There is a very moving way in which kabaddi players demonstrate that they are telling the truth. They do this when they claim a point, by putting their hand up and slapping their thigh at the conclusion of a raid. But the man they got, or thought they did, denies it, by vigorously waving his palm.
This is unusual because most of the time the fellow who is touched acknowledges it before the judges do, by putting up his hand in admission, and is off the court – ‘walking’, as they used to call it in the old days in cricket. But sometimes this doesn’t happen and the raider feels obliged to show he’s telling the truth.
He does this by touching the sacred playing area, making a 'mat promise', to prove authenticity to the judge. As I said, I find this moving, and it shows the earthy origins of these players. It shows a certain innocence. Hardened city types are unlikely to set store by such promises, and do not see the arena as being inviolate.
If the decision still goes against the player making the claim, he swallows it and moves on, which is usually a great thing. Sometimes, however, one wonders if there is value in protest. And one of those times came on Thursday in Kolkata, the fifth day of the first tournament of the country's Pro Kabaddi League. The league has eight franchises with players from all over the world.
I really tried to enjoy the match between Vizag and Jaipur. I had finished all my writing work for the week and was relaxed. But I couldn’t get into it because I couldn’t understand the scoring.
Early in the game, one Vizag player got three or four Jaipur defenders and touched the line clearly. But he was denied the points because, we were told by the commentators, he may have slapped someone in the face. But I didn’t see evidence of that and no replay was shown.
Minutes later, a Vizag defender was taken down again, this time nowhere near the line and the Jaipur-wallahs celebrated, but three points were granted to Vizag instead. Why? The commentators didn't know either and the game just sped along.
At the break, the teams were 17:16. But when we began after the break, the score was changed to 20:16.
Why? Dunno. The commentators speculated, but they were feeling their way through it all just as I was.
Then immediately, something else happened (the details are unimportant) and a point was awarded against Vizag when they should have won it. Then the same thing once again. Why? Not sure. At 32 minutes again a mistake. Two points denied to Vizag. The commentators were genuinely puzzled. This time, both the teams protested mildly.
However, this did not last more than a couple of seconds and they were soon at one another and showed no resentment against what I thought was clearly most eccentric judging. Had they protested more firmly perhaps the judges would have felt the need to explain to them, and the commentators to say nothing of the audience, what in the world was going on.
But no, they soldiered on, theirs not to question why.
From this event I thought it was important that the rules be changed slightly, and I suspect they will be, from next year. We are likely to see:
* The sound in the playing area amplified in some way so that the “kabaddi-kabaddi” is audible. At the moment it is not, and some players don’t even seem to be making an effort at repeating it.
* Third umpires who judge whether lines were crossed and players touched.
These two will make a huge difference to the game. The second is actually easy to do because kabaddi is an episodic sport, like tennis and cricket, and unlike football. The action takes a break when one team shifts from offense to defense. Referral to the third umpire will not break the flow of play. And it will add to the tension of the audience, as third umpires surely did in cricket and Hawkeye did in tennis.
I am happy to report meanwhile, that Abhishek (small b) Bachchan took time out of his busy schedule, as we say in India, to make it for this match. "Believe you me," said the commentator, "he's going to stay for the next match as well."
Of course I believe you.
This is unusual because most of the time the fellow who is touched acknowledges it before the judges do, by putting up his hand in admission, and is off the court – ‘walking’, as they used to call it in the old days in cricket. But sometimes this doesn’t happen and the raider feels obliged to show he’s telling the truth.
He does this by touching the sacred playing area, making a 'mat promise', to prove authenticity to the judge. As I said, I find this moving, and it shows the earthy origins of these players. It shows a certain innocence. Hardened city types are unlikely to set store by such promises, and do not see the arena as being inviolate.
If the decision still goes against the player making the claim, he swallows it and moves on, which is usually a great thing. Sometimes, however, one wonders if there is value in protest. And one of those times came on Thursday in Kolkata, the fifth day of the first tournament of the country's Pro Kabaddi League. The league has eight franchises with players from all over the world.
I really tried to enjoy the match between Vizag and Jaipur. I had finished all my writing work for the week and was relaxed. But I couldn’t get into it because I couldn’t understand the scoring.
Early in the game, one Vizag player got three or four Jaipur defenders and touched the line clearly. But he was denied the points because, we were told by the commentators, he may have slapped someone in the face. But I didn’t see evidence of that and no replay was shown.
Minutes later, a Vizag defender was taken down again, this time nowhere near the line and the Jaipur-wallahs celebrated, but three points were granted to Vizag instead. Why? The commentators didn't know either and the game just sped along.
At the break, the teams were 17:16. But when we began after the break, the score was changed to 20:16.
Why? Dunno. The commentators speculated, but they were feeling their way through it all just as I was.
Then immediately, something else happened (the details are unimportant) and a point was awarded against Vizag when they should have won it. Then the same thing once again. Why? Not sure. At 32 minutes again a mistake. Two points denied to Vizag. The commentators were genuinely puzzled. This time, both the teams protested mildly.
However, this did not last more than a couple of seconds and they were soon at one another and showed no resentment against what I thought was clearly most eccentric judging. Had they protested more firmly perhaps the judges would have felt the need to explain to them, and the commentators to say nothing of the audience, what in the world was going on.
But no, they soldiered on, theirs not to question why.
From this event I thought it was important that the rules be changed slightly, and I suspect they will be, from next year. We are likely to see:
* The sound in the playing area amplified in some way so that the “kabaddi-kabaddi” is audible. At the moment it is not, and some players don’t even seem to be making an effort at repeating it.
* Third umpires who judge whether lines were crossed and players touched.
These two will make a huge difference to the game. The second is actually easy to do because kabaddi is an episodic sport, like tennis and cricket, and unlike football. The action takes a break when one team shifts from offense to defense. Referral to the third umpire will not break the flow of play. And it will add to the tension of the audience, as third umpires surely did in cricket and Hawkeye did in tennis.
I am happy to report meanwhile, that Abhishek (small b) Bachchan took time out of his busy schedule, as we say in India, to make it for this match. "Believe you me," said the commentator, "he's going to stay for the next match as well."
Of course I believe you.
Limited-time offer: Big stories, small price. Keep independent media alive. Become a Scroll member today!
Our journalism is for everyone. But you can get special privileges by buying an annual Scroll Membership. Sign up today!