Connect with us

Features

TENNIS LOSES FEDERER HOMAGE TO A GENIUS

Published

on

By Anura Gunasekera

Roger Federer, the most celebrated Tennis player in history, after an illustrious two-decade career, departs the arena he graced with such virtuosity. Over an improbably long period he dominated in the most star-studded period of professional Tennis, unarguably that which showcased the greatest depth of talent of any era.

Federer concedes his mortality with the same dignity and equanimity, with which he has greeted both victory and defeat, the defining features of his public conduct over the years. It has been a stellar display, definable only in superlatives – even at the risk of sounding mawkish. Ideally, instead of this gradual fade-out, loyal fans would have cherished a more spectacular finale, a dream farewell, but sport is cruelly indifferent, even to its icons.

Like all greats who enforce change on their domain, Federer imposed his writ on his sport. To match his authority, delivered with silken skill , he forced rivals to improvise, restructure, to reach in to unsuspected depths and , in the process, to uplift their own competencies. That the top twenty in the last two decades, Roddick, Nadal, Djockovic, Murray, Wawrinka , Berdych and Hewitt included, became the players that they are, is in large measure due to the excellence and the challenge Federer presented. Had he not been around, his opponents would have been lesser players, lesser men.

In a sport which was subsiding in to constant, tedious contests, amongst a group of lusty base-line hitters with massive forehands and looping double-fisted backhands, Federer re-conjured a vanished finesse; the beauty of all-court shot-making, comprising a captivating mix of serve and volley, mid-court aggression and delicate passing shots, threading invisible gaps with surgical precision, reinforced by dexterous serving and solid back-court play.

Shot-for-shot, in the bread-and-butter armoury of all good Tennis players, through all his playing years Federer was superseded in consistency and power, by most of his close rivals. In an era when 200 kmph serves are a commonality, in terms of speed Federer was unexceptional. One could easily name a dozen players, some of them not even in the top hundred, who would out-gun the maestro on a given day. Yet, in terms of total career aces, Federer is third in the list, not far behind the two giant artillerymen, Isner and Karlovich.

When talking of powerful single-handed backhands, the names that come to mind are Wawrinka, Gasquet and, latterly, Thiem, Tsitsipas and Shapovalov. Federer is not the natural first. Forehands were delivered with greater power and consistency, by Del Potro, Djockovic, Nadal, Berdych, Verdasco and a host of other, lesser players. Amongst the top ten serve-volley specialists of the last three decades, Federer rates an honourable mention, but pundits would not rank him above Cash, McEnroe, Edberg, Sampras, Becker, Stitch or even Henman. His return of serve was reliable but rarely exceptional, mostly a neutral shot to ease him in to the point. In that department he will not be rated above Agassi, Nadal, Murray, Djokovic or Hewitt.

Given the superiority of all those players in specific aspects of the game, what enabled Federer’s lengthy dominance over a host of rivals, with individual weapons bigger than anything in his arsenal?

One can talk of Federer’s court coverage, a dance choreographed personally by the master, feathery light on his feet, an exhibition of fluid, balletic grace; the unreadable serve, delivered with identical action, whether down the centre or nicking the side lines; the back-hand down the line, its classic beauty masking the raw power; the topspin, back-hand cross-court flick, from deep in the ad-court, defying the mechanical limitations on shot-making and conjuring angles a double-fisted hitter would envy; the flat, rocketing, off-forehand, delivered at full stretch, described by John McEnroe, a genius of an earlier era, as the “greatest shot in our sport”; the running passes on both wings; the reflex volleys from mid-court and the overhead smashes with feet three feet off the ground, the backhand smash and the “tweener”.

Perhaps it was all of these, combined with the freshness that he brought to the game, the elegant all-court artistry, beguilingly creative, its freedom of expression defying the fear of error percentages , confident that the winners would eventually override the errors; a magical shot-making, his racquet a fencer’s foil, probing chinks in the opponent’s armour.

His brilliance is captured by McEnroe, commentating at Wimbledon a few years ago; from his deuce court Federer delivers an explosive backhand return winner, against a massive first serve, the ball nicking the side- line of the opponent’s service box, and McEnroe declaims in awed tones, “that shot does not exist, It Does Not Exist !!!” Federer made the impossible look both casual and natural, persuading the spectator that genius was a universally attainable goal.

Yet, this audacity , with minimal margin for error, was constantly shadowed by the likelihood of failure, particularly against more conservative opponents. Some of Federer’s significant losses are attributable to the high-risk nature of his game. But it was also his vulnerability, which enthralled and kept the audience on edge, all the time.

Federer had no formula, unlike the more calculating Djockovic , who relied on the metronomic precision of repetitive shot-making , with minimal variation from the first to the last stroke, even in a forty-shot rally; or Nadal, the man who troubled Federer the most, shackling opponents with relentless, top-spin, baseline bludgeoning ; or the choleric, unhappy, Murray, scrambling from side-to-side like a terrier, constantly at war with himself, his impregnable defence more effective than his attack. In stark contrast to all his peers, Federer in full flow was a joyous exhibition of spontaneity and improvisation.

Federer’s genius was summed up best by a great of a different era, Jimmy Connors, who once said, “in an era of specialists you are either a clay court specialist, a grass court specialist, a hard court specialist…..or you are Roger Federer “.

How does one define greatness in sport? Statistics, of course, are a prime consideration. Federer has 20 Major Singles titles in his cupboard, surpassed recently by both Nadal and Djokovic. He has figured in some of the most scintillating duels in the history of Tennis, most of which he has won. The only warp in a glittering tapestry is his record against Nadal who, as the Aussies would say, had the “wood on him”. But that too has to be viewed in context. In 40 encounters, of the 24-16 tally in Nadal’s favour, 14 of Federer’s losses are on clay, a surface on which Nadal, unarguably, has no peer. On the faster surfaces Federer leads, 19-11.

Federer’s supremacy fostered magnificent rivalries which enriched tennis of his period, in a manner not seen in any previous era. Apart from Nadal, against Djokovic it is 27-23 in favour of the Serb with the rigidly structured game, 23-3 against Wawrinka, 14-11 against Murray and 17-6 against Berdych. Against Roddick, who himself said that given Federer’s 21-3 dominance that there was no rivalry , 18-9 against Hewitt and 15-5 against the giant Del Potro; reaching further back when Federer was yet to cement his superiority, it is 11-8 against both Safin and Nalbandian and 8-3 with Agassi .

Federer’s supreme individualism does not leave a legacy for new entrants to inherit. Rigidly structured playing styles, which regularly produce thousands of clones in tennis courts the world over, are based on predetermined formulae, supported by proven results and easily passed on from coach or academy to aspiring players. In the universal context of production-line tennis, Federer’s talent was a radiant aberration. Out on the court Federer wrote a script birthed in his own psyche.

What of Roger Federer , the man? Great athletes tend to be viewed only in the context of the discipline that they dominate. Similarly, Federer the man is largely obscured by Federer the tennis player, with his involvement in and contribution to worthy causes rarely reaching the public eye. There is the Roger Federer Foundation for disadvantaged children, totally funded by him, and its affiliation with the South Africa – Swiss Charity, IMBEWU, to assist disadvantaged African children in sports, social and health awareness. In addition there is the leadership he has provided, through numerous sporting events, to generate funds for disaster victims all over the world. Federer, clearly, is a rare synthesis of sporting greatness and civic goodness.

Federer is also the only athlete of the Open era, to combine an obviously busy family life with that of being a world top five player. In an unrelentingly demanding sport, which precludes distractions outside the game, Federer is clearly a dedicated family man at the head of a large and loving family. This sense of proportion and balance, the awareness of the transient nature of supremacy in a sport, and the active contribution to a greater calling outside that dominance, invests Federer’s persona with a completeness, that no other great of the game has demonstrated in his playing days.

The “Greatest of All Time” (GOAT) debate needs mention, even briefly, in any dialogue involving Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. The Serb, with his growing collection of majors, may finally be defined, statistically, as the best craftsman of all time whilst the Spaniard, with his tenacity and physicality, is already spoken of as the toughest opponent of the Open era. However, greatness embraces multiple dimensions. For instance, It cannot admit the international embarrassment that Djokovic is, today. Greatness is a composite of longevity and successful outcomes, reinforced by visual beauty, lethalness of delivery, impeccable conduct, charisma, and the respect accorded by society. It is as much about style and manner of execution, and influence outside the sport, as it is about win-loss statistics.

Federer’s on-court conduct was invariably civil and understated, untainted by the often embarrassingly theatrical bellicosity and provocative histrionics of some of the other stars. That timeless grace extended beyond the court and inhabited his public persona as well. He is still the superstar of Tennis, continuing to transcend the sport despite the decline of his on-court dominance. In the Open Era, no other player has impacted the game as beneficially, as Federer has done. The retirement of no other tennis player has evoked such universal regret, acclaim and tributes, especially from former opponents and fellow contestants. Given all those elements, Federer, the supreme aristocrat of Tennis, wins the GOAT contest, hands down. Federer was the greatest, in a time of greats.

Federer’s career was akin to a glowing comet traversing the Tennis galaxy. Sadly, whilst other galactic wayfarers return at predictable intervals, this is one stellar being who is destined to disappear in to the sun. There will be no heir because he leaves behind no mould for recasting. What a bereaved Tennis world is left with is an enduring legacy of displays of genius, of consummate artistry, unique to the man. The statistics of his dominance will always be available for analysis but the elegance, the grace, and the unimpeachable conduct, both on and off the court, must remain enshrined in collective memory, particularly for those fortunate enough to have witnessed the peerless athlete in his prime.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

R. Sampanthan: ‘We cannot go on like this’

Published

on

By R.K. RADHAKRISHNAN

Member of Parliament Rajavarothiam Sampanthan, who has kept together a diverse coalition of Tamil political parties under the umbrella of the Tamil National Alliance since 2001, has witnessed many phases of the struggle since Sri Lanka became an independent country in 1948. Now 89 and largely confined to his official residence in one of Colombo’s well-guarded areas, Sampanthan still pins his hope on India and the international community to encourage Sri Lanka to arrive at an amicable solution to the issue of the Tamils’ hopes and aspirations.

In a rare interview, Sampanthan, who had the distinction of being the Leader of the Opposition in the Sri Lankan Parliament from 2015 to 2018, outlines what the priorities of the government should be. Excerpts:

Q: What is your assessment of the aragalaya (struggle in Sinhalese)? I see that all those who were in power are back in Sri Lanka and thriving.

A:The aragalaya was successful in the sense that they were able to make the main wrongdoer realise that he could not continue in office [President Gotabaya Rajapaksa]. Unfortunately, Ranil [Wickremesinghe], for his own personal reasons, supported the government. And by virtue of this support he was able to become Prime Minister. Now, he is the President. He became President with the support of those whom he opposed [earlier].

The aragalaya was partly successful, and the main offender, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, was compelled to resign. Now the question is do we have a government? Which is the government? Who is supporting whom? What is their stand on the economy? No one knows. It is all very confusing. I don’t know what policies they are pursuing. [Wickremesinghe is the lone member of his United National Party in Parliament. He survives with the support of MPs of the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP), Rajapaksa’s party].

As of now, what is inevitable and what should happen is there should be general elections. The people should be asked to decide who should be given the mandate to rule.

Q: I think President Ranil Wickremesinghe is following the same policies as the SLPP.

A:The credibility of Mahinda Rajapaksa [former Prime Minister], Gotabaya Rajapaksa [former President], and Basil Rajapaksa [former Finance Minister] were seriously questioned. They were the ones ruling the country. Mahinda Rajapaksa had to go into hiding in Trincomallee [at a naval base] at the peak of the aragalaya. The time has come for the people to be given the opportunity to decide who should govern this country because this [the current state of SLPP controlling despite people wanting the party out of power] should not continue. It will only get worse.

I don’t think the economic debacle is being tackled in any sensible way. They [the government] had gone to the IMF for a bailout. So far, the IMF has said nothing. This is of great concern.

Q: So you think that the only solution is going back to the people?

A: I really don’t know how they continued because the whole country was against them. It was the peak of opposition to any government. I don’t know why it [ aragalaya] did not continue [after Wickremesinghe took charge as President]…. The people wanted this government to go. Hence, they should go back to the people for a mandate.

Q: A negotiated settlement to Tamil political aspirations is the dream that is fast turning into a mirage. We do not see any gains for the Tamils. In fact, they are losing out because of demographic and cultural changes in the north and the east. Tamil political parties have not been able to make much headway.

A: The resolution of the Tamil national question has been a big issue since [Sri Lanka’s] independence. The Tamil people supported independence. They were compelled to change their stand after the citizenship law and the resettling of Sinhalese in large numbers in the east and the north. This changed the demographic composition in those areas.

The Tamil people demanded autonomy and devolution of power in those areas. This was the basis of the [1957] Bandaranaike-Chelvanayagam pact and the [1987] Indo-Sri Lankan accord. Both contained provisions on identity of the Tamil people, the territory, and arrangements with regard to self-determination, or the right to determine their own destiny. Unfortunately, the Sri Lankan government breached the agreements.

As far as Sinhala politicians are concerned, whichever political party they belong to, they are primarily concerned about gaining the support of the Sinhala people on the basis of an anti-Tamil stand. As long as this continues, nothing can be done. Sri Lanka is party to the international covenant on civil and political rights, and to the covenant on economic, social and cultural rights. Both covenants give the people the right to self-determination.

We don’t want the country to be broken in any way; we stand for an undivided Sri Lanka. At the same time, we cannot go on like this. We have no alternative but to approach the international community, which is well aware of the issue. There should be some arrangement regarding the north and the east. It is the duty of the international community, including India, the US, and the UK, to take the lead and push for an arrangement in the north and the east.

The Sri Lankan government is not delivering on the political question. On one side, the Sinhala population in the north and the east is being increased by resettlement, and on the other side, the Tamils are fleeing because of the violence and the unstable political situation. If this goes on, the people will be unable to maintain their identity, self-respect, and even their dignity. The international community should not permit that. It will set a bad example to the world. If they want peace in the region, and peace in this country, this problem must be resolved. (The Frontline)

Continue Reading

Features

Path to disaster

Published

on

Either we as a world have failed our human expectations to lead a normal life of peace and progress, or our leaders are nowhere close to offering that satisfactorily. Interestingly, war and destruction are not new phenomena to our civilization or to the world. We have been fighting wars in one way or the other. It seems we have been unable to evolve the right way to live with lasting peace.

The longer the Russia-Ukraine war goes on, the further hope of peace and recovery is pushed away. After all, months have passed, and everyday destruction and destitution have increased, not only in the war zones but beyond.

BY PRAVESH JAIN

It is a new-age world, intensely interconnected and interdependent like never before. What happens locally may soon spread globally. The longer the Russia-Ukraine war goes on, the further hope of peace and recovery is pushed away. After all, months have passed, and everyday destruction and destitution have increased, not only in the war zones but beyond.

The possibility of ending the war is not high. Today, the situation is such that everyone in the world is anxious about the morrow. The war is not just making the two warring nations bleed every day in many ways, it has impacted many other nations.

Europe is anxious to save itself from a hard winter, many others are concerned about how to revive their economies that the war has ravaged without visiting their borders. Thousands are dying, millions have become homeless, many innocents have gone to the grave for no fault of theirs, and many more cannot come out of closed doors in the war-impacted zones.

Inflation is growing exponentially, businesses are shaky, and the high hopes of a post-Covid boom have given way to terrible gloom. With rising unemployment, the youth are feeling hopeless. The scale of poverty is set to rise phenomenally; nations and governments around the globe are clamoring for solutions that are simply not there.

But amidst all this, the rising voices of war and revenge are filling the air and more plans are being hatched to intensify the war. For whatever reasons, one thing is conclusive.

Either we as a world have failed our human expectations to lead a normal life of peace and progress, or our leaders are nowhere close to offering that satisfactorily. Interestingly, war and destruction are not new phenomena to our civilization or to the world. We have been fighting wars in one way or the other. It seems we have been unable to evolve the right way to live with lasting peace.

Wars haven’t left us, and we have not stopped warring. It has been and is still around as a monstrous reality, teaching us to justify it as a necessary evil. But the evil is growing bigger by the day, and we remain unmindful of its perils. Time and again, we promise ourselves that we will not embark on wars again, but soon we seem to forget and get embroiled in them. What could the reasons behind this madness, or if I can say self-deceit, be?

After every war, we think and talk of peace. Then the very essence of our pledges evaporates into thin air. Are we thick-skinned, hypocritical, liars, unmindful, or simply incapable of keeping the promises that we make to ourselves?

This demands deep introspection. With the advent of pacifism in the late 19th and early 20th century, it felt like the world would embrace peace and harmony over violence. Then the First World War happened. The optimism at the start of the century was gone. There was widespread destruction, millions lost their lives, and several empires were reduced to rubble.

When the war ended, political leaders of powerful nations agreed on several treaties to ensure lasting peace and the world breathed a sigh of relief. That relief, however, was short-lived. Twenty years later a bigger war broke out. The Second World War was uglier and more destructive in all respects. It was the deadliest conflict in the history of human civilization, leading to a loss of around 80 million lives with several more being brutally affected.

Nobody wanted a third world war. So, nations sat down and decided to form a global body that would work towards ensuring world peace, and the United Nations was formed. Cut to a little less than a century later, and you will agree that the UN has become nothing but a symbolic organization that serves no practical purpose.

Several nations are in armed conflict with each other, and tensions are building across an increasing number of borders. It is as if war has been our way of life. This is not to say that devastating tactics are only used by the United States. Russia too uses these often, although only half as often as the US.

That may be not because of a lack of a will for supremacy, but because of the inability to afford the risks and resources so effortlessly. China, seeking to become the dominant power in the East and later the world, has also employed this methodology occasionally. And the intent is unfolding more vigorously along with matching actions. The question arises: why does the global leadership in general and the US in particular use mean to escalate conflict rather than defuse it?

Hasn’t anyone learned a lesson from the major world wars and their aftermaths? Nuclear conflict is a looming possibility, and everyone knows there will most probably be no human civilization left to tell the tales of that war.

On global forums, all nations repeatedly warn others to avoid nuclear war, but ground reality proves otherwise, as these same nations openly or secretly acquire nuclear weapons. That is the game plan, isn’t it While big nations churn profits from war, war-ravaged nations suffer brutal damage.

Aside from the destruction of their economies, the humanitarian losses are huge. Millions lose livelihoods if not their lives, families are displaced and the after-effects last for several generations. And this is when two nations clash across borders.

With the number of provocative tactics being applied by the USA around the world and Russia, China, and North Korea, adopting an eye-for-an-eye attitude in response, a third world war seems an increasingly likely possibility. To a neutral observer, this might seem childish, or even laughable. But there is nothing laughable about war, especially in modern times when almost every powerful nation is equipped with nuclear armaments.

What is frustrating is that world leaders do not recognize this. Or if they do, they don’t do enough to emphasize the point. Do our leaders ever realize that they are chosen by the people to lead them to progress and peace, not death and destruction? Are our leaders not accountable for their karma?

The karmic theory has its own bona-fide, unfailing principles. As you sow, so shall you reap. Often, I wonder what will happen to our leaders who flaunt their strength and arrogance and unleash acts of hegemony, rather than ensuring harmony for humanity to live in peace. Do they have no fear? Do they think that their power is eternal? Or are they simply not concerned about all this, blindly driven by their own misplaced missions?

Many questions arise in both mind and soul when one thinks of these destructive leaders. In many countries, the financial systems are fast collapsing and soon many banks may shut down. The world with its aspirations for better standards of living has been pushed a decade back. Every thinking human must have apprehensions about a dark future. (The Statesman/ANN)

(The writer is Chairman and Managing Trustee, Paras Foundation and can be reached at praveshjain@parasdyes.com)

Continue Reading

Features

Twin personas; reaction long after the action

Published

on

I am pleasantly surprised and marvel too most times I read the editorial in The Island. Why? Because they are so very apt on the most current issue in the land. The editor has the clever knack of hitting the nail right on the head and is fearless even when the nail represents a VVIP.

Friday 25 November had the sharp, truth writing editor commenting on President Ranil W and his stunning metamorphosis from a peace promoting, democracy advocating politician to a persona that he himself says is Hitler like. And as the editor has written, one wondered if he and his immediate predecessor, Gotabaya Rajapaksa, had swapped bodies, for the former sounded just like the latter. Gota was expected to be a dictator; a monk called out to him to be Sri Lanka’s Hitler while his brother Basil bracketed him with the ‘Terminator’.

Ranil seems to hear cries for protection of human rights as a cover for violent protests. Gota, though an army man and later as a civilian, cosseted the army at great cost to the exchequer, did not threaten to bring the army out to quell protests. It was done once or twice: e. g at Rathupaswela and at an FTZ. These orders were not proven to be directly emanating from him nor directly connected to him. However, peace proclaiming Wickremesinghe with his new surname added on is outdoing the former army officer. He maintains the PTA and now says (probably in all truth and belief – scarce characteristics of politicians) that he will call out the army to quell protests, which have been and will be, mostly peaceful.

What this woman, a former teacher and counselor, opines with common sense and intuition is that he is going about it all wrong. He is inciting protest and lawlessness, even violence, since the youth of the country, with others, are utterly frustrated, angered, troubled and volcanic – waiting to erupt and so are the sideline catalysts: the terrorism promoting core politicized protesters of the IUSF, FSP and certain JVPers. Ranil should have been wiser and less outreaching, and negotiated with leaders of the groups mentioned, including trouble rousers like Stalin, and convinced them of the dire state the country is in. Negotiating with die-hard protesters may not be his cuppa; he shies away from direct contact with the hoi polloi. But talk to them he must. He should include persons like Guv CB to the negotiating table since Dr Nandalal Weerasinghe is one of the very few, if not the only high-up, that all respect. The rabble-rousers should be convinced, even threatened privately, that at this juncture what the country needs and the IMF promotes is encouraging money making projects, the surest and largest-inflow-of dollars earning tourism to resume and continue with peace prevailing in the country. With so many countries with so much to offer, why should tourists visit a near warring Sri Lanka? The reality of course is that this dot of an island has most to offer the tourist as pronounced by even Lonely Planet guides.

However, as is always the case, the country pleases but men in it are vile and utterly stupid. The protestors do not realize their protests will not change things immediately. But they most certainly cost the country much. These fire breathing, loud mouthed protestors and so-called protectors of peace and human rights are at present the principal harmers of the land.If after sincere one-to-one negotiation, some remain recalcitrant, then the police should be called in to deal with them.

Bang shut empty stable door

Mentioned many times before by Cass and other writers, Sri Lankans in general suffer short memories: will vilify a person today and praise him tomorrow not only because they are turncoats but because the people have forgotten and of course forgiven yesterday’s sins of leaders. Another characteristic is shutting the stable door once the horse has bolted. The preliminaries of the flight of the horse are seen but no alarm is raised. Once the horse has bolted; then come forth loud hues and cries of damage done.This last character trait of the Sinhala race mostly, was exhibited and exposed in the news telecast on MTV 1 Channel on Sunday November 27.

Villagers of a certain forest area, with voices raised women to the forefront, confronted a man who was in a new built, multi roomed hut-like construction. He seemed settled down. The crowd that walked across a vast area of bare land accused that the forest that covered this area had been illegally decimated. They demanded evidence of his right to settle down there. He said the police and other officials had cleared him. Trespassing was not even mentioned. Cass’ wonder at this loud fracas was why the fuss now with land bare and a house built when the villagers surely heard if not saw trees being felled en masse. Why had they not informed authorities then? Why wait for the deforestation and illegal building to be completed before protesting? Had they been waiting all these past months for the TV cameras to arrive to act angry and national minded?

It was suspected, if not known for sure, that vociferous Diana Gamage was a dual citizenship holder or maybe even a citizen of another country visiting her home turf. She was up front for long and since being made a State Minister by Prez Wickremasinghe, his hand guided by a crow pulling strings from even thousands of miles to the west, became prominently vociferous with forex earning projects foundationed on fun and good times. She proposed the growing of ganja plants; creating a Disney theme park; making Mannar an international gambling den and what else Cass fails to recall. Now firmly in Parliament as an elected member she faces the public rising up and declaring she is not eligible to hold a Parliamentary seat since the passage of A21 or 22. The mare had bolted to the green pastures by the Diyawanne and now people are a-rising to close the door she galloped through. Confine her at home with no powers and privileges or deport her to turf in her adopted country?

Bandula Gunawardena, holding the portfolio of Minister of Trade, held forth on the subject he thinks he is omniscient in. He claims economics as his forte of intellectual knowledge; certification of this fact being he was a tuition master in the subject. He refers to himself as Doctor Bandula G; the doctorate coming to him from where we know not. In a pontification in Parliament on the Sunday, he waxed eloquent on mismanagement of the Central Bank and trotted out figures in billions and decimals thereof of printed money. He blamed past CB persons. Why was this economist considering himself on par with Amartya Sen, Paul Krugman and Maynard Keynes, silent then when Nivaard Cabral kept the printing machines in the CB turning day and night churning out 5000 rupee notes? (PS. Cass wonders very much whether he has heard of Krugman and knows Keynes was one of the Bloomsbury Group. Cass can wager her life that he does not know who this group was).

Speaking of this Mr Cabral, he was recently seen on TV at a press interview passing the buck adroitly and proclaiming he was obeying orders to print money. Was he a robot and of whom?

Short take

A very good move was mooted recently in Parliament and will soon be law. Cass refers to the stricture that university students will be allowed one extra year after their graduating date whether they fail the final exam and wish to repeat or when they dodge sitting the final exam. Here again the closing of the loophole after damage is done. Firebrand Wasantha is said to have been in the University of Sri Jayawardenapura for eight solid years. Wasn’t this truancy of sitting the finals seen earlier? Authorities too scared to report the fact; saving their scalps by ignoring anomalies. just as they turn blind eyes to filthy and dangerous ragging in universities?

This land of ours which is truly incomparable, is derogatively a land like no other when speaking of it with tongue in cheek.

Continue Reading

Trending