Double standards

Sir — Foreign funding for madrassahs is just the kind of thing the Hindu right in India loves to tom-tom as proof of its theories of Muslim perfidy. But the report, “Dollars for madarsas” (March 10), reveals a genuine humanitarian desire on the part of the American government, the donor, to better the lot of thousands of poor Muslims by upgrading the khareji madrassahs. Nothing more, nothing less. Contrast this with the perfidy of the Hindu organizations themselves. A recent report in the House of Lords revealed how thousands of pounds were raised by the British branch of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. This was done on the pretext of aiding education, welfare and development projects in India, but the funds were used to promote the RSS’s objectives. Despite its holier-than-thou rhetoric, the RSS is, in the end, no better than those it vilifies. But perhaps the Hindutva bodies would dismiss such criticism as being “pseudo-secular”.

Yours faithfully,
Shantanu Ghosh, Calcutta

On a winning note

Sir — Sourav Ganguly’s decision to play Ashish Nehra rather than Irfan Pathan for the first one-day international in Karachi, paid of. Though an economy rate of 5 runs an over has become common, this is still an important benchmark for bowlers and India did well to field four of its most economic bowlers for this match. Laxmipathy Balaji’s inclusion made sense too since it gave us the right-hand/left hand bowling combination which considerably improved our chances of defending 349 or scores in excess. But including Ramesh Powar in the team for the second one-dayer may be risky since the Mumbai spinner is an unknown quantity. This victory will give India the boost it needed. Both Nehra and Balaji are improving and Zaheer Khan is showing signs of recovery. With V.V.S. Laxman back, India should win two of the remaining four ODIs.

But the Indians under-estimated Pakistan’s batting and run-chasing abilities — especially that of Abdul Razzaq, Moin Khan and Shoaib Malik in the lower-middle order. Pakistan’s batting is better than we expected. If the Pakistanis bat first, they can put up a decent total making it difficult for India to chase against the likes of Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammed Sami. Even Malik was hard to put away in the middle overs and Sami bowled well towards the end. But Nehra was quite a revelation — he seems keen on making a comeback and his improved fielding makes him a very attractive choice. He should emerge as a steady bowler with the reliability and accuracy needed in high scoring one-dayers, specially in the death overs. All in all, Pakistan now is under pressure.

Yours faithfully,
Nikhil Shah, via email

Sir — I was surprised to see a full first-page blow-up of Ashish Nehra in the Sunday (March 14) edition of The Telegraph. After all, Nehra’s only contribution to the victory was bowling the last over. A picture of Rahul Dravid, Virendar Sehwag or Inzamam-ul Haq, the real heroes of the match, would have been more appropriate.

Yours faithfully,
J. Rajan, Calcutta

Sir — Why did the Indians — who scored 349 runs (they would have scored much more had they not wasted the slog overs) — almost lose the match? With such a huge total batting first, they should have won more easily and much earlier. If Sourav Ganguly’s team wants to lay serious claim to being the second best team in the world after Australia, it needs to do a lot more homework before it goes into the next game. The uninspired and toothless bowling attack needs to be pepped up and Javagal Srinath is definitely not the person to do so (remember his wayward bowling in the 2003 World Cup final).

Yours faithfully,
Kalyan Ghosh, Calcutta

Sir — The Pakistan team should be lauded for the way it played with determination and patience, while chasing a huge total. If the last ball had gone for a six, India would have lost. India has never shown such character batting second in one-day internationals. Our players panic easily and sacrifice wickets in quick succession — the only one exception being the victory in the 2003 World Cup league match against Pakistan, in which we batted second.

Yours faithfully,
C.S.N. Murthy, Hyderabad

Sir — I thought everything was over for India when Ashish Nehra was asked to bowl the last over. But fortunately Moin Khan did not repeat Javed Miandad’s last ball six in 1986 in Sharjah, despite being given a similar delivery — a full toss. I was also apprehensive of the crowd’s reaction after India won — I did not expect the Karachi crowd would be so sporting, particularly when there was rioting just a week ago, during the sale of tickets.

Yours faithfully,
Syed Tanveeruddin, Mysore

Sir — Amazing cricket — just the start expected of an Indo-Pak series! In the midst of all the security concerns, the Indians kept a cool head. Both teams must be congratulated for a display of excellent batting though the bowling left much to be desired — but that may be overlooked given the playing conditions.

Yours faithfully
Noyon Jyoti Parasara, Bangalore

Sir — Why must India always take the initiative when it comes to Pakistan? We send the first bus, we send the first train and now we sent the first team. The Indian team should have been allowed to take a much-needed break. Politicization of sports is no better than criminalization of politics. Are these one-sided overtures meant to promote one man’s Nobel winning chances?

Yours faithfully,
Mrinmoy Goswami, Nagaon

Sir — It would be a mistake to see the India-Pakistan series as merely a confidence building measure between the two nations. Material considerations also played a big role in bringing it about. Crores and crores of rupees are involved on both sides. Take the way Ten Sports is pushing cable operators to increase revenues paid for telecasting rights.

Yours faithfully,
Jang Bahadur Singh, Jamshedpur

Sir — It was disturbing to know that the India-Pakistan series is being monitored by the International Cricket Council’s anti-corruption unit. An Indo-Pak cricket match always evokes frenzy like no other sports event. The Indians are under a lot of pressure — being surrounded by securitymen is just one of them. Why can’t we trust the players? Besides, a star player getting out for a duck or the main strike bowler giving away too many wides does not mean a match is fixed.

Yours faithfully,
Sanghita Bhattacharjee, Calcutta