniting Asia for free trading and economic growth – has to wait for a decade or two before it can become a reality. Hopefully by then anti-social activities such as terrorism will come down, huge disparities will cease to exist, economies will surge ahead, and public health/education systems get better throughout Asia.

Posted on

BCCI’s lean patch!

Indian cricket, undoubtedly, is going through one of its worst times since the match fixing scandal in 2000. This time, the problems are mainly around the governance of BCCI than the on field performance of the team. The performance of the team as such can be improved, by identifying the right talent and grooming them into responsible roles with the help of skilled support staff and processes. But the administration seems to be struggling in streamlining the processes, finding the support staff on time, sorting out contract issues with the players and even failing in securing mighty sponsorship deals as they used to do in the past.

Until the unexpected World cup blues, everything seemed to be going fine with the Indian cricket with the richest cricket board in the world had everything under its feet, probably including the power to influence ICC. During those good times, all partners such as sponsors, tournament organizers, potential support staff and other sports bodies were vying their best to be associated with Indian cricket. An offer to be part of Indian cricket was considered the most coveted thing in the sports world then. Endorsements used to chase even the mediocre cricketer who has probably figured in the national team as a baggage on oversees tours. Things seems to be totally different in the current scenario.

After India’s world cup debacle, several sponsors have stopped airing the commercials featuring our high profile cricketers. Some have even terminated the contracts and instead signed up sportsmen from other games. While these are the cases with individuals, BCCI has suffered their biggest setbacks of all times with no sponsors coming forward to cover the recent and immediate future cricket tours, announcement of a parallel organization by a media giant, players having stand-off with BCCI over contracts and norms, the high-profile coach job offered being rejected by a preferred candidate etc. At the moment India’s cricket administration does not look any better than that in West Indies or Pakistan. The arrogant face that BCCI and its officials used to put together in front of ICC and the cricket-playing nations has more or less transitioned into a submissive profile.

If one analyzes the problem carefully, it is very obvious that many of the issues are related to the high expectations that the Indian cricket fans have with its national team and the extreme of madness that is exhibited by them. The media and sponsors are simply exploiting it with the intention of making big bucks at the cost of the fans’ religious behaviour, anger, desperation, admiration or craze. This puts BCCI as well as the players under tremendous pressure and mostly optimal functioning is hence affected. This pressure and focus also made BCCI and players feel a bit too much about themselves and things were taken granted on many occasions.

The other set of problems are related to the obsolete way in which BCCI is functioning. There was always an unnecessary hype around it, which probably started and peaked during the ‘rule’ of Jagmohan Dalmiya. Dalmiya kind of enjoyed the celebrity status during his stint with BCCI and ICC and even the minute details regarding his moves had wider coverage in the press. What did not change though was the age old processes in selection, the way in which the domestic cricket is functioning and the ways of spotting young talent.

With respect to the above issues, India could learn quite a few good lessons from its little neighboring nation, Sri Lanka. Ever since they emerged into the world cricket (hardly two decades back), they have managed to steadily improve in terms of professionalism and commitment both on and off the field. Every single time they have managed to meet the expectations of their fans by working hard and trying their best with respect to the game as well as administration. One key to success there also is keeping low-profile and doing their homework before taking decisions. They always had a bunch of committed players, good captains, good coaches and support staff for the past 15 years or so. It is high time Indian cricket took stock of the situation and assume a down to earth approach to the game rather than remaining on front page news all the time. Also fans should understand that it is just another game and cricketers are not necessarily gods or saviors of our country. Axing one such gods for not performing should be accepted as something that will do good for the game rather than taking it to the streets.

To be fair on BCCI, the selection committee has been operating reasonably well in the past few months. The problem being limited to the unavailability of skilled cricketers in the country or rather the lack of processes and opportunities to catch them young and groom. Australia, for instance has a whopping 25 contracted players this year as against India’s 16. What needs to change here is the domestic cricket system at state, region as well as national levels. Improving the infrastructure such as good sportive pitches and grounds, investing on homegrown support personnel, implementing a step-by-step governance improvement plan etc are the other steps they need to take without much delay. At the moment most of the sponsorship money seems to be ending up with the current set of elite players rather than investing for the future. This is something that BCCI needs to work on and improve without much delay. Otherwise they might as well end up like the Indian Hockey Federation!