New York’s untested drop-in pitches, favoring bowlers, face scrutiny after Sri Lanka was bowled out for 77 by South Africa and India dismissed Ireland for 9…reports Asian Lite News
Despite growing fears over the nature of pitches at New York for the T20 World Cup, there have been no such plans over shifting the remaining matches out of the Nassau County International Cricket Stadium.
The untested drop-in pitches at New York, which has favoured bowlers excessively, have come under heavy scrutiny after Sri Lanka were bowled out for 77 by South Africa, followed by India bundling out Ireland for 96.
A report from BBC has said “India have privately voiced their unhappiness with the unpredictable bounce and two-paced nature of the strips amid worries over the safety of their batters.” India are scheduled to play Pakistan in their second Group A game at New York on Sunday.
“The International Cricket Council (ICC) is believed to be analysing data from previously abandoned games to establish how to react should it need to act. However, ICC officials have maintained there are no contingency plans in place to switch any of the New York games to venues in Florida or Texas, both of which have natural turf strips.
“It is understood an unused pitch has been designated for the India v Pakistan showdown, although there is flexibility to alter that decision depending on how other pitches play before that encounter,” said the report from BBC.
The pop-up venue at New York, built for the T20 World Cup, has a total of 10 Tahoma grass pitches, which were grown in Australia and shipped to Florida before being transported via trucks to New York and installed a few weeks in a drop-in arrangement before the tournament began.
Australian curator Damien Hough, who knows the art and science of drop-in pitches due to heading the facility at the Adelaide Oval, was roped in by the ICC for the preparation of pitches at New York.
The outfield is made of Kentucky bluegrass, which were grown at a farm in New Jersey, on top of sand. In India’s game against Ireland on Wednesday, there was uneven bounce – which meant balls either bounced at ankle height or took off sharply towards the wicketkeeper.
Players like Harry Tector, Lorcan Tucker, Paul Stirling, Rohit Sharma and Rishabh Pant took blows on themselves, with Rohit retiring hurt for 52 after taking a blow on his elbow. Other problems with the venue at New York include slow outfield, due to its sand-based nature, and difference of 10m in square boundaries on either sides.
“A clear diagnosis for the problems has not yet been identified. India fans were even cheering runs for Ireland at one point during their eight-wicket win, hoping the length of the game would be extended so they could see more of their team batting in the second innings,” added the report.
It also claimed that concerns have also been raised about the six drop-in pitches laid at the practice facility in nearby Cantiague Park, adding that South Africa’s batters opted for throw downs as opposed to facing their own bowlers, and local net bowlers, because of injury concerns.
I am sceptical that the Pakistani political leadership has had a change of heart regarding its relations with India, says Prof. Sumit Ganguly in an interview with Asian Lite’s Abhish K. Bose
Sumit Ganguly is a Distinguished Professor of Political Science and holds the Tagore Chair in Indian Cultures and Civilizations at Indiana University, Bloomington. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and a Visiting Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He is the co-editor (with Eswaran Sridharan) of the forthcoming Oxford Handbook of Indian Politics. An author of a number of books on South Asia, Prof Ganguly is widely considered as an expert on South Asia. Asian Lite’s Abhish K. Bose asks Prof Ganguly some pertinent questions on the crisis being faced by Pakistan.
Abhish K. Bose: While Pakistan is confronting a rare economic crisis, one of their longstanding strategic partners, the U.S., is doing nothing substantial to bail out that country, which is facing its own share of domestic headaches. Does it indicate a significant shift in geo-political perceptions and priorities on the part of the US? If yes, why? What added bearing will this have on Indo-US relations?
Sumit Ganguly: The US, at the moment, is preoccupied with the war in Ukraine, the issues it faces with the PRC in Asia and beyond and with a range of domestic issues. Under these circumstances, Pakistan’s fate is a relatively low priority for the United States. Nevertheless, there are some in the US Department of State who are trying to keep the relationship alive in the forlorn hope that they can elicit some form of counterterrorism cooperation from Pakistan. This, in part, explains the recent decision to upgrade its fleet of F-16s. Ironically, Pakistan is paying about $400 million for these upgrades at a time when it is faced with near bankruptcy.
Abhish K. Bose: Pakistan is indebted foremost to the Chinese banks. Why doesn’t China intervene to avert a collapse? Is Pakistan going the Sri Lanka way? If, like in India, Pakistan had a stable democratic mode of governance, could the outcome have been different to what it is today? Or, a theocratic State, irrespective of the role of the army, unviable in the long-term?
Sumit Ganguly: To begin with, Pakistan is not a theocratic state. A theocracy is a state that is ruled by clerics. It is, however, a state based on religion. That being said, even if both India and Pakistan were robust democracies it is not entirely clear that they could resolve their differences amicably. From its founding Pakistan has had an irredentist claim to Kashmir. This claim has not been abandoned regardless of which government has come to power. Of course, had democracy been consolidated in Pakistan, one wonders if a different outcome might have obtained.
Abhish K. Bose: What is the role that patronising and funding militancy and cross-border terrorism has played in causing the present disarray in Pakistan? What, if any, are the lessons that countries like India can learn from the plight of Pakistan?
Sumit Ganguly: India learnt its lesson from the Sri Lankan fiasco. After all, it is well known that RAW supported and trained the LTTE. This lead to a serious, eventual blowback. Yes, Pakistan’s dalliance with a range of irregular forces and terrorists have come to haunt it. Yet, far too many Pakistanis have deluded themselves into believing that that they are victims of terrorism.
Abhish K. Bose: The recent statement of Pakistan PM Shehbaz Sharif that after three wars with India Pakistan has become sensible enough to want to live in peace with India. Is a civilian government in Pakistan free enough from the control of its army to choose the path of peace with its neighbours? Will religious extremists in that country tolerate such an option? If this change in perception is due to an economic crisis, will it not revert to the old mode of antagonism when the crisis blows over? Or, do you think there is a genuine change in perception and priorities?
Sumit Ganguly: I am quite skeptical that the Pakistani political leadership has had a change of heart. Even if they have it is far from clear to me that they have the requisite ability to dramatically change course when it comes to relations with India. The military still remains primus inter pares and controls the relationship with India. Furthermore, distrust and hatred of India has become woven into Pakistan’s political culture. More to the point, the rise of Hindu nationalism in India is adding fuel to the fire.
Abhish K. Bose: To what extent, do you think, has the Russia – Ukraine war accelerated the economic downslide of Pakistan, already strained by the pandemic-induced slowdown?
Sumit Ganguly: I think that the war has exacerbated matters. However, the problems were of long standing and indeed structural.
Abhish K. Bose: How significant is the role of Pakistan in furthering the geo-political roadmap of China? China has invested hugely in Pak as part of the belt and road project. What will be the role donned by Pakistan if and when China emerges as a major global player?
Sumit Ganguly: The Sino-Pakistani nexus was forged after the 1962 war. For both countries, this is one of the few alliances that has endured. China’s commitment to the BRI is both designed to serve its own parochial, material interests while making Pakistan even more dependent on the PRC.
Abhish K. Bose: Taking into account the border disputes India had with China and Pakistan, and China creating periodic tensions in the border, what would be most prudent strategy for India to fend off these adversaries? What should be thrust areas?
Sumit Ganguly: India has to pursue two simultaneous strategies. First, it needs to bolster its domestic military capabilities. Second, it needs to strengthen its security partnership with the United States. For the foreseeable future it will lack the necessary wherewithal to cope with the threat from the PRC.
Border Security Force exchange sweets with Pakistan Rangers at JCP Attari on India’s 73rd Republic Day, in Amritsar on January 26, 2022. (Photo Pawan Sharma_IANS)
Abhish K. Bose: The Pakistan PM has recently demanded the mediation of UAE in the Kashmir issue. Do you think India will take kindly to internationalising the Kashmir issue? Wouldn’t it serve the political interests of the BJP better to keep the Kashmir pot stirring?
Sumit Ganguly: India has never taken kindly to any effort to internationalize the Kashmir issue. This government will prove no exception to the rule. Actually, apart from its drastic decision to dispense with Article 370 which had conferred a special status on the state of Jammu and Kashmir the BJP does not have any compelling reason to stir the pot in Kashmir. All they want is political quiescence.
Shehbaz Sharif pointed out that Islamabad and New Delhi should have competition in trade, economy and improving the conditions of their people, reports Asian Lite News
Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has reiterated his country’s strong resolve to maintain peace in the region, but added that sustainable peace in South Asia was linked to the resolution of Jammu and Kashmir issue in line with the UN resolutions and the wishes of Kashmiris, and nothing short of it would work.
“We want permanent peace with India through dialogue as war is not an option for either of the countries,” The News quoted the premier as saying said while speaking to a group of students from the Harvard University.
Sharif pointed out that Islamabad and New Delhi should have competition in trade, economy and improving the conditions of their people.
Pakistan was not an aggressor, but its nuclear assets and the professionally trained army are deterrence, he said, adding: “We spend on our military to protect our frontiers and not for aggression,” The News reported.
The delegation consisted of students from diverse origins and academic backgrounds.
The Prime Minister welcomed students and held a candid discussion about contemporary challenges Pakistan was facing today.
In response to a question about the national economy and the IMF programme, the premier said that Pakistan’s economic crisis stem from structural problems along with political instability in the recent decades.
Border Security Force (BSF) personnel exchange sweets with Pak Rangers during the 76th Independence Day of India, at the India-Pakistan Attari-Wagah border, Monday, Aug 15, 2022. (Photo:Pawan sharma/IANS)
He said the first few decades since the inception of Pakistan witnessed impressive growth across all sectors of the economy when there were plans, national will and the implementation mechanism to produce outcomes.
“Overtime, we lost the edge in sectors in which we were ahead. The lack of focus, energy and policy action led to reduction in national productivity.”
