Times and rules are changing, so should all of us

Over time, almost every sport has changed its colour, feel and outlook. Cricket began its transformation with the evolution of One-dayers and it now feels the moment has come for more modifications.
Sadly, the ICC has been fooled by a red herring: it has opted to tweak ODI rules, instead of revisiting Test matches which are fast becoming an anachronism in these action-packed times.
Worse, the two main changes proposed are too little and too insignificant: two-wickets-off-one-delivery is only going to add artificial excitement and will not improve the quality of the game. The floating rule on fielding restrictions will also see one major change, that too only over time: the death of part-time bowlers.
Every team will be forced to field five specialist bowlers; otherwise, the batting captain will demand all the restrictions against part-timers and make merry and a mockery of the rule.
The real challenge would have been to make the contest between bat and ball more equal: why is a bowler allowed a maximum of ten overs while the batsmen enjoys total freedom? Why not at least raise the limit to 15 per bowler? Will the game really get one-sided if the quota rule is abolished? I doubt it.
The best bowlers send a maximum of 20-22 overs in a day; more significantly, they are most effective when they bowl in short spells. Don''t think so? Just ask McGrath to bowl non-stop and see how he fares? In all likelihood, his performance graph will steadily drop after every over.
Meanwhile, Indian hockey has also taken its first step forward with new rules and a new format. Was it a successful experiment? Well, the inaugural edition of the PHL was an organisational success but it hasn''t given birth to a mass of stick-wielding boys and girls.
I would like to make one point though: I was in Hyderabad for two days (thanks to the organisers) a couple of weeks ago. My trip coincided with the conclusion of the Tier-2 and the AGM of the hockey federation. At precisely 4pm, just a few minutes after the last T2 match, KPS Gill''s convoy zipped into the stadium.
He and his trusted lieutenants (plus security guards) presided over the prize-giving ceremony, sparkled on live television, addressed a quirky press conference and raced away to their respective cities. None of them bothered to stay back to watch the evening match. I wonder if any of them even thought that they could play a role in lifting the game.
How will a league succeed, indeed throb, if the big bosses seem indifferent and behave like they are doing a favour by arriving for somebody else''s function?
The good news is that the first step has been taken; the bad news is that late ties might not catch the fancy of youngsters in our country: they have already got hooked to more glamorous and ‘in'' sports. Or worse, they''d rather hang out with friends, do nothing and have a great time.
Importantly, the television is ruled by serials in the evenings, and not many men probably have the courage to fight against determined mothers and demanding wives. European soccer and NBA work because pubs, sports bars and drinking holes provide an electric atmosphere for the harried man: big matches, big screens, big discounts and happy wives is the winning mantra.
Add beer and snacks to this combination and almost everybody is looking forward to these wonderful evenings.
In India, sadly, anybody seen with a drink in his/her hand is believed to be badly brought up. Arguably, this attitude has to change if the sports revolution has to really take off. A couple of brave winners and a few changes in rules can only stir up temporary interest.