Chelsea in a hole

          Historically significant, as one of only four winners of the EPL as it is today, but insignificant as holders of only four titles as opposed to Manchester United's nineteen and Liverpool's eighteen. A great team with quite some matchwinners, but terrible with few superstars and inconsistency. Able to beat Manchester United (last season) but splitting points with Genk in the Champions League. A team of contradictions, that is Chelsea.
          The Blues find themselves in a slump again, not unlike last year's interminable mid-season string of unpleasant results. They are yet to win against a major team in the EPL this season, losing 3-1 to Manchester United, humbled 5-3 by Arsenal and thwarted 2-1 by Liverpool. They even lost to long-term absentees QPR, signalling that this team is in a deep hole.
         They are not a one-man army like Arsenal, who owe their seventh place to Robin van Persie, which is also why Chelsea do not figure in the top scorers list. (Another reason is that Drogba is pretty injury-prone.) The other big striker, Fernando Torres, finds form in fits and starts and is largely off-colour. Their defence typically performs well for the first twenty minutes, then develops extraordinary complacency and is perenially hovering around the half-line and sometimes even indulging in shots. They then get surprised by perfectly onside goals.
          The face of their team, Frank Lampard, is performing well but his age can be seen. He's no youth and the Blues will be hunting for another like him, when he decides to hang up his boots.
          They have money. Like the owner of Manchester City, Roman Abrahamovich too has piles of money from being in an oil-rich area. They too can emulate the rising team assembled from money and skill. They too can pose a threat to the record champions defending their title. They can. But the question is, will they?

A Legend Exits

          It has been nearly a week since one of the greatest cricket writers of our time took his own life, and I am still getting over it.
          He did not embellish his columns with long words tedious to pronounce coded only for the supremely knowledgable. Instead, he used stunningly appropriate words and metaphors that hit the nail on the head. His sentences were not convoluted or unwieldy and in fact they became progressively shorter as his life hurtled towards its sudden end. His pieces were not for lexicographers or etymologists but for anyone who loved the game.
           He found a fantastic way to merge his twin loves, cricket and the English language, and delighted thousands of fans in the process. His batting prowess was considerably overshadowed by his flair for writing, but no matter.
          He steadfastly backed India during the highly charged and concentrated with controversy India-Australia series in 2008 and won himself more admirers in his nation. He was one to stick with a strong stand and coupled with his very influential nature, some transformations in the game were made.
          He had all the reason to continue living, but allegations by the police compelled him to take the final irreversible step. He left the cricket world much richer than it was before he entered the scene.
          Adieu, Peter Roebuck.

Should Federer Retire?

          The big news in the tennis world is that concerning Andy Murray's toppling of Roger Federer, signalling the Swiss monarch's slip outside the top three for the first time since 2003. The 16-time Grand Slam champion is well into his downward curve now, with Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal and to an extent Jo-Wilfried Tsonga and Andy Murray proving their superiority over the once-unbeatable FedEx.
         The 30-year-old maestro seems to be planning to pick up another Grand Slam before hanging up his boots, but that seems a bit difficult considering the aforementioned people's form and skill. The last major he won was the Australian Open in January 2010, which is of course a while ago. Retiring in time is important, as a certain racing superstar understood, or did he?
          Take a look at Michael Schumacher, the German 7-time World Champion in Formula One racing. For the last two years of his career, the legend in his iconic red Ferrari was repeatedly finishing second, behind Spain's and Renault's Fernando Alonso. Schumi realised he was no longer the winner he used to be, the famous jump on the top step of the podium was gone, and he announced his retirement at the Monza circuit in Italy, Ferrari's home.
          The second innings, though, has panned out very differently for the star. Sitting in a Mercedes with a  fraction of the speed and power of the Ferrari, the German is doing all he can to get the best out of the car. Alonso occupies the Ferrari alongside Massa, and none of them are podium regulars.
          Schumacher understood when it was time for him to exit the top level. Federer is routinely beaten now, yet he carries on. Perhaps it is a symbol of strength and will to carry on. But unless a legend, a star, retires when he is still good, the lasting impression their career will leave on fans of the game may be quite different from their best performances. Maybe this will apply to Tendulkar too, in a while.