Where are the Crowd Pullers? (Part 1)

Gilchrist retires from international cricket!

This news item shook me. He probably belonged to the last of the crowd pullers left in the game.

Who is a crowd puller? According to the Cambridge International Dictionary of Idioms, a crowd puller is something or someone that many people are keen to go and see.

I have watched the game for close to three decades. There have been players who have captured my imagination over the years.

The West Indian team of the eighties was for me the greatest crowd pullers. I do not think any other team, including the current Aussie team, who were as feared as these people were. When they batted, they murdered bowling attacks, but without losing their flair. When they bowled, they bowled very fast but there was some grace in their effort!!



I cannot think of anyone who cut and pulled as ferociously as Gordon Greenidge. A short ball and a moment later, the ball was fetched from the point boundary or the square leg boundary. His partner-in-crime was the gum-chewing Desmond Haynes. Today’s generation talk glowingly about the Hayden-Langer partnership. I may sound biased probably but it was wonderful watching the West Indian duo play.

Whenever the first West Indian wicket fell, in walked another gum-chewing batsman. I cannot remember any player who created a fan following as much for his swaggering walk to the crease as much for his destructive batting. I follow tennis and watch Federer play unbelievable, yet attractive tennis (most of the time in utter disbelief)—I dare say Richards was like that. He could play incredible shots! I never saw him play with a helmet—he had such a tight technique! It was magic to see him walk up to the batting crease and score those runs.

Clive Lloyd was a giant, in every sense! He was a tall figure—he could be intimidating whenever he crouched, leave alone hold a bat! The sight of Lloyd in the first slip with Richards and Roger Harper for company was not something the batsman looked forward to—it was exhilarating to see them move effortlessly to pull off those blinders! Watching them pouch catches was a treat to behold!


The West Indians made fast bowling a treat to behold. Who can forget Andy Roberts running in and bowl a sharp bouncer, just about missing the batsman’s head? The next ball would be a fuller length delivery and the batsman is gone, caught on the crease, and ‘caught behind’! If the batsman played out a Roberts over, they had to reckon with Holding! Holding’s motion to the crease was like Rolls Royce (not my term!). Then you had the Big Bird, Joel Garner. He was 6 ft 6 inches tall and he bowled deliveries from almost 9 feet. Imagine him bowl to a batsman like Gavaskar who was 5 feet 5 inches—it can give you goose bumps! Marshall was an unconventional fast bowler—short and ever smiling. I can vividly remember him run from a long run-up, round the wicket and aimed at the batsman’s body. After "the strike," he would walk to the top of his run-up with an endearing smile.

Those were the smiling ‘assassins’! We would throng the TV sets to watch these guys play. They were never short of intensity and played the game ‘hard’ (don’t ask me what that means!). But they did so with some amount of grace ala the great Federer!

Gilly's Legacy

Gaawn! The crowd is going wild at the Adelaide Oval!

I can imagine Bill Lawry uttering this when Adam Gilchrist (Gilly) was dismissed for the last time in his Test career. That dismissal marked the end of an era! An era, which began 12 years back when little Kaluvitarana took strike at the top of the order and struck a magnificent hundred against the Aussies. An idea was born. We often credit the Aussies with innovative tactics, which is not always true. In this case, Arjuna Ranatunga came up with this novel idea. It took a good one year and a World Cup final defeat for the Aussies to discover that they had a player—Gilchrist—who could do a Kalu regularly.

The advent and subsequent success of Gilly introduced a new meaning to the word ‘balance’ to the cricketing lexicon. Earlier, when you mentioned the word ‘balance’, you were talking about a batsman’s poise at the crease. Now the word ‘balance’ means who will play where! In the last decade, coaches and captains have brought in players into the eleven only to bring in ‘balance to the team.’ How can you explain Duncan Fletcher’s vision of creating a Gilly out of Geraint Jones? On the other hand, the Aussie gem of an experiment of creating a Freddie out of Shane Watson? Even more ridiculous was the English insistence on playing Ashley Giles over Monty Panesar—Fletch thought that if the Aussies had Warne, we had Giles at No.8! We shall compete man-to-man, position-to-position! Sound outrageous! Pakistan is still trying to create a Gilly out of Akmal—the whole world can see that he is a shoddy wicket keeper! The list continues… (Please note that I am not mentioning Dhoni. Enough has been said on him.)

All this in the name of bringing in balance to the team. Nobody is talking about skills anymore. What is also forgotten is that someone like Gilly was proficient in both the departments—therefore the term ‘balance’ made sense. Similarly, when Monty was always likely to pick up more wickets than Giles, why Giles?

In most cases, the tactic has not worked, not surprisingly!

To Adapt is to Make Fit!!

Sometime back, I saw Vishal Bharadwaj’s Omkara. I was seeing it again, having seen it a year back when it hit the movie halls. I remember reading some interesting reviews on the movie. Some reviewers were not comfortable with an adaptation of a Shakespearean classic—it was sacrilege!

According to Merriam Webster’s dictionary, to adapt means to make fit (as for a specific or new use or situation) often by modification. Omkara was always an adaptation. Othello could never be Omkara and Desdemona was never Dolly. Besides, the movie was set in UP. Obviously, it was going to be different. To expect the movie to be true to the great play was nothing short of unfounded expectation. As an avid cinemagoer, I believe that a movie is essentially a story telling session. Let us also realize that Shakespeare was as much a storyteller as Vishal Bharadwaj is—only their modes of expression have been different. If Shakespeare set his characters in a particular era and in a particular area, Vishal has set his characters in a different era and in a different milieu. Many of us have read Othello and most of us, who have read Othello, went and saw Omkara. We did not see Othello—we only saw Omkara and that was his story!

I believe that all of us base our opinions on a particular book or a movie (or for that matter any issue in life) on some of our own prejudices. Often, this affects our objectivity. Years ago, I read Mario Puzo’s book on Godfather. Sometime later, I caught up with the televised version of Coppola’s great movie on Doordarshan. I felt that the movie is no patch on the book. It was perhaps a knee jerk reaction because subsequently when I watched the movies (the entire series) on VHS, I began to appreciate the difference between the two mediums of expression.

I happened to see The Departed, a fortnight back. I had seen the original movie Infernal Affairs on DVD. Scorsese’s movie was set in different surroundings in a different country. Obviously, the movie had to be different. If I had gone looking for Yan and Ming in The Departed, I would have disappointed. In no way, The Departed is an insipid movie. Scorsese does manage to tell me a story as enthralling as the one told by M/S Lau and Mak.

Recently, I also happened to watch the movie ‘Sunset Boulevard.’ For the uninitiated, the legendary Billy Wilder directed the movie in 1950. Wilder’s movies stood out for their outstanding screenplays and each of his movies could be adapted to other forms such as theater. This movie is no different and subsequently a decade back, Andrew Lloyd Webber staged a successful musical based on the movie. Knowing Webber and also the medium, the treatment would have been different (so I presume since I cannot afford a trip to the Broadway!). The musical was appreciated as much as the movie. In fact, Billy Wilder is reported to have been quite pleased with Webber’s effort. I am sure if Shakespeare had lived to see Omkara, he too would have been happy!

Before I wind up, I must confess that neither have I been engaged by Vishal Bharadwaj to defend his movie nor am I on the payroll of Martin Scorsese, Lau and Mak, and Andrew Lloyd Webber. I have only tried to add my two-bit on this adaptation debate! Let the adaptations roll on…

A Blast from the Past

When I set out to write this page, I was wondering, ‘Why am I writing this page?’ I have been a Hindi film buff all my life and from the very beginning was fascinated by the ability to bring stories on the big screen. With time, my belief that films are just another platform to tell stories only strengthened. How the filmmaker tells the story decides whether the film will appeal to the audience or not. My earliest memories of film viewing were the weekend film on Doordarshan, which was a family affair. After the film, the discussion at the dinner table would focus on whether Kalyani should have killed the other woman in the Bimal Roy classic, Bandini and why Raju betrayed Rosie’s trust in the Vijay Anand classic, Guide. I am sure our household was not the only ones – we had company! When I grew up my interest only deepened and saw many more films, mostly good and very rarely trash – must thank Doordarshan for not exposing impressionable minds to inane films unlike some of the film channels of today! Mr. I&B Minister, thank you!!

I have picked two films that I saw during my growing up years. They have remained etched in my memory. I could have chosen a Sholay or a Mughal-e-Azam. I love both these films and they are great films and they good enough to be tutorials on filmmaking. I am in now suggesting that the below-mentioned films are better or worse than a Sholay – I hate comparisons because each good film has its place in the sun (just as both Bradman and Laxman have their appointed places in the Cricket Hall of Greatness!!). If Alfred Hitchcock had chosen a Hindi film, closest to his genre of filmmaking, he would have chosen Teesri Manzil (1966). Teesri Manzil saw the coming together of two geniuses of the time, Vijay Anand and Nazir Hussein. They could not have collaborated on a better venture. The film also saw the emergence of R D Burman as a frontline music composer. The film had all the ingredients of a good mainstream film – good script, fine camerawork, outstanding chemistry between the lead pair (Shammi Kapoor-Asha Parekh), elaborate dance sequences, foot tapping music. Who can forget the opening scene where headlights of a car on a highway are zoomed in to show the credits? Can anyone not remember the elaborate dance number, ‘O Haseena Zulfonwali’ featuring the legendary Helen matching steps with Shammi Kapoor? How could we forget the charming Premnath who plays the mentor to the hero? Did we not relish the well-choreographed climax scene shot brilliantly in natural light? There are so many golden moments in the film but my pick is the scene in the train where Shammi Kapoor and Asha Parekh travel together in the same compartment along with a fat man who only laughs! That scene is so well crafted that it evokes genuine laughter!! This film is worth a dekko even after 30 years!

Hrishikesh Mukherjee has always been one of my favorite directors. His forte was in bringing to screen real-life people with real situations and weaving all the ingredients of mainstream cinema around such men and situations. I have watched most of his films but Anupama (1966) remains a personal favorite. This film is a tribute to his mentor, Bimal Roy and the film would have definitely made the master proud. Anupama is a story of a timid girl who is held responsible by her father for her mother’s untimely death. She finally finds love with a young writer, played by Dharmendra. Sharmila Tagore was probably one of the most versatile actors, Indian cinema saw and in this film, she plays the lead role with admirable ease. In an era when filmmakers discovered color, this one is made in black and white – am not sure, if it would have created the same impact in color. The film has many outstanding moments but my favorite is when Sharmila Tagore is leaving her home and she finally vents out her emotions to her father. After the scene, you feel lighter—that is the impact of the scene!! My earliest memories of the film were through some unforgettable songs. Who can forget the two Lata gems – Dheere dheere machal & Kuch dilne kaha? Can anyone forget the Hemantda solo – Ya dil ki suno? Bimalda led to Hrishida and after Hrishida, who? I can’t think of anyone else who can ever recreate those magical moments on screen!

Hrishikesh Mukherjee (1922 - 2006) Anupama (1966 – immortality)

Why do I remember some of those films? Because they share something with some old grandma’s tales – the presentation and the story-telling style! The films have remained with me because they told me the story in a manner that I could understand! In addition, the dramatic scenes and some interesting passages ensured that they stay with me! Therefore, I have not written the storyline of the two films but only highlighted some moments that have remained with me.

Slow Death of Good Reading??

The other day, I went to a leading bookshop. I wanted to take advantage of the discounts offered by the shop. I went to the Helpdesk and asked for a famous book written by Milton Friedman. To the uninitiated, Milton Friedman was one of the most distinguished economists who won the Nobel Prize in 1976. He had passed away sometime back and hence the renewed interest in his work. I asked the executive whether the shop had any books of Milton Friedman. Milton, who? (ala Noel who?) was the look on the executive’s face. Then I told him that Milton Friedman was an economist. The executive admonished me and said, ‘Sir, aisa koi nahin hai. Aap shayad Thomas Friedman ki baat kar rahe ho?’ I said an emphatic NO. Again for the uninitiated, Thomas Friedman’s book is one of the best-sellers now—hence the interest in the executive to sell the book.

A week back, I met a young student, who happens to live in my building. I saw a copy of ‘Shantaram’ in his hands. I asked him if he read a lot. He said that he was a voracious reader and he loved reading non-fiction. I politely asked him which the best non-fictional work was, he had read. He replied, ’Shantaram – so much so that I am reading it again.’ ‘Have you read the books of Richard Feynman and Milton Friedman? Have you read the book, ‘The Gulag Archipelago? The diary of Anne Frank?’ He replied in the negative. I came back rather puzzled. Have we lost the habit of reading good non-fiction books? I am afraid, yes!

Coming to Milton Friedman’s book, I was exposed to the book during my college days. I was not an economics student, but like many others of my age then, loved to read well-written books. This particular book was recommended to me as a must-read by one of my professors. This book opened up a completely new world of free markets, when they were merely words. The book is so well written that it makes sense to most people. That is the power of good writing!

My interest in Feynman’s writings also started during my college days. Richard Feynman was two of the greatest physicists of the twentieth century, the other was of course Einstein. In my view, he was also one of the most outstanding teachers the world has ever produced. My professor had couple of books by Feynman. Those were essentially lecture notes. Once I read them, I was hooked. His thought process was so vividly clear that he could teach physics to a man on the street. Perhaps, this teaching style evolved from his own interest in paintings and music. Reading those lecture notes have been some of the exhilarating experiences in my life.

Why don’t people read Feynman any more? Why doesn’t Friedman interest anybody now? Regular readers haven’t even read Pico Iyer. Why? The answer to that is that reading quality has dropped. When we grew up, we were trained to read. Reading was an activity where one invested time. There was the neighborhood library that was the treasure of good literature. Of course, the footpaths of King Circle and Flora Fountain also helped. We looked forward to saving the extra pocket money to go and search for those elusive titles. Sadly, the youngsters of today no longer grow up in that culture. They take to reading as an escapist route. No longer do they read for assimilation. There is enough to do in a day, reading can’t be fitted in! The Big Bosses and the Aaj Taks have replaced quality reading. Enough of crass has permeated into our consciousness and our longing for more crass has only increased. I liken it to the Cola drinks—the more you drink, your thirst increases and you end up consuming a lot of cola! Because reading standards have dropped, writing standards have also dropped. That is a dangerous thing because the generations ahead will suffer because of this decline.

The other day, I was carrying this book by Art Buchwald, which I was reading. Someone asked me, ‘Is this book about art?’ I smiled wryly. An old Rafi song came to my mind, ‘Kaise samjhaoon ………’ I was being harsh to myself. I should let this pass!