Fabricated quotes?

Anyone who's ever spoken to a journalist knows that what appears in the press the following morning may or may not resemble what you actually said. It can get even worse when some sort of translation is involved. Looks like CricInfo is getting in on the game with it's quotes.

Top of the quotes on the site today is the following:

"Dammit."
Neil McKenzie, at the non-striker's end, reacts as Jacques Kallis trudges off before the umpire's verdict in the first Test against India in Chennai

Not a particularly exciting quote, until you realise that, according to CricInfo's own commentary and scorecard, Neil McKenzie had been sitting in the pavilion for the best part of 15 overs when this happened. He may have been anywhere on the ground, but wherever he was, it certainly was not at the non-strikers end.

So the question is - can CI not tell the difference between Hashim Amla and Neil McKenzie? (ouch!) Or should we really not trust any of the quotes that are trotted out for our entertainment?

Geography 101 for Cricket Journalists

Clearly, Geography 101, as well as Logic 101, need to be included in mandatory training for journalists.

Take this brilliant excerpt from Myles Hodgson of the Press Association, as he attempts to explain why relatively few English players are likely to sign up with the IPL.

"Unlike the other Test-playing nations, England is in the Northern Hemisphere so they have less breaks than most international teams simply because they play in their summer and then go abroad to play in another summer."

Ponder that for a minute, if you will. And then ask yourself a couple of questions.

Firstly, when did India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and the Caribbean countries shift south of the equator? Or is it, in Hodgson's view, only South Africa, Zimbabwe, Australia and New Zealand that, along with England, rank consideration as "real" Test-playing nations? I won't even go where some people might take this one!

Secondly, if England play at home in the summer, and go abroad to play in the southern summer; and all the other teams are in the southern hemisphere; then who exactly are England playing against, if you take Hodgson's premise that no other team has to play both home and abroad in opposite summers?

Unbelievable - how does this tripe get past an editor?

Mr Cricket - an example for everyone

I've written about how poor Viv Richard's autobiography was. I've pilloried Prabhudesai on Dravid, enough to receive a long and impassioned defense of his work from the author (material for another post someday). Steve Waugh's epic was sadly, decidedly within his comfort zone. Generally, sporting biographies and autobiographies turn out to be as banal as can be.

With that in mind, I wasn't impressed when my wife spent a few dollars on Mike Hussey's book - and yet here I sit today, complimenting her on her astute choice.

For once, we have a book by a cricketer that actually talks about what it means and what it takes, to be the cricketer that he is. It is open, honest and insightful, and apart from a few graphics to illustrate how good a cricketer Hussey actually is, everything in it is information I cannot glean from elsewhere. I actually feel like I learned something from the book, not just about Hussey and his struggle to the top, but about myself as well.

Sure, he doesn't have the literary skills of a Dumas or a Mitchell, but boy does he deliver some meaningful content. I would countenance any young player looking to make his way in the game to read this. Hussey's methods may not be for everyone, but there's little doubt that this book can be a tremendous guide to anyone.

How good is David Mitchell?!

I observed back when I read Black Swan Green that David Mitchell appeared to be a prodigiously talented writer. Now that I've read Cloud Atlas I can safely say that my original assessment was a massive understatement and I did Mitchell a great disservice. I don't even know where to begin to describe the masterful tapestry that he has woven, so I won't.

It shall have to suffice to say that he has got to be one of, if not the, most innately talented authors I have ever come across. His mastery of each of the half-dozen completely different voices that he adopts is quite incredible, and the only reason it took me more than one night to read the book was the fact that I had to get up early each morning to drive down to the WACA for the small matter of a Test match.

One contrarian caveat that I must throw in here for clarification. The book itself I found to be excellent, but I'm not sure it's really an all-time-great novel in my own estimation. It's up there near the top of modern literature to be sure, but I'm not sure I'd even rate it above one of my other recent reads, The Time Traveler's Wife.




Perhaps it wasn't wise to read For One More Day right after Cloud Atlas, but in any case, I'm simply glad that I didn't actually spend money on this book. There's nothing egregiously bad about it, but it didn't particularly have anything going for it either. Repetitive and thus predictable, it smacks of a short story masquerading as a novel. An author can pull that off, if he has the sort of literary skills that Mitchell possesses. I suspect even Mitch Albom fans would struggle to say this was a really great piece of work.


The Inheritance of Loss was an interesting read, mostly in that I really struggled to figure out where the author was coming from. Astonishingly, there wasn't a single positive character in the book. Every one of them was in some way a pathetic caricature, and I use that word to emphasise the lack of depth that often existed. Oddly, I found myself wanting to skip chunks of text, and yet continue reading - perhaps an indication that Ms Desai's writing didn't resonate with me, but that the story that might have been told, did? Again, nothing terrible about the book, but not one I'd particularly recommend, and I am stunned that it won the Booker prize! An almost very good book that didn't quite make it.



Jasper Fforde, take a bow. I've been wanting to try Fforde out for a long time, and I finally took the plunge. The Eyre Affair is outrageous stuff, and pure entertainment, but in a quality, rather than cheap way. Light, yet sumptuous, and oestensibly trite, yet captivatingly brilliant. No question I'll be reading his entire collection now, and if you are into your literature, but also enjoy suspending disbelief, then I have little doubt that you will love the neither utopian nor dystopian world that Fforde has created.

Four brilliant days at the WACA

What a wonderful Test match. It ebbed and flowed for three great days, and the fourth day provided tremendous entertainment, although with Australia never quite getting back on top despite threatening, it may not qualify as one of the all time great Test matches.

However, it did qualify, in my book, as one of India's greatest ever victories, and it certainly was a historic performance. Perhaps the only Indian victory greater than this one, given the context, the pitch, the expectations and the quality of the opposition, was the Laxman-Dravid Calcutta encounter.

I think the best way to summarise my experience is to go through player by player with my thoughts, seeing as anyone who's reading this already knows what happened.

• Billy Bowden - He had a pretty good Test actually, keeping the theatrics to a minimum, and getting it mostly right. His one clanger may have been the Symonds lbw on the final day, and there was a close one he didn't give against Dravid in the first knock, but that was about it. However, his inability to count to six was quite ridiculous at times, most notably when he made his partner go back to his post, only to be overruled by the third umpire. Also poor was his remonstrating with bowlers not to appeal too much - perhaps he got a little carried away by the spirit situation.
• Asad Rauf - he had a shocker in my book. He seemed to be struggling with the conditions, and he got increasingly trigger happy as the Test went on. He sent Dhoni, Tendulkar, Rogers and Hussey all packing with iffy lbw's, and nailed Dravid in the second innings with a poor caught behind decision. Fortunately though, all these were marginal calls, rather than egregiously terrible ones as we saw in Sydney. What he did prove though, was that umpires need warm-up games too. The ball bounces more in Sydney than it does in Rawalpindi or Multan, Mr Rauf.

• Wasim Jaffer - Continued to show that he possesses quite unflappable temperament, but also little ability to resist the flirtatious drive. He was enthusiastic in the field though, and the opening partnership is likely to remain for Adelaide.
• Virender Sehwag - Batted like a man who had no form and little class to fall back on, which was sad to see. However, quite simply his attitude and approach - taking the game to the Aussies - made a notable difference at the top of the order, and he'll be back in the side for a while now I think. He was also heavily involved in the field, always having something to say to the captain and bowlers, and by all accounts his contributions were vital.
• Rahul Dravid - Much happier at number three, and played some great cricket, despite not being at his most fluent. No surprise that he wound up top-scoring in India's best away win ever, is it? Dropped one on day 4 that he didn't see, but otherwise was superb in the slips, and was clearly Kumble's right hand man - the captain was invariably seen going to Dravid for advice. He made me cry when he got out though. That's the third 90-odd I've seen him get live!
  
• Sachin Tendulkar - I take back anything I've ever said in question of this man. He can bloody well bat. Getting very slow in the field unfortunately, but do we care? The crowd in the members all wanted to see him score runs, and they got their wish, though not the century both they and he craved, thanks to Asad Rauf.
• Saurav Ganguly - What a disaster in the field, and in this Test in general. Everyone around me in the crowd wanted to know why on earth he was in the side, and I couldn't provide an answer. His lethargy was mind-numbing, and his efforts in the field often laughable (not that I could do better or anything). I hope the rumour of sickness was in fact true, and we will see better from him in Adelaide. I'm not a fan, but even then I expected a lot more!
• VVS Laxman - Sometimes it's hard to imagine how he hasn't scored 10 thousand runs and 40 centuries. This was one of those Tests. He just manages to look divine.
  
• MS Dhoni - Samson in disguise? The long highlighted hair is gone, and so is the go-for-it batsman. In his place though, we have someone who is looking increasingly competent, both in front of and behind the stumps. I've been calling for Parthiv Patel to come back into the side, but I think I might have to rethink that one.
• Anil Kumble - What can you say about the man? Looks like he was made skipper about ten years too late, and I don't see how he's ever going to stop bowling. His batting was a disappointment though - his team needed him twice, and he failed them both times. Getting to be a liability in the field too.
• Irfan Pathan - He bowled beautifully, moved the ball nicely, was a livewire in the field, and batted with considerable aplomb, to the surprise and consternation of many in the crowd. Welcome back - it's going to be hard to drop him now, and RP Singh will be the one looking to see when Zaheer is back.
• RP Singh - I like his attitude, and what's not to like about a bloke who can swing it at 140kmh? His batting in the second dig was a bit of a revelation, but he may be the most vulnerable of the three pacemen from this Test, despite being the most senior!
• Ishant Sharma - what do you say about a chap who gets Ricky Ponting twice, does him for pace and bounce half a dozen times, and bowls one of the best extended spells I have ever seen, live or on television. The crowd really took to him, and the general consensus was that if he put some meat on those bones, there's some truly world class potential there - stuff that would put a Srinath to shame.
• Harbhajan Singh - talk about an enthusiastic twelfth man. He was everywhere, all the time -- except when Andrew Symonds was batting, in which case the 12th man duties were undertaken by others.
• Yuvraj Singh - the poor attitude that we have read about was quite apparent in the fielding sessions, and it was no great disappointment when he limped off injured on the third morning.
• VRV Singh & Pankaj Singh - let's just say that they won't be coming on as substitute fielders anytime soon.
• Dinesh Karthik - like Harbhajan, he was everywhere, and displayed the sort of attitude that suggests that he's a real positive asset in the dressing room.

• Chris Rogers - back to the drawing board for him, but he knows that he's the next cab off the ranks at least. He was sensational in the field, but one hopes the flashy bmw he drove to the ground in is not an indication of a feeling that he has already found success.
  
• Phil Jacques - coming back down to earth after a high-flying start to his Test career. This is where the rubber meets the road, and it'll be interesting if he's able to adapt and stop going after everything. Fortunately for him, there's not a lot of good swing bowling in world cricket, so he won't often be tested this much. Supposedly poor in the field, but Australia's worst is better than India's best I think!
  
• Ricky Ponting - reality bites for Ponting. He's really been outdone by India, though I expect a double-ton at Adelaide to compensate. He was roughed up by a 19 year old, and it was interesting that there were a lot of people in the members who felt that his time as captain may be up as soon as the end of this season. One thing worth pointing out - he was a consummate sportsman through the entire match, no two ways about it.
• Michael Hussey - showed everyone how to bat at the WACA on the fourth day... it's all about knowing how to leave the ball. I wonder though, if he should be batting at five, with Clarke at number four.
• Michael Clarke - drove into the WACA in an old Ford, with Lara Bingle accompanying him. Perhaps it hasn't all gone to his head after all. Classy batting in the second knock, but as happened after the 6-9 in Mumbai, his bowling is becoming overrated.
• Andrew Symonds - what an all round cricketer this man is. He's not a great at anything, but he can swing the ball at 125kmh, bowl good offies, hit a ball as hard and cleanly as anyone, and he is stupendous in the field - for the second year running I lost count of the number of certain boundaries he turned into dot balls.
• Adam Gilchrist - this fairytale is coming to an end. He's still better than most, but certainly not at his best. I imagine we've got another year at most, if that, so enjoy it while it lasts.
• Brett Lee - Dale Steyn is awesome, but Brett Lee must be the best fast bowler in the world right now bar none. Simply wonderful to watch - the sort of cricketer I will pay good money to see.
• Mitchell Johnson - as the radio commentators pointed out, tried to bowl fast instead of reverting to type and swinging it. Normally it's the touring bowlers that struggle with that at the WACA!
• Stuart Clark - As I said last year, nobody's missing Glenn McGrath - he just had a haircut and a name change, simple as that.
• Shaun Tait - My God, what a disappointment after all the 170kmh hype. A real dud, but I know he can bowl better - we've all seen it. His last over on day 2, when Ponting was trying to squeeze an extra over was hilarious, particularly the stuttering stop-start run that ended in the delivery being abandoned right as the clock ticked over. He'll need a good ODI series to ensure he doesn't drop out of the mix.
• Brad Hogg - got the biggest cheer of the game.... everytime he ran out on the field. Australia missed him, for his batting more than anything.

So on to Adelaide now. I'll be hoping for an Indian win, but I'm not expecting it.

More thoughts on Bollyline (ugh)

• Who'd want to be Asad Rauf or Billy Bowden. Woe betide them should they even miss a marginal no-ball call that turns out to be of no consequence, leave alone give one team or the other a free wicket. Ironically, it will be a no-win situation that India have put themselves into. If the umpires err against India, it will "prove" that replacing Bucknor was silly. If they err against Australia, it will be a perfect opportunity for the Aussies to score points by making a big show of not being bothered by it.

• Anil Kumble was the first captain to accept Ricky Ponting's deal regarding captains/fielders calling catches. It's probably a safe bet that he will also be the last.

• Were Brad Hogg and Harbhajan Singh ever going to play in Perth anyway? I suppose Harbhajan might have, if only to bowl two overs (one in each innings to dismiss Ponting). But surely Tait is coming in for Hogg to blast India out?

• Conventional wisdom has it that Sehwag will come in for Yuvraj if he scores more than about 20 in Canberra this week. However, you have to wonder at this point if it won't be Jaffer who makes way. Perhaps Sehwag and Karthik in for Yuvraj and Jaffer, or maybe Pathan takes one of those spots, plays as an opener and an extra bowling option allowing Harbhajan to play as well. I'm not a fan of 5 bowlers in general, but India have to be aggressive tactically to square the series. Personally though, I'd dump Harbhajan, play Pathan to deepen the batting, and work on the presumption that batting depth will give India a chance on the bouncy track more than extra bowlers.

• Hopefully, we'll get a real scorcher of a Test next week. I'm going to enjoy my birds eye view, almost as much as I'm going to enjoy the opportunity to meet a certain Liverpool supporter!

• Finally, while many people are suggesting banning sledging, I'd like to suggest the polar opposite. Let's make cricket a full contact sport. See if Harbhajan still wants to take on Symonds, or if anyone would ever challenge Inzamam (were he to return to the game).
  

A controversial victory

OK, so absolutely nobody will get the pathetic pun, if you can even call it that. For your consideration, I propose the conspiracy theory of the day, postulated by a man who once was a fan of a fan of Rodney Hogg's, though I'm not sure that's relevant.

Last we heard, a major Bollywood epic, entitled "Victory" was filming at the SCG. They couldn't have scripted better material if they had tried. The rest I leave to your imagination.

In all seriousness though, the controversy is quite ridiculous, as is the "Bolly-line" moniker that I have seen applied to it. I see it pretty simply. Ponting needs some runs, and if Harbhajan plays, he won't be getting them. Here comes RT Ponting, 401* at Perth - and I'll be there to witness it. Wait, I said I was going to be serious:

1. If Harbhajan used the term "monkey," he's an idiot, because he was fully aware of what happened in the recent ODI series, and would have known full well that it is considered an offensive term. Let's be brutally honest - India can be a very hostile place if you're dark-skinned, so this is not the time for being holier-than-thou and some introspection is in order.
2. That said, people are called a lot lot worse on a cricket field. As, I think, Greg Baum, observed, the Australians have figured out how to keep it within the letter, if not the spirit, and other teams need to get a little more sophisticated.
3. Michael Clarke cheated in my book. He joins the sad list of cricketers who have, most likely knowingly, claimed bump catches. My list started with Mark Waugh, 17 years ago, and includes players from several countries and of several skin pigments.
4. Not walking when you edge to first slip? These guys need to come to California, where a batsman can walk after being caught at second slip, and then come back after the umpire shouts after him "hey, I'm not giving you out!"
5. At the end of the day, despite the atrocious umpiring which in this instance ended up favouring Australia overall, India should have drawn the Test match. You simply cannot complain about the result when you wind up losing three wickets to someone who never bowls in the penultimate over of the match.
   

Cricket or Liverpool?

I think I've finally had my fill of Dileep Premachandran's editorials. It's bad enough that the man is a Liverpool supporter, but it's become borderline pathetic the way in which all his cricketing columns have to somehow attempt to make a point about the greatness of Liverpool, and if he can squeeze it in, a, usually baseless, dig at United.

His latest piece, on the monkey-bastard "Bolly-line" controversy, is no exception. In it he manages to point out how Liverpool were cheated of the European Cup in 1965, how a referee had a stinker at a Liverpool game recently, and how he thinks that Cristiano Ronaldo is a villain. Why, if he really wanted to make a point about cheating, perhaps he'd do better to use Steven Gerrard as an example.

Revealed at last - why Indian batsmen don't run singles!

You may not have realised this, but it's because they are... Brahmins! No, that's not my theory - but it's the one described in an article in the Sydney Morning Herald today.

Not a lot that I can say, other than to remain in vein and point out that the Brahmins have scored most of the runs for India in this series. It also stands to reason, I am forced to conclude, that there must be a super secret by-invitation-only subset of Brahmins, who run even less than their 'ordinary' counterparts. No doubt Sourav Ganguly is a member of this sect :-)

Good thing there's some entertaining journalism doing the rounds to take our minds off what is on the way to becoming a bore-draw.

Reality Bites for India

I can safely say that I'm not speaking purely with the benefit of hindsight. A few things to consider.

1. Yuvraj Singh I don't think has ever even scored more than 30 other than on flat tracks at home and in Pakistan. He may yet go on to do great things, but his 169 against Pakistan was not the great knock that many said it was. It came in amongst first innings scores of 630 and 530, both scored at around four runs per over, which tells you about the track in Bangalore!
2. Therefore, to sacrifice your best batsman by making him open, to accomodate Yuvraj, was a ridiculous move. Even more so when you consider Dravid's history as an opener. Eight Tests prior to this one, and India have lost five of them, drawn two, and won one. Apart from two centuries in run-fests in Pakistan, I don't think he's ever topped 20 as an opener. Therefore, the think-tank sends him in to open. Go figure.
3. Sourav Ganguly - as someone who is far from a fan, I have to hand it to him for these two knocks. Arguably his best stuff since his comeback, in which his contribution has not been as outstanding as the statistics might lead you to believe. He's showing some guts, and while it can be argued that he managed to spend most of his time facing Hogg and Symonds, the fact remains that he was at least able to get off strike when facing the pace trio, which is more than any of the other batsmen can claim for themselves.
4. The Pitch - what many people forget is that Australia beat India in India not so long ago. This match was played on a very Indian sort of wicket, and the Aussies are expert at bowling a suffocating line and length on those wickets. They did just that here at the MCG.

Sydney and Adelaide likely represent the two chances India have of salvaging some pride in this series.

I'll be at the Perth Test, which at this rate is likely to be a three day affair, and I hope to be at the Adelaide Oval as well, though the series may be a dead rubber at that point.

There aren't a lot of options available to India. I think they'll have to consider bringing Sehwag back in for Yuvraj, and possibly Irfan Pathan in for RP Singh to add depth to the batting line up. If we could get Parthiv Patel in for Dhoni, that would be the icing on the cake, but it isn't likely to happen.

Time Travel and other recent reads

A few of my better recent reads:

• Anne Fadiman - The spirit catches you and you fall down

• Wasn't sure what I was going to get here, but it turned out to be a touching story and I was riveted. First of all, it was a specific story of a culture and people that I knew nothing about, and was therefore happy to get an introduction to. It was also a harrowing tale of a poor young girl suffering from epilepsy. But more than both of those, it was a surprisingly insightful revelation of an experience that could be transposed onto any diasporic community. It just goes to show that for all our differences, things are so much the same for all of us on a fundamental level. There's so many levels on which to read this book - all of them valuable and enjoyable.

• Michael Chabon - Kavalier and Clay

• An excellent read. Everytime I felt it was dragging on, it shifted, which said to me that the author paced it just right. There were definitely points at which I worried that it would be descending into political propaganda, but it never quite did. I look forward to reading more about a Yiddish policeman.

• Audrey Niffenegger - The Time Traveller's Wife

• So I'm a sucker for time travel, so much so that I'm the person that thinks Journeyman is the only show on TV worth watching, apart from Heroes. I really couldn't lose with a book like this. And I didn't. Right at the top of my list, for the time being, at least. What really blew me away was how effectively Niffenegger managed to develop the plot and the central characters, despite operating in a chronologically challenged environment. We may have jumped back 30 years from chapter to chapter, but the individuals always progressed in our minds.

• Mark Haddon - A Spot of Bother

• Curious Incident was superb. I really felt like I was inside the mind of an autistic child, not that I have any idea what that would actually feel like. Haddon's follow up, "A Spot of Bother," is not perhaps on that level, but he has given us another wonderfully quirky, amusing and yet profound glimpse into a dysfunctional world. I hope I don't have to wait too long for the next one. He's on my must-read list now.

• Harry Thompson - Penguins Stopped Play

• Superb. If you play cricket at all, and know how to read, pick up a copy of this one! One of those that really resonated with me - I could pick out characters in my own cricketing experiences that matched up with every member of the Captain Scott squad. If you don't know who Thompson is - he's one of the creators of Ali G, and as such instrumental in the discovery of Sacha Baron Cohen. He also helped put guys like Ricky Gervais and Harry Enfield on the map - a real comedy legend!

Freakonomics

I guess it's fashionable to rave about this book. Fortunately, it's also fashionable in some circles to be contrarian, so I'm not going to be completely out of favour after this brief comment.

They say economics is the science of incentives. I'd go a step further and say it's the science of common sense. The concept that is the foundation of economics is that of supply and demand. If you want more of something that is in scarce supply, it'll cost you. If you don't want something that is available in abundance, you can get it on the cheap. Your first year of economics in high school will focus on that - and if you ask me, if you didn't realise it already, you're doomed anyway.

As far as Freakonomics goes though, we've moved one level lower - to the science of statistics. In the famous words of Aaron Levenstein, "statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is interesting. What they conceal is vital!" Ironically, that's essentially what the authors claim about other peoples statistics, only to go and fall foul of the same issues themselves.

Are swimming pools really more dangerous than guns? Is flying safer than driving? Is the crime rate lower today because of Roe vs. Wade? Is having an intact family unit and reading to your child totally irrelevant? The same stats that the authors use to supposedly prove one side of each of these and many other questions, can be used to prove the inverse.

So in the ultimate analysis, the book is an entertaining read, but not necessarily insightful. In fact, I couldn't shake the feeling that it was in part an excuse to espouse a particular set of beliefs, under the guise of scientific fact.

Read it, if you haven't already. You'll have a good laugh, and if you're not an open minded thinker, it might make you aware that there are many ways to skin a cat.

Mantra

I'm not a food blogger, and I don't usually bother to post about my restaurant experiences, but this one really took me by surprise last night, so I had to say something. We dined at Mantra, in Palo Alto - a restaurant that can best be classified as part of the growing breed of Indian fusion experiences.

It opened a couple of years ago, to less than glowing reviews, but a change of chef and revamp of the menu supposedly yielded positive results, so we figured it was worth a try. It was a fabulous meal.

I was a little concerned at the menu - it gave lie to the impression that there may be a little too much happening with the food, but that turned out to be far from the case. In fact, most impressive was the balance the chef achieved between Indian flavours in non-Indian dishes, and vice versa. Second to that was the plating of the dishes, which managed to add to the experience without ever being overdone -- other than perhaps the desserts which were a little over the top in presentation!

The appetizers were both superb - a delicate pea, cumin and green apple soup poured tableside over a crisp medley of diced mango and a few other things (sorry, the details are failing me!); and a kebab combination featuring minced lamb over quail eggs, and an absolutely stunning chicken reshmi kebab tinged with just the right amount of saffron.

It was the mains that really blew me away though. My Kashmiri Sea Bass was unequivocally the best fish I have ever eaten. It was cooked perfectly, moist throughout, the flavours of fish and spices perfectly matched - and it truly melted in your mouth. The two veggie entrees - an Indian style ravioli (a single large piece) and the Sabz ki Salan both elicited rave reviews, and perhaps the only disappointment was the lemon and thyme tandoori chicken in the mixed grill, which was not the best cut of chicken, and failed to live up to the standards set by everything else.

Dessert was also impressive - the rose and cardamom chocolate lava cake was a hit, as was the home made ice-cream and kulfi combination, and the shrikhand-esque lavender creme brulee.

If there's one criticism I have, it's that the food didn't quite come out together - it seemed as though the kitchen started everything, and sent it out when ready, rather than figure out preparation time and back into when to start preparing each dish. Other than that, the service was attentive, but unobtrusive - just how I like it.

All in all - a brilliant experience, one which I would highly recommend.. and I will definitely be back for more.

New York Times on cricket!!

So the New York Times got all excited about India's series victory today. No doubt we're all supposed to be excited that cricket is getting coverage in one of the leading US publications. And then you get into the details.

A "picture of the day", of Sachin Tendulkar screaming with anguish. It's the look he usually reserves for his regular failed attempts to hit the stumps. The kicker though, is the caption:

Sachin Tendulkar, an Indian bowler, narrowly missed an opportunity to dismiss the England batsman Matt Prior during the final day of the third test between England and India at the Oval cricket ground in England. Later Monday, India won the five-day international competition.

I guess the only thing they really got right is the fact that Tendulkar was more of a bowler than a batsman in this Test!