Pre-tour inspections a must?

[King]

Pre-tour inspections a must? TNN / Partha Bhaduri NEW DELHI, July 26: The shabby lodging provided to the Indian team in Nottingham begs the question: Should the BCCI start sending pre-tour inspection teams regularly to even 'safer' places like England and Australia, and make sure beforehand that players will be kept comfortable at all times? After all, the English and the Aussies don't hesitate to send recce teams here before every visit and the BCCI gladly plays ball without reciprocating, unless a country has genuine security concerns like Pakistan. But the curious visit of an official team from Australia recently, coupled with the current accommodation fracas in Nottingham, should prompt the board to adopt a fresh policy. There are two aspects to the issue: player comfort and security arrangements. The perception that cricket and social unrest go hand in hand in the subcontinent seems to have bred perpetual paranoia in some quarters. According to an association insider, the latest alibi is the Haneef case, which prompted Cricket Australia to send a recce team earlier this month to inspect grounds in Chandigarh, Nagpur, Hyderabad, Baroda and Kochi, ahead of their visit to play ODIs from September 29 to October 17. Officially the visit was "routine", insist both cricket boards. The team then went on to visit Pakistan - where Indians will feel terror concerns are more pressing - to inspect venues like Peshawar ahead of the Australia A and under-19 teams' visit. Incidentally, Australia has decided to pull out of the Champions Trophy hockey tournament across the border. But why insist on visiting India? After a detailed inspection of every ground, the recce team came up with two objections: The rubble at the Rajiv Gandhi Stadium in Hyderabad and the shabby state of affairs at the Nehru Stadium in Kochi. There were no murmurs about the security aspect, and the BCCI has denied that there were any complaints at all. It's common knowledge that cricket grounds in India could do with a long-overdue makeover in terms of spectator comfort and aesthetic appeal, but if "the venues have been decided and will not change", as BCCI secretary Niranjan Shah told TOI, why bother with the exercise? CA media manager Philip Pope has said that "it is normal practice by us to send a team for inspection to study the logistics, facilities, hotel arrangements, ground and pitch conditions". But would CA like it if India did likewise, and if it had refused to play at an under-construction MCG on the last tour? Did the Indians complain about the rubble then? There are, as always, two ways of looking at the matter. One is the official line. "The BCCI has no objections to Australians coming here on a pre-tour inspection," says Shah. Other top board officials are not inclined to be as hospitable, although their refusal to go on record proves they don't want to make an issue of it. "This is totally wrong and smacks of double standards," said a top official, "If it was up to me I wouldn't let them enter to inspect venues and hotels. We provide top-notch arrangements to every team." Another mentioned the Indian team's discomfort in Nottingham and added that "such things could have been avoided had India insisted on a pre-tour inspection". He said: "We should also do this, to avoid such problems. As for venues, no board has any say in the matter if the ground is ICC-approved but in Australia's case it was a bilateral exercise." Bilateral or unilateral? After all, India certainly won't send a team Down Under this time, although in 2002, when India last toured England and Jagmohan Dalmiya was president, the BCCI insisted on an inspection. Former communications manager Amrit Mathur, who was part of that team, said: "I have also been to Pakistan, but there the security aspect needed to be monitored. I guess it depends on the outlook of the board. Times have changed and pre-tour inspections are routine these days. But I feel if our board has some questions about the venues and hotels they should definitely send pre-tour teams, even to places like Australia and England." Baroda Cricket Association CEO Makarand Waingankar agrees and says, "We should start doing likewise. It's the professional thing to do. It was the terror aspect which prompted Australia to visit, but they take care of other things like hotel and travel. Player comfort is on top of their agenda, unlike ours."

[King]

I have to say the accommodation provided in New Zealand is nowhere near as flashy as in India. From what I know the visiting cricketers are hosted in flashy 5 star hotels in India where as in NZ you wouldn't even call the hotels 3 stars. I remember about prior 2000 2 players used to share the room. Each room barely had little space to walk with two single beds across the room. I know these days the players get to have their own rooms but the hotels are not that flashy as in India. I guess Indian players simply get on with it and making very little fuss about anything really.

[Ram]

Ravi , there was a picture of you with Jadeja and one another player ( Harbhajan maybe). Was that one instance two players were asked to share a single room ?

[King]

Yup that was one. Remember how very small space there was between the beds? Here you go I've uploaded it again. The players were cramped for space. Couple of suit cases would fill the room. I wouldn't stay in such a cramped room unless it was inevitable really.

[Ram]

Yup that was one. Remember how very small space there was between the beds?

Yep. I guess the Indian board didnt expect the players to put be put up some in such a place in the first place in Notts. If the players had gone to Zim or Bangladesh , maybe they would have sent an inspection team.

[observer1]

Cities like Nottingham probably dont have good 5 star hotels anyway. To be fair to the ECB, I know that the English team stay in similar hotels - I have seen them in the Crowne Plaza in Leeds - I have stayed there myself - it is a good hotel, but not in the style of the true 5 star hotels in India. And, to be honest, Powar must consider himself lucky to be in a windowless room - there are no stray bullets likely to get him - Nottingham is the gun capital of the UK!

[King]

Cities like Nottingham probably dont have good 5 star hotels anyway. To be fair to the ECB, I know that the English team stay in similar hotels - I have seen them in the Crowne Plaza in Leeds - I have stayed there myself - it is a good hotel, but not in the style of the true 5 star hotels in India. And, to be honest, Powar must consider himself lucky to be in a windowless room - there are no stray bullets likely to get him - Nottingham is the gun capital of the UK!

Similarly NZ team stays in the same hotel and also all the ICC officials too. It is not about the stars but the size of the room that really makes one very uncomfortable. Say in Hamilton (small town) cricket teams are put in a motel usually with couple of rooms and a open plan living kitchen. It is not like there are no better hotels in Wellington but just that it is NZ cricket board's choice to put them in a smaller sized rooms whereas I'm sure the team is hosted in if not the best among the best hotels in India.

[Mr. Wicket]

Ravi; as far as hotel rooms go, part of it is the culture difference. When in India, cricketers stay within. Almost always. This isn't a comment on touring teams' treatment or mentalities, it happens with most international cricketers. Given the swarms of fans and the obsession with the game in most areas, cricketers just tend to stay indoors most of the time and thereby need a lot more space to themselves. The room becomes a place where the players stay when not at the ground or at any press/publicity events, for the most part. In NZ, it's the complete opposite. If you're a big name cricketer, maybe a handful of people will ask for a pic or an autograph, but you won't have a couple of hundred kids swarming around the hotel with their autograph books in hand or waiting for you at the airport/ground entrances. Most people don't stay indoors, they move out and enjoy themselves around the city. When Sri Lanka toured India, half the papers had shots of the swarms of fans outside a hotel waiting for autographs from Murali or Jayasuriya. When I was in Queenstown and the SL team happened to be in town, the front page of the local paper showed the Lankans all riding the jetboat over the Kawarau river. Similar situation in much of England. Players/teams/people generally don't stay indoors that much, because there's no need. They're more free to be out of the rooms, enjoy themselves, etc - and even if it is Tendulkar, there won't be the constant swarm around him. As for the grounds, the point in the article is bullshit. Think back to when a poorly constructed/overfilled stand collapsed in a ground a few years back and a number of peopel were killed. Or Guwahati less than 18 months ago, when there were riots and stampedes because a match was abandoned. The comparision to a rubble-filled MCG during construction is ridiculous - that's one of the best organised grounds on the planet, putting the likes of Lord's to shame and was fully functional even when at 2/3 capacity due to being built. With a lot of Indian grounds, there are concerns about either general security or ground safety (as at Guwahati) and those need to be addressed. The CCI and Mohali are among very few world class grounds in India, a lot of others do have genuine problems that arguments like those in the article are just glossing over.

[King]

Ravi; as far as hotel rooms go, part of it is the culture difference. When in India, cricketers stay within. Almost always. This isn't a comment on touring teams' treatment or mentalities, it happens with most international cricketers. Given the swarms of fans and the obsession with the game in most areas, cricketers just tend to stay indoors most of the time and thereby need a lot more space to themselves. The room becomes a place where the players stay when not at the ground or at any press/publicity events, for the most part. In NZ, it's the complete opposite. If you're a big name cricketer, maybe a handful of people will ask for a pic or an autograph, but you won't have a couple of hundred kids swarming around the hotel with their autograph books in hand or waiting for you at the airport/ground entrances. Most people don't stay indoors, they move out and enjoy themselves around the city. When Sri Lanka toured India, half the papers had shots of the swarms of fans outside a hotel waiting for autographs from Murali or Jayasuriya. When I was in Queenstown and the SL team happened to be in town, the front page of the local paper showed the Lankans all riding the jetboat over the Kawarau river. Similar situation in much of England. Players/teams/people generally don't stay indoors that much, because there's no need. They're more free to be out of the rooms, enjoy themselves, etc - and even if it is Tendulkar, there won't be the constant swarm around him. As for the grounds, the point in the article is bullshit. Think back to when a poorly constructed/overfilled stand collapsed in a ground a few years back and a number of peopel were killed. Or Guwahati less than 18 months ago, when there were riots and stampedes because a match was abandoned. The comparision to a rubble-filled MCG during construction is ridiculous - that's one of the best organised grounds on the planet, putting the likes of Lord's to shame and was fully functional even when at 2/3 capacity due to being built. With a lot of Indian grounds, there are concerns about either general security or ground safety (as at Guwahati) and those need to be addressed. The CCI and Mohali are among very few world class grounds in India, a lot of others do have genuine problems that arguments like those in the article are just glossing over.

Whatever but your reasons doesn't answer why the players are put in small sized rooms? BTW good to see ya here :thumbs_up: