Lalu Yadav - a distinguished politician ???

I recently had an argument on facebook with a friend, who is from the congress traditional votebank, who took umbrage at my listing a few people, who were rewarded by Lallu Prasad yadav during the previous edition of Jungle Raaj, for composing songs and prayers on Lallu, writing articles praising Lallu, penning his biography etc.
Considering that this friend is a constituent of a votebank, it isn't surprising that he is anti BJP, but what was shocking to see him defend Lallu and address Lallu as 'one of the most distinguished politicians in india'.
I seriously wonder at how intolerant and ideologically fanatical these people are, that they prefer an illiterate, brazenly corrupt, blatantly communal and convicted criminal, whose brand of politics is overtly based on a regressive and dangerous combination of caste and religion. While we can deride the average bihari for voting into power Lallu and his acolytes, it is the support of such highly educated people for Lallu that is shocking, especially that they are so deadset against the BJP, that they will support anyone who is anti BJP.
It is so obvious that people like these prefer the votebank and populist policies of the congress and other pseudo secular parties over the BJP which espouses the cause of inclusive development that you wonder whether they are even worth taking along on the path to development and prosperity. These are the kind of guys who will always vote for the congress no matter what and defend the congress in all social forums; but the moment the BJP comes into power, they will start voicing expectations from the 1.5 year old BJP government which they never asked the congress to fulfil in the last 60 odd years. So, the fact that the congress is not even held accountable for not delivering on expectations (or even trying) in the last 60 years and even though the BJP has initiated steps for good governance, the BJP is straightaway criticised for not doing enough, without even giving the initiatives enough time to deliver results.
It is perhaps best to remind such people that they are better off in India than in neighbouring countries where the plight of their brethren is worse than animals, with minorities being routinely attacked, women regularly abducted, gangraped and forcibly converted to islam, ingoing displays of a complete disregard for and blatant voilition of minority rights etc.
In the end, for our nation to develop, the majority must understand that Indian tolerance and secularism are a legacy of the inherent peace loving hindu nature, and that the hindu spirit of accommodation and working hard is the only way to become achieve economic and social progress. If minorities are patriotic and want to march forward, in tandem, with the majority, they are welcome to do so and enjoy the benefits of development. If however minorities choose to always undermine steps for national security and development, they will be left behind and the blame will be solely theirs.

Lallu's son makes mistakes twice while being sworn in as a minister in charge of 3 portfolios

Lallu has extracted his pound of flesh from nitish kumar by getting one of his (lallu's) sons elected as the Deputy CM and another inducted in the cabinet in charge of 3 ministries.
While the Lallu + nitish + congress' (opportunistic and morally dubious) combine's victory is actually a victory of the regressive and dangerous brand of caste and religion politics over the inclusive developmental and good governance plank that formed the bedrock of the BJP's campaign, and highlights how deeply entrenched casteism, regionalism and selfish interests of small groups is in the psyche of Bihar (at the expense of national issues and sentiments); the selection of family members exposes how these 3 parties look at politics as a heredity profession and provides an indicator of how all 3 are planning to exploit their mandate by enriching and empowering their own families/ caste groups.
A portent of what was to come was served when tej pratap, one of lallu's sons (a 9th grade passout), made not one but two mistakes while being sworn in. He finally got it right in the third try. One of the mistakes tej pratap made was to say 'upekshit (neglected)' instead of 'apekshit (expected)', perhaps understandable given the brand of caste politics Lallu plays in Bihar.
If this is any indicator of things to come, the people of Bihar are looking at another spell of jungle raj and can say good bye to all hopes of economic and social development and good governance (the brunt of which will unfortunately be borne by other states which will see unabated migration from Bihar).
The people of bihar have called this calamity upon themselves and regardless of how much the nation will progress under Narendra Modi ji, Bihar doesn't seem destined to see 'acche din' for quite some time.


Link to the article on lallu's son making mistakes during the swearing in ceremony:
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-watch-when-lalu-prasad-yadav-s-son-messed-up-his-oath-2147258

Was Tendulkar a selfish player ??

In the last India-South Africa one dayer, where India were steamrolled by the South African juggernaut, Rahane was the one standout player. He was the only batsman to stand up to what is arguably one of the best pace attacks in the world and while he played an excellent innings, what made the innings memorable for me personally was that it brought back memories of my childhood icon, Sachin Tendulkar, a player who my generation grew up watching - in the 1990’s and 2000’s – a period when he played his heart out for the country and was often a one man army, the only one standing between India and yet another humiliating defeat (or improbable victory, depending on how you look at it).


Tendulkar’s greatness lay not in his scores or his strike rate (both of which were phenomenal, especially by the standards of his time) but for what he represented i.e the one ray of hope for the billion denizens of India, on whose shoulders rested the hopes of an entire nation – akin to an ancient gladiator who fought not just for his own life but for the sake of the pride of his whole country – which afforded all of us a brief spell of vicarious pleasure and the feeling of being world beaters while Sachin stood tall at the crease and defied some of the fastest and wiliest bowlers of his era.
Tendulkar’s immense talent and commitment was most often demonstrated in the way he made the impossible seem within our grasp; allowing us success starved Indians a few rare moments of joy and optimism, in the belief that Tendulkar, with his super human cricketing ability, would single-handedly make up for the shortcomings of the rest of the team and deliver the most unlikeliest of victories.
The true measure of Tendulkar’s success was that he actually managed to do this in almost every match and delivered the team right next to victory’s door.


People from my generation or those who followed cricket in the decades of 1990 and 2000 have endearing memories of India going on overseas tours and our bowlers getting walloped and our batsmen coming out to chase scores of 270-280 (the present day equivalent of which would be 330-340).
A frequent setting for such a chase would be in Australia, with the Aussie bowling attack led by some exceptional fast bowlers, aided by excellent fielders (and sledgers) and often umpires as well (the likes of steve randell – who was arrested for paedophilia, Darryl hair, Darryl harper). Chasing under lights, our first couple of batsmen would scratch around for a few before succumbing meekly, at which stage Sachin would walk in (stride is not the right word – it denotes arrogance – while Sachin has always been a humble and self-effacing person) – in front of a baying crowd and a pumped up aussie attack – and immediately restore India’s dominance by playing an array of strokes and running like a hare between the wickets.
The only support left for Tendulkar would be the lower middle order and the match would invariably culminate with the lower order folding up or Sachin falling towards the fag end – and others being unable to close out the game (which is why the term ‘snatching defeat from the jaws of victory’ was quite frequently used by our newspapers in those days).


To understand the magnitude of Tendulkar’s achievements, it is necessary to understand that in those days, scores of 225 were eminently defendable and even 200 defended frequently. 250 was considered a winning score, with 300 being almost unheard of.
There was also the psychological pressure created by very few teams having chased down relatively high scores – thereby giving the impression that the score was unattainable and no one had done it before (while nowadays there have been so many successful chases of high scores that teams aren’t demoralised as they know it has been done quite a few times before).
In the last 10 off years however, a lot of things have changed; primary amongst them being cricket becoming a much higher scoring game, aided by flat pitches and batsmen friendly rules, the emergence of neutral umpires and the retirement of some all-time great bowlers (aussies, saffers, pakis etc). The obvious (and intended) result of these changes was that matches have become high scoring affairs and nowadays even 300+ scores are chased down with monotonous frequency.
Additionally, in earlier times, teams defending scores enjoyed a much higher percentage of wins than did teams chasing, while over the past 8-10 years, there has been a marked improvement in the success ratio of teams chasing – to the extent that a lot of teams nowadays prefer chasing as a matter of strategy - secure in the belief that their batsmen can chase down even scores in excess of 300.


People who have started following cricket in the last 7-8 years are so used to this state of affairs that it is impossible for them to fathom the magnitude of the seemingly unsurmountable difficulties faced by sides of the 1990’s in chasing 270-280.
It is often these people, brought up on a staple diet of 300+ scores, who criticise Tendulkar for not being a match-winner, a player who was selfish and played for personal records and whose centuries never ensured Indian victory. As proof for these malicious and baseless allegations is made the statement that India did not win a lot of matches where Tendulkar did well, implying that Tendulkar’s selfishness and craving for personal glory made him play in a manner contrary to the team’s needs, thereby depriving the team of victory.


Rahane’s innings in this match not only reminded me of Sachin’s one-man efforts in an earlier era but also brought a flash of realisation where I recollected that Tendulkar made all those runs in precisely the same circumstances, in causes which would be considered lost right at the outset by most teams, and yet managed to get India tantalisingly close to the finish line. Hardly anyone else in the team supported him and had some of our batsmen been just average or our bowlers less profligate, we would have won a lot more matches.


People who are unaware of the context of the cricketing standards of those times will find it well nigh impossible to understand the significance of Tendulkar’s contributions or why he was placed on a pedestal and considered to arguably be the best of his era (quite a few considered Lara to be the best).

I hope this article helps them understand the background, and if not actually appreciate and commend, then at least refrain from levelling false accusations of selfishness against Tendulkar.