The English Press

[King]

Indian media is trash.They suck up to foreign players for bytes and have no regard for their own players. They portray players as god when things are going well for the player and when not they lamblast them consistently. Indian cricket media scribes always ask foreign players about Tendulkar and report gleefully if the foreign player has anything good to say about Tendulkar. It almost sounds as if Indian media is out there working to get recognition for Tendulkar from foreign players. Every media is biased to a certain extent and I've read English media write more sensible articles than the Indian ones when India toured England. As for the likes of Hick, he was one of the highest paid county cricketers. I think he was paid way more than 200000 pounds a year. Given the stature he has in domestic cricket and the amount of reporting on county cricket by the media Hick has been given a fair space. Last year when India visited England, the English media were the ones to tore down the likes of Matt Prior, KP and the rest in the jelly bean saga. I'm not saying they are saints but they aren't any worse than Indian media. Indian media is obsessed with its own players and harsh it may sound even the Indian public at times just cannot admire foreign players I think. Indians don't appreciate players from outside India enough IMO

[Dhondy]

I share Gambo's frustration with the English press. They find it difficult to acknowledge that India have left England in their wake over the last 10 years. In their book, Sehwag will always be a FTB, while Pietersen makes the aesthetes purr with delight, Lara the leader of the underachieving Tendulkar, and India is just a third world country that has no right to spend riches on foreign players in the IPL (summary of an actual article on Cricinfo). I find the Australian press much fairer. They give credit when you better Australia. The English tend to find mitigations even when their side is thrashed roundly, and will only give credit when the thashing is administerd by Australians.

[King Tendulkar]

I think its more a case of the white cricket press. There is a definite ethnic divide!

[DomainK]

Its but natural that they will see things from their point of view and not from ours. Press, on today's date, is commercial...all around the world. They publish what sells. Bias is something that comes in naturally. Is our media any better? No, they are perhaps even worse. I cant imagine a star news/aaj tak anywhere else in the world.

[Gambit]

Indian media is trash.They suck up to foreign players for bytes and have no regard for their own players. They portray players as god when things are going well for the player and when not they lamblast them consistently. Indian cricket media scribes always ask foreign players about Tendulkar and report gleefully if the foreign player has anything good to say about Tendulkar. It almost sounds as if Indian media is out there working to get recognition for Tendulkar from foreign players.

That was one of my points. The Indian media readily laps up anything the English press says. They have to become their own 'man'. Part of the problem lies in the fact that we have very few decent cricket columnists. And thanks to that, the English press continues to sway press opinion amongst the world.

Indians don't appreciate players from outside India enough IMO

I don't think that is necessarily true. All the big foreign players are celebrated in India. Look at the adulation Lara, Waugh and Akram get. If you meant Indian fans online, then I'd agree. It's probably a case of pissing off fans from other teams who browse the forum and/or in response to Indian players being bashed on other forums.

[Tapioca]

ILara the leader of the underachieving Tendulkar

Regarding that specific point, one reason why English media accepts West Indians more readily than Indians could be because West Indian cricket came of age some thirty years before Indian cricket did. By early 1960s, West Indies had reached the same level as England, and any Englishman who grew up in the 1970s or later would have got used to losing to West Indies on a regular basis. So respecting a West Indian cricketer as better than their own would come naturally. For Pakistan too, 1982 was probably the series when they were "recognised" in England (plus, there were several top class Pakistani cricketers in county cricket). For India, there were a couple of wins in 1971 and 1986 but I doubt whether it could be said even in the 1990s that India fought on level terms with England in England, despite posessing one truly great player. The journalists who grew up in the last generation probably still view India the way they were then, and find it difficult to accept that India has outgrown them. But this will change with time. New Zealand (even though they are of the same stock and all that) will take even longer to find acceptance in England for the same reason. As someone who grew up watching cricket in the 1980s, I still find it difficult to accept that the little brothers of Sri Lanka have become as good or at times better than India, even though I know that it is true. Someone who started in the 1990s would be in no such denial.

[The Outsider]

While the reasons behind the English press being biased are obvious ie. press from all countries are biased, the reason they receive so much weight and importance doesn't have much to do with the white man's or Britisher's word but rather with the fact that their writings are so damn good and withstand the test of time. You can still find books and articles written decades back on cricket in circulation because they are so damn good. Even if people had written articles praising the Hazares and Merchants for their batting accomplishments they would have been of such inferior quality that they have not survived the test of time. Looking even at great Indian accomplishments, compare to the place Azhar's century at Lords in 1990 has with his and Tendulkar's scintillating partnership in South Africa in 1996. The former is part of folklore and one would be hard pressed to find quality articles for the latter. As far as cricketing feats go, the innings in South Africa was no less classy than the one at Lords but the fact that the British press captured it so vividly and wonderfully as compared to the trash which would have been dished out by the likes of TOI and HT that it will be the 1990 effort which will go down in the annals of history. Just look at the writings on this board. When Dhondy writes an article or a post, a lot many are compelled to read it and it registers in their mind because he writes so well. For writings to survive over time, they need to be good and what will survive are quality writings forming the impression many years later rather than some insipid stuff, which might have had some good factual information. There is no comparison in the quality of the writings of say the Independent and Telegraph with let's say TOI and HT. I never venture to read the latter and if I did not watch cricket even I would be thinking Pietersen is in a different league than Sehwag. Now if someone continues writing superb pieces on Sehwag in widely read publications there is no reason why an impression won't form based on them.

[Bumper]

I havent followed the English press closely enough to comment on this thread. But if the English press is anything like the English commentators (barring Bumble), then i can see the frustrations voiced in this thread. In the recent tour, the English whined constantly about rain, injuries, bad luck & what not, until the end of the 3rd test, at which time, it was more than obvious to even a layman that India had thoroughly outplayed England in the entire tour.

[ICFtoday]

I have always thought of English press as a hard-nosed vigilant body which pays attention to detail and reports the necessary. I also strongly believe that we as Indians are a lot more sensitive and take things written/said about our players more personally than an Englishman would. Hence, when the English hail/demean KP they do not hesitate do so as long as they have facts to support it. They do not believe in charming the readers or agree with them. I do understand that this thread is not compare the English and the Indian media but to be honest I can bet that in comparison to the English, Indian media mostly bases its reports on immediate events/matches and thus fails to present an overall comprehensive picture. To say that the English are more respectful of players who have performed at County level or in England is true to a certain extent. But then for other reporting media to blindly follow their opinions is absolutely wrong. The English press are independent and write about what concerns the English. Its not their fault that media elsewhere in the world follow their suit.

[ICFtoday]

In summary, it is unfair to ask someone to behave in a certain manner just because they are being followed when in all honesty they really do not care just like the followers.