Cricket: My Favorite Commentor - Arjuna Ranatunga
By Angsuman Chakraborty, Gaea News NetworkSaturday, August 13, 2005
I like to read incisive commentaries from cricket pundits and knowledgable journalists. By and large they fall in two categories. Almost all journalists and most ex-cricketers are mostly biased from start and then they try to justify their conclusion with cliches. And few and far between them we find people with an in-depth understanding of the subject and incisive commentaries based on logic and experience.
Lets start with the rest of the pack.
Ravi Shastri sucks (I am being polite) as a cricket commenter. He is an extremely biased ex-cricketer who shuns logic in favor of his regionalism and personal preferences.
Srikant is rah-rah type but much than Shastry. Mohinder Amarnath is decent. He is however often too circumspect. I miss analytical abilities or logical insight from any of them.
Now to the best.
I like reading the columns of Washim Akram and Arjuna Ranatunga and some Australian ex-cricketers. Of them Ranatunga is the very best. His commentaries are incisive, unbiased and based on logic and deeper understanding of the game as can be clearly seen by reading his articles.
Read his article on cricinfo for a good analysis on Indian cricket’s captaincy issues and his take on it.
|
March 8, 2008: 2:59 pm
guys ravi shastri rocks dude when ravi starts speaking he shuts everyone up |
|
November 2, 2006: 12:40 am
Arjuna Ranatunga always smiling expressions are nice when he delivers speech. This describes him as favourite commentators for many. |
|
May 26, 2006: 2:26 am
Ravi Shastri is a very good commentator. Being a indian he can chanllenge even a foreign comentator in his style of questioning. If we go to late 80’s he was the star player of indian cricket. |
 Dibyendu Chakraborty |
November 28, 2005: 11:28 pm
I accept that Ranatunga is good.So far as Ravi Shastri is concerned, he is totally biased & such persons should be barred from dealing with public media like TV. |
|
November 4, 2005: 10:28 pm
I don’t think it is wrong for him to refer to Sri Lanka as we. He is an ex-cricketer and Chairman of the Board for Sri Lankan cricket. He is very much a part and parcel of Sri Lanka and rightfully so. It is not wrong for anyone, journalist included, to feel attached to his country or his team. Would you like to read an Indian journalist reporting the tsunami like an “impartial” American journalist would? Unbiased is the wrong approach when we are dealing with nefarious activities like corruption, nepotism, politics etc. |
 PRAKASH |
November 4, 2005: 6:43 pm
Although I some what agree that Arjuna Ranatunga makes some sense in his reporting. But he does not have basic journelestic ethics. I haven’t read any journalist taking a side to begin with. He always referes to Sri Lanka as “we” a term never to be used by an unbiased journelist. Just thought of sharing my view point. |
ravi shastri