Bhargav<\/p>\n
Dear NL Team,<\/p>\n
I didn’t quite understand the point of the Subramanian Swamy Interview. Redactions were the least of my concerns. There was no substance in the questions or in what Swamy said.\u00a0<\/p>\n
There was an attempt to address some policy questions, but obviously, Swamy would never give serious enough answers. If policy questions were a focus, there could be many contemporary politicians, commentators, etc., you could have had on.<\/p>\n
If mudslinging was the focus, you could have reported his tweets and analysed their credibility. The interview felt like a waste of time and resources that could have been directed toward other, more substantial interviews.<\/p>\n
***<\/p>\n
Mohak\u00a0<\/p>\n
Hi Abhinandan,<\/p>\n
Cricket, I believe, is a sport because it is a physical activity with rules and recognition. Agreed, it does not have the athleticism of some other sports, but that is purely because professionalism in cricket is a new phenomenon, post-1960s or 70s. But to further complicate the debate, are gymnastics and breakdancing (that are part of the Olympics) sports?<\/p>\n
Also, cricket today is athletic enough, and I would love to be part of the panel to discuss it. I would recommend Jarrod Kimber’s podcasts and books.<\/p>\n
***<\/p>\n
Prakash<\/p>\n
Sport requires athleticism, quick reflexes and skill. The level of athleticism, reflexes, and skill complexity varies by sport, a player’s role within a sport, and the era under consideration. Cricket has some roles common to all players, and others specific to the level of technical skill a player has and the role he\/she matches. Wicketkeepers\/fast bowlers need a very high level of athleticism, as does fielding around the boundary. Spin bowlers, batsmen, and slip fielders need relatively less level. Cricket has changed a lot more over time than some other sports, and the level of athleticism needed today is much higher than it was 40-50 years ago.<\/p>\n
***<\/p>\n
Madan<\/p>\n
Just a suggestion, but it’s only because you are NL. If a panellist (NL\/guest) is giving a recommendation and you are familiar with it, don’t jump in immediately with your experience\/knowledge; it doesn’t matter how exciting it is. Gives it a much more pro feel if you wait for them to complete and then add your nuance. ( onwards and upwards )<\/p>\n
***<\/p>\n
Nikhil<\/p>\n
About cricket not being a sport: While I get Abhinandan’s tongue-in-cheek “Oh, cricket is not a sport” jab, it falls flat in any sane comparison of the demands placed on players’ bodies.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Multiple papers: Movement patterns in cricket vary by both position and game format<\/a>. Movement Demands of an Elite Cricket Team During the Big Bash League in Australia – PMC<\/a> indicates that players run at speeds between 2 km\/h and 5 km\/h, depending on their role (batting, bowling, or fielding). If we add this up over a day in ODIs or 5 days in Tests, it is a test of stamina and athleticism far greater than in many other sports.\u00a0<\/p>\n Additionally, the fact that pure athleticism is not sufficient to succeed (tactics, strategy, skill, and technique are all necessary) makes cricket a far more challenging sport than one might perceive from the outside. Anyways, that was my 2 cents on this whole debate.<\/p>\n Love the podcast! Keep up the great work.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n