The Similarity Transform Song

(to the tune of “If You’re Happy and You Know It“)

Note: This song describes what to do for a similarity transformation to find the eigenvalues of a matrix A. A similarity transform changes the matrix but does not alter its eigenvalues. Ideally, if you could find a similar matrix that was diagonal, you could pick the eigenvalues right off the diagonal. A similarity transform is of this form: B = T^{-1} A T, where T is the similarity transform matrix, and B is the matrix that is similar to A.

If your matrix has distinct eigenvalues,
It is very much apparent what to use:
Choose nonsingular for T,
and get a diagonal B,
If your matrix has distinct eigenvalues.

If you have a real symmetric matrix A,
Choose orthogonal for T: it’s the best way!
Because, after all
B is real diagonal
If you have a real symmetric matrix A.

If it’s complex and Hermitian, never fear!
The solution to your problem is quite clear:
Use a unitary T,
to get a real diagonal B
If it’s complex and Hermitian, never fear!

If your matrix A is normal as can be,
Take the following advice from me:
If your T is unitary
B’s diagonal (how scary!)
If your matrix A is normal as can be.

If A is chosen arbitrarily,
and you find a T that’s unitary,
Then B has the form of Schur
(that’s upper triangular)
If A is chosen arbitrarily.

If A is once again arbitrary,
Then you choose “nonsingular” for T,
B is almost diagonal,
(that’s Jordan form, y’all!)
If A is once again arbitrary.


“The Similarity Transform Song” Copyright (c) 2000 Rebecca Hartman-Baker.(from http://www.cse.uiuc.edu/~rjhartma/eigensong.html)

Found this while surfing. Was really funny and interesting.

Advertisements

4-1 Series roundup: The Emperor strikes back, the crown prince graduates

The ODI series in Pakistan has been quite wonderful for India. It was a kind of turnaround after the Karachi result and more importantly a revenge well-exacted, for the loss in the ODI series at home last year, particularly since we won four matches on the trot. If there was one thing that killed Pakistan in this series, it was their too-abysmal-for-words fielding. It was hardly even club class, save for a few of the cricketers. Apart from misfields and overthrows, the worst part was that they hardly collected even the balls they fielded properly. Woolmer’s got some work on his hands!

As for India, the Emperor (read Sachin) struck back, both with bat and ball just to prove, if at all he needed to, as to who’s still the boss. More importantly, Yuvaraj really matured as a batsman, played with an unbelievable head on his shoulders. The bowlers did their job and Dhoni, has worked real magic. The real test for Dhoni would start in the near future, when teams, having realised his potential and the danger he holds, start working on him. Interesting cricket lies ahead.

As for Dravid, he’s wonderfully jelled; he’s contributed as a batsman quite well but more importantly captained quite astutely. I’d still like to see him defend totals better, considering we kinda faltered in Game 1.

Overall, it’s been a memorable series, with a lot of positives. Sreesanth, RP Singh are all proving to be good material, and we’re surely having a problem of plenty in the pace department ahead of the World Cup. We need to pull up our socks a bit in the test matches as well, and we’re well on our way to becoming a very very good team. Kaif must soon get back into form; there’s no reason to hold Ganguly back, if Kaif is performing so badly.
Postscript: I think we’ve shot up on ICC ODI rankings. I guess we’re 2. Good job. Good form.

Seven years down memory lane

It’s the 17th of February today, seven years past 17-2-1999, when we did have our last day in DAV Boys Senior Secondary School, Gopalapuram. Have several wonderful memories of this beautiful phase of life, from a school where I studied for twelve long years. Like several of my classmates, I owe a whole lot o DAV, for what I am. We had mostly great teachers right till the very end (when problems did begin to crop up) and always a great batch of students. From being very studious to extremely mischievous, we all had our great times in DAV.

On 17th Feb, we had our farewell havan, as well as several farewell speeches, a victory lap around the school, capped by a treat at Pizza corner! There are possibly people whom I’ve not met ever since, and those whom I keep in touch with till this very day. The new bluwiki home at http://www.bluwiki.org/go/DAV_1999 is indeed helping.

Schooling is always a treasured memory from childhood. I owe some of my best friends to DAV. Can’t really think of much more to write… It’s always great to reminisce those wonderful days at DAV….

This is Rajan and me from 17-02-1999!

03.jpg

This was possibly on 16th Feb, outside ‘Joy’.. what wonderful memories…

34.jpg

Just caught this wonderful poem in a forward; it captures all the nostalgia from the school days:

Gone are the days …

When the school reopened in June,
And we settled in our new desks and benches…

When we queued up in book depot,
And got our new books and notes.

When we wanted two Sundays and no Mondays, yet
managed to line up daily for the morning prayers.

We learnt writing with slates and pencils, and… Progressed To fountain pens and ball pens and then Micro tips…

We began drawing with crayons and evolved to
Colour pencils and finally sketch pens…

We started calculating first with tables and then with
Clarke’s tables and advanced to calculators and computers.

When we chased one another in the corridors in Intervals,
and returned to the classrooms drenched in sweat…

When we had lunch in classrooms, corridors, playgrounds, under the trees and even in cycle sheds.

When all the colors in the world, decorated the campus on the Second Saturdays.

When a single P.T. period in the week’s Time Table was awaited more eagerly than the monsoons.

When cricket was played with writing pads as bats,
And Neckties and socks rolled into balls.

When few played “kabadi” and “Kho-Kho” in scorching sun, While others simply played “book cricket” in the
Confines of classroom.

Gone are the days…
Of fights but no conspiracies,
Of Competitions but seldom jealousy…

When we used to watch Live Cricket telecast,
In the opposite house during Intervals and Lunch breaks.

When few rushed at 3:45 to “Conquer” window seats in
our School bus. While few others had “Big Fun”, “peppermint”, “kulfi”, ” milk ice !” and “sharbat !” at 4 o’Clock…

Gone are the days of Sports Day, and the annual School Day , And the one-month long preparations for them.

Gone are the days Of the stressful Quarterly, Half Yearly and Annual Exams, And the most enjoyed holidays after them.

Of tenth and twelfth standards, when we
Spent almost the whole year writing revision tests…

We learnt, we enjoyed, we played, we won, we lost…
We laughed, we cried, we fought, we thought…

With so much fun in them, so many friends,
So much experience , all this and more…


Sachin ODI Dismissal Stats

These stats are interesting too. Vaas is not too much of a concern, nor Razzaq, as you can see his averages are not that bad against them. But you can conclude that Razzaq dismisses a set Tendulkar, and that’s a bit dangerous. I remember a 93 in Aus, and of course the recent 95 when Razzaq dismissed Sachin. On the other hand, Pollock has always dismissed Sachin early. It can also be viewed that Pollock can’t dismiss Sachin except early! So maybe, Sachin should not open against SA. It’s always possible to draw dumb conclusions from statistics, but we can make useful interpretations at times! Walsh again appears to have had an upper hand with Sachin. I am surprised that Cronje has dismissed Sachin only thrice — at one point it appeared that he was picking Sachin every single game!

Statsguru – SR Tendulkar – ODI Batting – Bowlers/fielders dismissed by

SR Tendulkar (Sachin Tendulkar) [Player Page] – RHB; LBG
Born: 1973-04-24 (present age: 32y 299d)

ODIs: India 1989/90 – 2005/06 (16y 238d – 32y 298d)
Also: Test Player 1989/90 – 2005/06.

Filter: none.
Sort order: total dismissals (descending).


                     Mat    I  NO  Runs HS1  HS2  HS3     Ave 100  50   0
overall              362  353  33 14146 186* 152  146   44.20  39  72  16

Bowler Dis bwd c fi c wk st lbw hit Ave 0 Team WPUJC Vaas (LFM) 9 2 4 2 0 1 0 20.88 1 SL SM Pollock (RFM) 7 2 2 2 0 1 0 6.28 1 SA HH Streak (RFM) 7 1 4 2 0 0 0 32.28 0 Zim Abdul Razzaq (RFM) 6 2 1 2 0 1 0 51.50 0 Pak Azhar Mahmood (RFM) 6 1 3 1 0 1 0 25.83 0 Pak GD McGrath (RFM) 6 0 4 2 0 0 0 26.16 1 Aus CA Walsh (RF) 6 1 3 1 0 1 0 8.66 2 WI Aaqib Javed (RFM) 5 0 3 1 0 1 0 3.20 1 Pak AA Donald (RF) 5 1 3 0 0 1 0 22.60 0 SA DW Fleming (RFM) 5 1 1 3 0 0 0 54.60 0 Aus ST Jayasuriya (SLA) 5 1 2 0 2 0 0 48.20 0 SL DNT Zoysa (LFM) 5 0 3 1 0 1 0 47.40 0 SL AC Cummins (RFM) 4 1 3 0 0 0 0 30.00 0 WI PS de Villiers (RFM) 4 1 3 0 0 0 0 15.50 0 SA CZ Harris (RM) 4 0 3 1 0 0 0 69.75 0 NZ JH Kallis (RFM) 4 1 3 0 0 0 0 74.75 0 SA B Lee (RF) 4 1 3 0 0 0 0 17.25 0 Aus TM Moody (RM) 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 16.25 0 Aus DK Morrison (RFM) 4 1 3 0 0 0 0 12.75 0 NZ M Muralitharan (OB) 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 46.25 0 SL Shoaib Akhtar (RF) 4 0 2 1 0 1 0 36.00 0 Pak Waqar Younis (RF) 4 1 2 1 0 0 0 34.25 1 Pak NW Bracken (LFM) 3 0 1 2 0 0 0 58.00 0 Aus WJ Cronje (RM) 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 28.33 0 SA TJ Friend (RFM) 3 0 1 1 0 1 0 24.66 0 Zim L Klusener (RFM) 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 24.66 0 SA GR Larsen (RM) 3 1 0 0 1 1 0 49.33 0 NZ CR Matthews (RFM) 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 15.66 0 SA Mohammad Sami (RF) 3 0 1 2 0 0 0 14.33 1 Pak DJ Nash (RFM) 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 18.00 0 NZ Shoaib Malik (OB) 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 114.00 0 Pak SA Thomson 3 0 1 2 0 0 0 25.00 1 NZ DR Tuffey (RFM) 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 5.66 0 NZ Wasim Akram (LF) 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 5.00 0 Pak SR Waugh (RM) 3 0 2 0 0 1 0 59.33 0 Aus GP Wickramasinghe (RFM) 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 17.33 0 SL CEL Ambrose (RF) 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 24.00 0 WI Ata-ur-Rehman (RFM) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 27.50 0 Pak N Boje (SLA) 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 90.50 0 SA EA Brandes (RFM) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 9.50 0 Zim CL Cairns (RFM) 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 2.50 1 NZ CE Cuffy (RF) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 33.00 1 WI KSC de Silva (LFM) 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 20.50 0 SL M Dillon (RFM) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 36.50 0 WI CJ Drum (RFM) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 1.50 0 NZ CRD Fernando (RFM) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 19.00 0 SL A Flintoff (RF) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 43.00 0 Eng GW Flower (SLA) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 42.00 0 Zim JN Gillespie (RF) 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 31.50 0 Aus MN Hart (SLA) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 72.00 0 NZ M Hayward (RF) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 21.50 0 SA PW Jarvis (RFM) 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 14.50 0 Eng MS Kasprowicz (RFM) 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 71.00 0 Aus CC Lewis (RFM) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 18.50 0 Eng BM McMillan (RMF) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 39.50 0 SA Mohammad Rafique (SLA) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 51.00 0 BD Naved-ul-Hasan (RMF) 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 2.50 0 Pak ML Nkala (RFM) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 28.00 0 Zim RJ Ratnayake (RFM,LB) 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 44.50 0 SL Saqlain Mushtaq (OB) 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 83.50 0 Pak Shahid Afridi (RM,LBG) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 68.00 0 Pak MA Suji (RMF) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 11.50 0 Ken A Symonds (RM,OB) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 74.50 0 Aus ME Waugh 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 76.00 0 Aus

Sachin ODI Bowling Stats

Sachin dismissed Inzi for a record 7th time — he’s not dismissed anyone more times; also, only Jayasuriya (does Inzi have a weakness for part-timers?) and Prasad have dismissed Inzi more times (8) (see below). I myself remember several times Sachin dismissing Inzi. Also note that he’s been breaking partnerships, considering the high scores batsmen have been on (reflected by the averages) — Andy Flower seems to clearly indicate that.
Statsguru – SR Tendulkar – ODI Bowling – Batsmen dismissed/fielders effecting dismissals

SR Tendulkar (Sachin Tendulkar) [Player Page] – RHB; LBG
Born: 1973-04-24 (present age: 32y 299d)

ODIs: India 1989/90 – 2005/06 (16y 238d – 32y 298d)
Also: Test Player 1989/90 – 2005/06.

Filter: none.
Sort order: total dismissals (descending).


(6 ball overs)       Mat    O       R   W   BB1    BB2     Ave  Econ    SR 4w 5w
overall              362 1224.5  6194 142  5/32   5/50   43.61  5.05  51.7  4  2

Batsman Dis bwd c fi c wk st lbw hit Ave 0 Team Inzamam-ul-Haq (RHB) 7 1 2 2 0 2 0 35.57 0 Pak A Flower (LHB) 4 0 2 1 1 0 0 74.00 0 Zim Abdul Razzaq (RHB) 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 27.00 0 Pak DPMD Jayawardene (RHB) 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 10.33 1 SL BC Lara (LHB) 3 1 1 0 0 1 0 47.66 0 WI CD McMillan (RHB) 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 32.33 0 NZ A Ranatunga (LHB) 3 0 1 1 0 1 0 14.66 0 SL SR Waugh (RHB) 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 16.66 0 Aus MG Bevan (LHB) 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 36.50 0 Aus N Boje (LHB) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 12.00 0 SA SP Fleming (LHB) 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 41.00 0 NZ MJ Horne (RHB) 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 59.00 0 NZ Khaled Mashud (RHB) 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 11.00 0 BD L Klusener (LHB) 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 12.50 0 SA DS Lehmann (LHB) 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 4.50 0 Aus RS Mahanama (RHB) 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 29.50 0 SL DR Martyn (RHB) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 13.00 0 Aus Mohammad Sami (RHB) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 1.50 0 Pak Moin Khan (RHB) 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 21.00 0 Pak JN Rhodes (RHB) 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 23.50 0 SA Saeed Anwar (LHB) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 137.00 0 Pak Shoaib Malik (RHB) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 92.00 0 Pak PV Simmons (RHB) 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 58.00 0 WI ME Waugh (RHB) 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 98.50 0 Aus SC Williams (RHB) 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 60.50 0 WI

Statsguru – Inzamam-ul-Haq – ODI Batting – Bowlers/fielders dismissed by

Inzamam-ul-Haq [Player Page] – RHB; SLA
Born: 1970-03-03 (present age: 35y 351d)

ODIs: Pakistan 1991/92 – 2005/06 (21y 264d – 35y 350d); Asia XI 2005 (35y 167d – 35y 171d)
Also: Test Player 1992 – 2005/06.

Filter: none.
Sort order: total dismissals (descending).


                     Mat    I  NO  Runs HS1  HS2  HS3     Ave 100  50   0

overall              355  330  49 11230 137* 123  122   39.96  10  82  19


Bowler Dis bwd c fi c wk st lbw hit Ave 0 Team ST Jayasuriya (SLA) 8 0 6 1 1 0 0 37.37 0 SL BKV Prasad (RMF) 8 1 5 1 0 1 0 34.25 1 Ind SR Tendulkar (LBG) 7 1 2 2 0 2 0 35.57 0 Ind WPUJC Vaas (LFM) 7 1 2 2 0 2 0 34.57 0 SL NJ Astle (RM) 6 0 3 1 2 0 0 17.16 0 NZ SK Warne (LBG) 6 1 0 0 2 3 0 14.16 1 Aus AB Agarkar (RFM) 5 2 0 2 0 1 0 39.00 0 Ind GD McGrath (RFM) 5 0 1 2 0 2 0 10.00 2 Aus M Muralitharan (OB) 5 1 2 1 1 0 0 40.80 0 SL JH Kallis (RFM) 4 2 1 1 0 0 0 38.00 0 SA L Klusener (RFM) 4 0 0 2 0 2 0 20.50 0 SA C Pringle (RFM) 4 0 3 0 0 1 0 26.75 0 NZ RR Singh (RMF) 4 0 2 2 0 0 0 31.50 0 Ind CL Cairns (RFM) 3 1 0 0 0 2 0 24.66 1 NZ WJ Cronje (RM) 3 1 0 1 1 0 0 53.66 0 SA M Dillon (RFM) 3 0 1 2 0 0 0 12.66 1 WI SC Ganguly (RM) 3 0 1 2 0 0 0 15.00 0 Ind CH Gayle (OB) 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 31.66 0 WI CL Hooper (OB) 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 23.33 0 WI GR Larsen (RM) 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 29.66 0 NZ S Lee (RM) 3 0 2 0 0 1 0 8.33 0 Aus A Nehra (LMF) 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 42.33 0 Ind CPH Ramanayake (RFM) 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 58.00 0 SL A Ranatunga (RM) 3 0 2 0 0 1 0 18.00 0 SL HH Streak (RFM) 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 15.33 1 Zim CA Walsh (RF) 3 0 2 0 0 1 0 29.33 0 WI

Inzi, Moin, sporting spirit and all that obscure stuff

Sporting spirit: Inzamam-ul-Haq’s whinge about his Obstructing-the-field dismissal at Peshawar divided opinion across the world. Some panned him for his lack of awareness of the game’s rules, while others – including several former Indian cricketers – supported his contention that the Indian appeal had been less than sporting. But while Inzamam deserved some sympathy in the wake of what had happened to him against England at Faisalabad, Moin Khan – his former team-mate – stepped in to win the hypocrisy stakes. The man who once caught Sourav Ganguly on the second bounce in a Test match not only questioned Rahul Dravid’s integrity, but went on to suggest that Ganguly would have behaved different. About as rich as the Australians imploring players from other nations to “walk” when out.

— Dileep Premachandran on cricinfo

Moin caught Saurav on second bounce — the umpire (that blind V K Ramaswamy — perhaps that Tamil comedian with the same name could have made a better decision) deemed that it came of the short leg’s leg (my foot!). There was so much dust puffed up by the ball striking the turf and it took 11 dishonest players and 2 blind umpires to make that abhorrent decision.
Perhaps it would be prudent to stop Moin from writing, since he’s been suffering from the foot-in-mouth disease all the time. Perhaps, he too, like Jayawant Lele, has mastered the art of walking on one foot! Constant and consistent garbage — he should soon become the editor of TOI Sport!

Australia just whipped SL today, after being 10-3 in 3.0 overs. Good job, Ponting and Symonds. Murali missed his 100, with the ball though (10-0-99-0) [See here].

As for “Australians and walking”, it’s a big joke. When Gilchrist walked so (in)famously in the World Cup semi-final (I still don’t understand what SL were doing in the semis after losing to Kenya), no one spoke to him in the dressing room till the match concluded. I remember him saying that he wished that someone would at least abuse him! Secondly, people made a big hue and cry appreciating Gillespie (or probably Kasprowicz) walking in the last India series. Give me a break! You don’t need people like Venkatesh Prasad or Kaz to walk — they’d get out anyways. The bottomline is that “selective walking” is very dangerous. It can trick umpires, i.e., if Lara, who has a reputation of walking, does not walk after a nick, chances are that the umpire would not give him out. It’s better to consistently not walk instead. After all, why are umpires there for?

Back to the Inzi issue, Osman Saimuddin echoed many of my own feelings in his column:

Inzamam’s reaction leaves a bad taste

Osman Samiuddin

February 10, 2006

If you haven’t seen the incident referred to, then google.com has a video clip of it

Inzamam-ul-Haq makes his way off after being given out at Peshawar © AFP

It should first be clear that, by obstructing the field at Peshawar, Inzamam-ul-Haq was out.

Law 37 (1) states that a batsman is obstructing the field if he willfully obstructs or distracts the opposing side by word or action. It is also obstruction if a batsman willfully, and without the consent of the fielding side, strikes the ball with his bat or person – other than the hand not holding the bat – after the ball has touched a fielder. And Law 37 (2), on accidental obstruction, states it is for either umpire to decide whether any obstruction is willful or not. Inzamam patting the ball back appeared willful and, in any case, both umpires consulted each other before ruling him out. That incident and its aftermath, however, revealed two disturbing aspects.

The first was that Inzamam wasn’t aware of the law. Given the abundance of rules and subsections governing the game, it is futile – though not unfair – to expect captains to be intimately aware of their minutiae. At least, knowledge of those concerning dismissals is prerequisite for every captain and player. Granted, it is an uncommon mode of dismissal – he was only the third man in ODI history to be dismissed in such a manner – but rarity should not justify ignorance.

Inzamam wrote in his column for The News: “Such not very common laws need to be explained properly and in detail.” Is it not incumbent upon a player to know them himself? And if they need explaining to one with a 100-plus Tests and 350 ODIs, in a career spanning nearly 16 years, it reveals more about the player than the laws. That Inzamam should have known the law brooks no argument, defense or justification.

It wasn’t the first time either that he has been caught unawares; in Pakistan’s seven-wicket win at Wellington, in 2003-04, he shunned the extra half hour on the fourth day 28 runs from victory. Showers and inconsistent weather were expected on the final day and the decision bemused and shocked observers. To Pakistan’s horror, play was delayed on the final morning but, luckily, only for an hour. The win was duly completed. In quite a different way, that situation also reflected a similarly dangerous lack of awareness of situation and circumstance.

But more regrettable than his ignorance are comments in the aftermath which only compound his folly. By publicly accusing India of acting outside the spirit of cricket he raised a question, of sportsmanship and spirit of the game, when it needn’t have been invoked. The match was delicately poised in favour of Pakistan, Inzamam’s was a crucial wicket and India needed it. The mode of dismissal was legitimate and the appeal as sporting or unsporting as any for an edge, leg-before, stumping or run-out. Incidentally, the appeal was also as genuine as the one Pakistan made when Sachin Tendulkar was run out at Eden Gardens in 1999, another dismissal that sparked debate about the spirit of cricket.

Tendulkar appeared to have grounded his bat before colliding with Shoaib Akhtar inadvertently, causing him to lift his bat when the bails were dislodged and being given out; Pakistan could have withdrawn the appeal given the accidental collision but chose not to, which was their right. In Inzamam’s case, the decision didn’t even involve considerations of a collision as a loophole.

Ultimately both decisions were correct according to law and that, not ensuing debate in both cases about sportsmanship, is what matters. Moin Khan, who played in that match, called Inzamam’s dismissal deplorable, citing it as an example of India’s desire to win by hook or by crook and launching a scathing personal attack on Rahul Dravid. Conveniently, Moin forgets Tendulkar’s dismissal. Was appealing for it then not outside the spirit of the game as well? In a realm as grey as ethics, such accusations are damaging and unnecessary and though they hold less significance than Inzamam’s, Moin’s words are incendiary, misjudged and possibly hypocritical.

Worse still, Inzamam further implied it could affect relations between the two sides. Mostly, this series has been played in a cordial spirit, aside from some niggles at Faisalabad. Inzamam has thus not only made an issue from nothing, within the context of India and Pakistan, he has acted irresponsibly. As captain of a side in a series where so much is always at stake, where words must still be uttered cautiously, his comments are unnecessarily provocative; for a ravenous media on either side of the border not strangers to hyperbole and context-removal, they are gold-dust.

Already India has been compelled to issue a counter-statement, and although they have correctly called for the issue to be put to rest, it is unlikely that it will so easily. Inzamam claimed he has, “asserted on my boys not to make much of the Peshawar incident … however, in my personal opinion the appeal was not made in a sporting manner. Instead, it just might have left a bad taste in the mouth.”

How, though, can he expect his side not to make much of it when he himself has already done so? The bad taste has already been left in the mouth and it is not the Indians’ doing.

Wonder if Dravid should have appealed against Shoaib Malik in yesterday’s match, for the same reason! Guess public pressure/media made him decide otherwise. Gavaskar made a good point saying that Indian cricketers should be allowed to at least write, if not talk to the media, since it gives Pakistan an unnecessary advantage (of manipulating public opinion?).

Let these issues take the backseat. More cricket, please!!