Your cover story The Big Easy (Mar 17) was an interesting read on our players. It’s good to see them sport the team spirit outside the grounds too. A bit more of media savvy and these guys would be the perfect ambassadors for India.
Sanket Joshi, D Miami, US
Though no one disputes that Sachin played a most valuable role in India’s comeback, it is shocking to see commentators like Mark Nicholas reluctant to comment on Sachin’s slowing down when nearing a century. When Ganguly played a few dot balls while nearing a century against South Africa in the last World Cup, Imran Khan had said that had he been in Azhar’s place, he’d have dropped Ganguly for the next match. But no commentator dares to comment on Sachin’s flaws. We all know how biased Indian commentators were for singling out Ganguly for India’s disastrous start. Unlike us, nba commentators in the US mince no words if they see players like Kobe Bryant play selfishly. We should take a leaf out of their books.
Vishnu Anjan, Bangalore
I can’t understand why Ganguly is still supporting Dinesh Mongia. The guy has no talent whatsoever. He shouldn’t have been in the squad in the first place. Now perhaps Ganguly wants him to justify his own lack of form; his two centuries against Namibia and Kenya are nothing to write home about.
S.D. Kalyanaswamy, New York, US
While the entire nation salutes Sachin and his men for their epoch-making win against Pakistan, likening it to a victory in war or raising high-voltage jingoistic cries—as our politicians and military brass did—does not augur well for the rapprochement we seek so eagerly with our neighbour. And then to have Jaswant Singh declaring that it did not matter if we won the World Cup or not, and offering tax sops! No wonder our country is in the financial mess it is in. If our cricketers have any sense, they should refuse the FM’s offer in the interest of the nation.
D.V. Madhava Rao, Chennai
Nothing can be more misleading than the Great Indian Bluff on the pivotal role of Rahul Dravid in holding the batting line-up (The Wall Holds Up). At the most opportune moments, this "Muddled Choker" has given the opposing side maidens and a flurry of dot balls. What India needs out of him is a utility innings without a compromise on the strike rate. For the amount of talent he has and the orthodox cricket he plays, he has all the ability in the world to milk at least 3-4 singles out of the opposition per over.
An Indian Fan, Dubai, UAE
Hmm. So the journalists see this as a mere property dispute (Notes From the Underground, March 17). And our lawyers see it in terms of the 50-year-old Constitution. Has anyone spared a thought to our 2,000-year-old traditions?
S.K. Mishra, Panaji
Heard this one about the asi? Two of its archaeologists were on an Indus Valley dig. It was the same story, they had to come up with something within a fixed time. They couldn’t. So they were given more time and dire threats. Desperate, one archaeologist cried Eureka one day and held up a wire to proclaim that the Indus Valley people had discovered and were using electricity. At a loose end, his partner did some more furious digging and exclaimed, "Ho, no wire here. This means they were using wireless!"
K. Subramanian, Chennai
You say, "It’s a strange co-incidence that soon after the asi was asked to excavate..., Kasturi Gupta Menon, career bureaucrat and the DG, asi, was transferred. Earlier, the asi DG reportedly had a spat with Union minister for culture Jagmohan." For the record, the order for my transfer as development commissioner (handlooms) in the textiles ministry was issued by the appointments committee on February 22, 2003. I joined the post after relinquishing charge as asi DG on March 3, 2003. The order of the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court directing the asi to excavate at Ayodhya within a fixed time was passed on March 5, 2003, a full 10 days after my transfer orders. Also, during my tenure as asi DG, I had a cordial working relationship with Mr Jagmohan.
Kasturi Gupta Menon, New Delhi
Would they excavate the Taj Mahal next to see if it is not built on the foundations of a temple? When will we stop living in the past? These disputes over unimportant issues have already pushed India 100 years behind the rest of the world. Can we afford to regress any more?
Dr Rahij Anwar, Greater London, UK
You seem terribly afraid that the Ayodhya issue may be resolved in favour of the poor Hindu pilgrims. Would it not start giving a feeling of importance to these vermin of the earth, when the nation was clearly inherited by the English-educated elite in 1947? And so you have to oppose it as it strikes no chords in your hearts.
A.K. Aggarwal, Ahmedabad
I can’t understand why you should think that Sonia is the weakest link in her party (Exeunt, Followed by Modi, March 17). At least she has held the Congress together. She has matured as a leader despite the fact that she hasn’t been all that long in national politics. She may not be a fluent speaker (and she does not need to be one) but she has shown her administrative acumen in the way she has dealt with her CMs, something the more smooth-talking Vajpayee and Advani haven’t been able to do.
Naveen Gadi, Detroit, US
A nice ‘opinion’ (Disarming a Tyrant, March 17) from Vinod Mehta in a long time. Most will agree with what he says. People in general are anti-Saddam, pro-Iraq, anti-Bush and pro-US.
Rajeev, Surat
Saddam would not have complied with any UN resolution without the threat of the American military at his doorstep. That is the only reason why he began destroying his missiles before the war.
Anji Joshi, New York, US
True, Saddam couldn’t hold Kuwait. Neither could Osama hold Afghanistan. But evil minds can always damage territories, harm humanity, no matter where they are.
Nisha Sebastian, Mumbai
The problem with the US is that it has fought all its wars—be it the world wars, the Vietnam war, the war in the Gulf or the one in Afghanistan—away from its soil. They have thus never undergone the pain, the suffering and the damage war inflicts. Thank God for France, Russia, China and Germany for their decision to veto and oppose America’s war.
Teffy Thomas, On e-mail
Jaishree Mishra may have succumbed to its charms but I remain unimpressed with Bollywood (Bombay Meri Jaan, March 10). In fact, so immersed are we in our film-making factory that our awareness of world cinema is minimal. In the hype surrounding Devdas, someone wrote of Zhang Yimou’s film Hero as an "obscure" Oscar contender. This when Hero was a much-awaited movie and Yimou is an internationally-respected director. Om Puri, speaking on the irrelevance of Bollywood, says "even the Chinese films are better known". Not for nothing do they make an appearance in Derek Malcolm’s list of 100 great movies post-1980. Not a single Indian movie makes the list. Where Bollywood succeeds is in providing the high fashionable kitsch of the moment.
Anu Moulee, Sydney
The spoof in the film Jaane Bhi Do Yaaron was based on the Mahabharata and not the Ramayana as you seem to believe in the item Celled Out (Polscape, March 10). Incidentally, there was a spoof based on the Ramayana in an otherwise serious film—Gharonda—made in the late 1970s, starring Amol Palekar, Zarina Wahab and Shriram Lagoo.
Anil K. Joshi, Ranikhet
The excerpts (My Left Foot, March 10) from Mohit Sen’s book A Traveller on the Road were very revealing about the childishness of our Communist leaders. Who can forget how they reacted when Sushmita Sen became Miss Universe or when India went nuclear in 1998? Most recently, they opposed Dr A.P.J. Abdul Kalam’s nomination for the post of President. It just shows they haven’t matured yet.
R. Gopala Krishnan, Bhilai
Disarming a Tyrant (Mar 17) was one of the most confusing pieces written by Vinod Mehta. He categorically states that Saddam is a tyrant but does not believe he poses any danger. He also says that Saddam should be disarmed but again speaks against war. Diplomacy has been tried for 12 years but it has not achieved anything. In yet another twist, Mr Mehta says the US has not produced a shred of evidence of weapons of mass destruction. Then why should we disarm Saddam in the first place? How can you deprive a person of something he does not have? What exactly in your lexicon does disarming mean? The esteemed editor also acknowledges that Iraq will be far better without Saddam. Exactly the same words were used by Bush. But while Bush is a right-wing Christian fundamentalist, you are the shining pillar of pseudo-secularism. This is not even double standards. It’s far worse than that. No one has contested the fact that Saddam is a danger. No one says he doesn’t have wmds. No one says he is not trying to get n-weapons. But still the cry is, "No war against Iraq."
Vinoo Ramakrishnan, New Jersey, US
In all the analysis and hair-splitting being done on the budget (Post-Budget Money Special, March 17), what’s being forgotten is that it’s not law as yet. That will happen only when the budget is passed by both houses of Parliament and receives presidential consent. Many changes are made during the debate on the budget.
Arun Kutty, Noida
