Shashank Ravichandir

Sneaky feeling he might go back to back. How is he still performing like this?

Zverev now 21-1 in his last 22 tiebreaks at Roland-Garros

IPL NEEDS TO BE RADICAL. RIGHT NOW IT RESEMBLES RAVANA’S HEAD; THAT IS THE PROBLEM. Lalit Modi’s T20 brainchild revolutionized cricket, much like Kerry Packer’s ODI once did. It transformed the sport into a global entertainment product. It is a summer obsession in the most populous country in the world. But it has now reached a precarious inflection point. Cricket’s popularity in India has a strong base and the IPL certainly does not face extinction, but the risks of stagnation are high. The problem is that many matches are beginning to look the same.   IPL NEEDS TO EMBRACE A FREE- MARKET MODEL. (It must abandon the homogenization of IPL teams. That initial format has outlived its utility.) The current periodic auction and retention structure is designed to create parity. While noble in intent, it has produced unintended consequences. Every franchise has access to roughly similar budgets. Every squad contains a mix of star players and talented but lesser-known local players. The result: every team is capable of beating every other team on a given day. While this appears fair, it often diminishes one of sport’s most powerful attractions: narrative. And favourites. David versus Goliath. Remember India’s 1983 World Cup win by Kapil’s Devils? Football’s most successful league, the English Premier League, from which the IPL draws inspiration, thrives because there are giants and modest but resolute challengers. Supporters love watching powerhouses battle underdogs. They enjoy dynasties, rivalries, drama, and superteams. Chennai Super Kings and Mumbai Indians were once touted as the Manchester City, Liverpool, or Chelsea of the IPL (sorry, Arsenal fans). They currently languish near the bottom of the table. Nottingham Forest, Brighton, Crystal Palace, and Everton can beat any of these teams on a given day, but the Big Six remain a dominant force. They draw the crowds. They provide the drama. An upset is still an upset. Tottenham Hotspur nearly got relegated this season in a spectacular collapse, although that is not de rigueur. The IPL, by contrast, often resembles ten versions of the same team. It is like Ravana’s head. Winning and losing can often be forecast on the law of averages. Punjab Kings won their first six matches and then lost as many. KKR had the reverse experience. Defeats are rarely comprehensive. Frankly, the team at the bottom could simply be unlucky. The recurring wafer-thin margins of victory and defeat take away some of the thrill of the game. There is zero surprise; the surprise is known beforehand. The thrill factor induces a yawn. Sixes become meaningless. Soon, only a Super Over will titillate. RECOMMENDATIONS: The IPL need not be churlish. It is a full-blown capitalist enterprise; the owners include billionaires and private equity funds, among others. They have deep pockets and big egos, and I am sure they want to win, given rising franchise valuations. It is a business model, so why cap its fortunes? 1)      Allow franchises complete flexibility in player acquisition based on their financial muscle and appetite. 2)      Remove salary caps. Why should Vaibhav Suryavanshi or Virat Kohli, who are major draws, not receive whatever a franchise owner can afford to invest? Players must be the real beneficiaries. I am sure Reliance can afford to buy the whole Men in Blue team to represent Mumbai Indians if he is given the liberty to do so. Then let them. What would make T20 and the IPL entertaining is that a power-packed team by itself will still not ensure the championship, because of the inherent capriciousness of the format. On any given day, anything can happen. The heavyweights can still be upset, even if they would begin as clear favourites. There is no contradiction here. All sports carry that caveat. ( Continued in Thread)

Alex Ferguson won just 2 in 30 years btw and it took him 12 years in to win his first.