Why trials with Sushil? Rio berth is mine, says wrestler Narsingh Yadav

May 11, 2016

Mumbai, May 11: Narsingh Yadav hates media interviews. The Mumbai-based wrestler would rather express himself on the mat, against formidable opponents. On the rare occasions he agrees to be interviewed, the answers are measured, and show his reluctance.

rio

However, all that has changed since he won a quota place for the Rio Olympics in the 74 kg category by winning a bronze medal at the World Championships last September. That has intertwined his fate with that of India’s most decorated wrestler, Sushil Kumar, as only one of them can go to the Games to be held in August.

The issue has snowballed into a controversy with talk of holding trials to select the rightful competitor for Rio gaining momentum. Sushil, who won bronze and silver in the last two Olympics and is eager to add a third medal, has demanded that trials be held.

Pinned to a corner, and having to defend what he believes is “his right”, the 26-year-old Narsingh has come out swinging with feisty interviews.

“Trial ka toh wajood hi nahi banta. Mera haq hai Rio jaana. (There is no basis to hold trial. It is my right to go to Rio). Whichever wrestler is demanding a trial, ask him if he ever had to undergo one when he went for the Olympics,” Narsingh told HT at Sports Authority of India’s Mumbai campus, his base since he began the sport.

Having spent a lot of time at the national camp in SAI’s Sonepat centre with India’s other top wrestlers, Narsingh is back home at the SAI centre. It is his comfort zone, far from the whisper campaigns and intrigue that has engulfed Sonepat.

Narsingh’s personal coach, Jagmal Singh, who is also the national team’s assistant coach, lends another dimension to the debate whether trials should be held.

“Imagine a scenario where trials are held but the person who wins picks up a serious injury, there would be limited time for recovery. The wrestler would have to go to Rio half-fit. Would that not affect India’s chances of winning a medal?”

While many have said the wishes of a wrestler of Sushil’s stature cannot be ignored, Narsingh is in no mood for such arguments.

“There were trials held for deciding the team for the World Championships, where I won bronze and the quota. Whoever wanted trials should have participated in those trials.”

Jagmal added: “Being asked to undergo a trial would affect any wrestler mentally as he is bound to wonder why he is being asked to do it, that too if he is being asked to go up against someone who has moved up from another weight class.”

While it is yet to become clear whether or when the trials will be held, it seems im

minent the two wrestlers will grapple in the media for what both believe is their right.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
July 7,2020

Mumbai, Jul 7: Australias second largest city Melbourne is set to go for another round of lockdown — for six weeks — from midnight Wednesday as the coronavirus has reared its ugly head in Victoria. And this has further confirmed that this years T20 World Cup in Australia is practically not possible. Even as the ICC keeps delaying the announcement, BCCI hopes that the official call will now be taken with this latest development.

Despite ICC's Financial and Commercial Affairs Committee (F&CA) chief Ehsan Mani as well as Cricket Australia making it clear time and again that hosting a T20 World Cup in the October-November window is practically impossible, the ICC hasn't made an official announcement and that hasn't impressed the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI).

Speaking to media persons, a BCCI official said that it is only the ICC which has kept speaking about delaying the inevitable — announcing a postponement — even as Cricket Australia chairman Earl Eddings wrote to the international body that it looks highly unlikely that a T20 World Cup can be hosted in these trying times.

"As it is there were so many logistical difficulties and that is perfectly understandable. The Australian government has been addressing the public health issue efficiently and there are regulations in place which are crucial to address the challenges. In that background even Cricket Australia has been practical in their assessment of the situation.

"With this present situation where Melbourne is in lockdown, the ICC really must take the final call of closure on the issue if they have any concept of responsible decision making," the official said.

Not just CA chairman Eddings, but also Mani — who is also the PCB chief — recently told the media that the T20 World Cup cannot be held in a bio-secure environment.

"We have had a lot of discussions and the feeling is it (T20 World Cup) would not be possible this year. ICC has World Cups lined up in 2021 and 2023, so we have a gap year where we can adjust this event. God forbid if some player(s) falls ill or mishap occurs during the tournament, it will have a big impact and create panic in the cricket world and we can't take that risk. Having a bio-bubble environment is feasible for say a bilateral series like Pakistan in England, but it is very difficult when 16 teams are involved," he had said.

Cricket Australia's interim CEO Nick Hockley echoed the sentiments when he said the biggest challenge was to get the players from so many teams into the country.

"Our biggest challenge is getting 15 teams into the country. If I compare it with the prospect of a bilateral tour, you're talking about bringing one team in and then playing individual matches. But the prospect of bringing 15 teams in and having six or seven teams in one city at the same time, it's a much more complex exercise," he had said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 29,2020

Kolkata, May 29: Former skipper Kumar Sangakkara believes missing Angelo Mathews due to an injury hurt Sri Lanka badly in the summit clash of the 2011 World Cup, which hosts India won after a gap of 28 years.

Having played a key role in their thrilling semifinal win against New Zealand, Mathews was forced out of the final against India at Mumbai's Wankhede Stadium by a quadriceps muscle injury.

Reflecting on the six-wicket loss to India, the former Sri Lankan captain said Mathews' injury forced him to opt for a 6-5 combination and was also the reason behind his decision to bat first after winning the toss.

"In that WC final, that's the biggest thing I look back and think...You can talk about drop catches and all of that happens. But the composition of the side and the fact that we were forced to make the change was to me the turning point," Sangakkara said in the latest episode of Instagram series 'Reminisce with Ash' hosted by India off-spinner Ravichandran Ashwin.

Mahela Jayawardene's unbeaten 103 went in vain as India hunted down 275 with Gautam Gambhir setting up the chase with a 97-run knock before skipper Mahendra Singh Dhoni finished off in style, smashing Nuwan Kulasekara for the winning six in his unbeaten 91.

"But for 100 per cent, if Angelo (Mathews) had been fit, I know for sure we would have gone for chase... I'm not sure whether the result would have changed. That balance of team that Mathews would give at seven really was a bonus," the former wicketkeeper batsman said

"If you take our entire campaign, whatever we did Mathews' overs and his ability to bat with the tail and read situations was an incredible bonus to us. He was a young chap who came into the side and from day one he could read situations. It's just instinct, how to up the rate, how to control the bowler, when to accelerate."

During the conversation, Ashwin also asked him about the controversial toss when the coin was flipped twice amid the cacophony of the Wankhede and eventually Sangakkara elected to bat.

"The was crowd was huge. It never happens in Sri Lanka. Once I had this at Eden Gardens when I could not talk to the first slip and then of course at the Wankhede. I remember calling on the toss then Mahi wasn't sure and said did you call tail and I said no I called head.

"The match referee actually said I won the toss, Mahi said he did not. There was a little bit of confusion there and Mahi said let's have another toss of the coin and heads went up again," he said.

"I am not sure whether it was luck that I won. I believe probably India might have batted if I had lost."

The loss prolonged Sri Lanka's wait for another world title as yet again the 1996 champions failed in the final hurdle.

"Whether we win or lose, we have this equilibrium on how to take a win or loss. The smile hides a huge amount of sadness, of disappointment, of thinking of 20 million people back in Sri Lanka who had been waiting for this for so long, since 1996.

"We had an opportunity in 2011, opportunity in 2007, then T20 opportunities in 2009 and 2012," Sangakkara said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
August 6,2020

New Delhi, Aug 6: The BCCI on Thursday suspended the IPL title sponsorship deal with Chinese mobile phone company Vivo for the event's upcoming edition amid heightened tensions in Sino-India diplomatic ties.

The BCCI sent out a one-line statement, without giving details, saying that Vivo would not be associated with the IPL this year. "The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and vivo Mobile India Pvt Ltd have decided to suspend their partnership for Indian Premier League in 2020," the statement said.

Meanwhile, Vivo released its own statement saying that the two entities "have mutually decided to pause their partnership for the 2020 season".

Vivo won the IPL title sponsorship rights for five years from 2018 to 2022 for a reported sum of Rs 2,190 crore, approximately Rs 440 crore per annum.

The two parties are now working out a plan in which Vivo might come back for a fresh three-year period starting 2021 on revised terms.

However, a top BCCI official offered a different view. "Here we are talking about diplomatic tensions and you expect that after November, when IPL ends and before the next IPL starts in April 2021, there would be no anti-China sentiment? Are we serious?" a veteran BCCI official said on conditions of anonymity.

The anti-China sentiment in the country peaked after the violent face-off between the Indian and Chinese troops in eastern Ladakh. India lost 20 soldiers in the clash, while China also acknowledged unspecified casualties.

The stand-off at the Line of Actual Control (LAC) caused outrage across India with several calls for boycotts of Chinese companies and products.

The BCCI is now likely to float a tender for new IPL title sponsors as mandated by its constitution. The glitzy T20 league starts on Sept. 19 in the UAE, forced out of India due to the rising COVID-19 cases.

The new development is in stark contrast to what came out of Sunday's IPL's Governing Council meeting, where it was decided that Vivo, along with all the other sponsors, will remain on board.

This was after the BCCI had announced in June that all sponsorship deals pertaining to IPL will be reviewed in the aftermath of the clash in the Galwan Valley.

However, after Sunday's meeting, there was a huge backlash on social media about the BCCI holding on to Vivo.

Both parties then began thrashing out an amicable separation plan, at least for this season.

However, the end of this deal could spell losses for the franchises as they get a substantial share from the sponsorship pool. Half of the annual Vivo sponsorship money is distributed equally among eight franchises, which comes to Rs 27.5 crore.

"As of now, it will be very difficult for the BCCI to match the sponsorship amount at such short notice. Therefore, both BCCI and the franchises should be prepared to lose out on some money -- BCCI more but each franchise from Vivo's exit will potentially lose 15 crore," the official said.

"This year will be difficult for everyone but the show must go on," the official said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.