This brilliant picture was shot yesterday somewhere in London. Apparently the photographer used a big flash and rendered useless the Stig’s trademark black visor on this crash helmet. Sadly though, speculation still abounds.

The original black jumpsuit clad Stig was once revealed to be Penny McCarthy, a former F1 driver and tester for a number of teams like Arrows, Benneton and Williams. But after he was killed off in a Top Gun-esque stunt on the HMS Invincible, the white Stig was introduced and his identity has been a closely guarded secret.

Interestingly, British bookie William Hill has offered odds on the identity of The Stig. Former F1 drivers, Damon Hill, Martin Brundell and Julian Bailey have all been mentioned on Stig rumors and have received odds of 4/1, 6/1 and 3/1 respectively. Even current McLaren Mercedes driver, Lewis Hamilton faces 16/1 odds. Oddly even celebrities such as Simon Cowell (yes THAT Simon Cowell) has been mentioned as a possible Stig.

While excitement has spread in the Top Gear forums in the intertubes, BBC has refused to comment on the new pictures. Interesting!

But, having said that, the only reason that the last mentioned does not happen to often on this blog is because of a serious lack of time in between the hectic weekdays and the languorous weekends spent on the couch with a X-Box controller in my hands. So consider yourself lucky, ladies and gentlemen and pray that I stay a couch potato.

Right. But even with my big heart, one part of me does fight that “couch potato” tag and goads me into taking up every opportunity to spend time out of the confines of the apartment. So when one such opportunity came up a couple of weeks ago, that part of me jumped up in glee.

So, go to UberDesi and read TOW the SAJA convention ‘07 and look at some pictures here (Thanks Preston!) and you might even catch a glimpse of me somewhere along the way.

Part 1 of 3

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

For the remaining parts,

Part 2 of 3

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

Part 3 of 3

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

Yesterday I noticed (via the schedule on my Willow.tv subscription) that if India beat Sri Lanka (and) West Indies beat Pakistan (and) there are upsets involving these teams, then India would finish B1 and Pakistan would finish D2 and their much awaited clash will be on a weekend (on April 1).

But now after Prem’s article, the ICC seems to have edited the schedule to say “TBC” on the post-group stage games. However, the schedule on Indya.com (official internet partners for WC’07) still shows “D2 vs B1″ on April 1st (click here for PDF version).

But it is frightening to see (if what Prem says is true) that the ICC does not expect any upsets. Wait, I could even argue the other way – that this time the ICC is so sure about its whole anti-match fixing activities that it does not expect any upsets! Ha!

Either way, all I care about is India’s weekend games! So they better keep the whole D2 vs B1 type thing and seed the teams all over again based on their performance in the preliminary stages. That way I can at least watch the weekend games live!

I started on the book and during this past week, I read about the GOI’s latest ordinance forcing private broadcasters to share sports feeds with Doordarshan. I realized that their could be an Australian precedent, according to Benaud. And based on what I have read about it these past two days, it looks like the Aussie measure dates back to a time as recent as ’04 early as 1992.

Here is what Benaud says -

As regards television it has always been a part of the Australian sporting landscape that certain events, if being shown live, will be on an anti siphoning list and restricted to free to air television which could be the Australian Broadcasting commission or commercial networks, but it is definitely not Pay Television.

Fewer than one in four households in Australia had access to Pay Television in 2004 and the aim of the anti siphoning legislation is to ensure that as many viewers as possible are able to access important events without having to pay.

So it appears that events like Wimbledon and the Ashes, not to mention some other events (full list here) have to be carried by free to air channels in Australia. However Benaud mentions that Australia’s Premier Media, formerly Fox Sports, exploited a loophole in the Australian government’s rules to buy the rights to the 2005 Ashes series in the UK itself, which were then were sold on to pay television.

While the shit’s already hitting the fan in India, my initial thought was gung ho, i.e. supporting this exercise, since I had already read Benaud’s brief description of this anti-siphoning law. But it appears that while it seems that the government and Das Munshi’s heart seem to be at the right place, the details just leave you with a bad taste. But the object of this post was to point out what happens in Australia.

Looking at the Australian scene, you see that the law puts the onus on the broadcasters. This is a excerpt from here (emphasis is mine).

The anti-siphoning list is not a list of sporting events reserved solely for free-to-air television. It does not compel free-to-air broadcasters to acquire the rights to listed events and does not guarantee them exclusive rights to such events, nor does it compel them to broadcast events to which they hold rights.

And that’s where the Australian model differs from India, where (from what I understand) a pay channel fights for the rights, buys it and hands feed in a platter to the government owned channel that broadcasts the feed with its own revenue generating ad feed.

Now the next excerpt makes the role of the pay channel more clear (in my eyes).

The right to broadcast listed events can be acquired by pay TV licensees if broadcast rights are held by commercial television licensees (who have the right to televise the event to more than 50 per cent of the Australian population) or by a national television broadcaster (the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) or Special Broadcasting Services (SBS).

So, if this model was to be adopted for India, (feel free to correct me if you think my interpretation is flawed), the pay channels can acquire the rights only if Prasar Bharati (or any other free to air channel, if any in India) holds the rights.

But has it ever happened? I mean, the main grouse that everyone has with Prasar Bharati is that they sit on their asses and use “laws” to force the other broadcasters to hand them everything in a platter. And everyone agrees that this abject laziness has to stop and as as Jagadish points out, this new ordinance just seems to motivate the executives (if I can call them that) at Prasar Bharati to stay lazy.

It looks like the Australian government thought about the lack of motivation angle too and has tried to protect the pay channels from this occurence.

The Minister may delist an event from the anti-siphoning list (section 115 (2) of the Act). An event is also taken to be automatically delisted 2,016 hours (twelve weeks) before the start of the event unless the Minister publishes a declaration that the event continues to be listed (section 115 (1AA) of the Act), and 168 hours (1 week) after the start of the event. This delisting allows pay TV broadcasters to acquire the rights to the event (section 115 (1B) of the Act).

Subsection 115 (1AB) of the Act provides that the Minister cannot publish a declaration preventing automatic delisting under subsection 115 (1AA) unless the Minister is satisfied that “at least one commercial television broadcasting licensee or national broadcaster has not had a reasonable opportunity to acquire the right to televise the event concerned“.

So in Australia, 12 weeks before an event on the anti-siphoning list kicks off, the government automatically takes off the event from the list, giving pay channels to get the rights. This happens after the government checks to see if any of the free-to-air channels have expressed interest in broadcasting an event on the anti-siphoning list and have had reasonable opportunities to acquire the same.

However the bold text in that last excerpt is what confuses me just a bit, particular the mention of “reasonable opportunity”. Does reasonable opportunity means a chance to be part of the bidding process? Or does it involve being one of the final choices? Prasar Bharati could easily argue that the former is the right interpretation.

The actual text of the act gives the following examples of events that may cause the de-listing of events.

Example 1: The national broadcasters and commercial television broadcasting licensees have had a real opportunity to acquire the right to televise an event, but none of them has acquired the right within a reasonable time. The Minister is of the opinion that removing the event from the notice is likely to have the effect that the event will be televised to a greater extent than if it remained on the notice.

Example 2: A commercial television broadcasting licensee has acquired the right to televise an event, but has failed to televise the event or has televised only an unreasonably small proportion of the event. The Minister is of the opinion that removing that event, or another event, from the notice is likely to have the effect that the removed event will be televised to a greater extent than it would be if it remained on the notice.

As you see, these examples are not very helpful in interpreting the conditions for de-listing. They add another disputable phrase “real opportunity” into the mix. I shall try to find out more real life scenarios where de-listing happened, which will make it easier to understand how this works in Australia.

I don’t think it is logical to argue whether viewing cricket is an issue worthy of national debate. But I think this is a good instance of a case where the government seems to had its mind at the right place (i.e to increase the viewing base), though the details though leave much to be desired. So while this issue runs the risk of being painted as the Government regulation of economic activity, it is actually an issue of consumer rights protection.

Now I have to say a couple of things in conclusion. I think that Das Munshi’s track record with the AIFF has nothing to do with this ordinance. So I just wish anybody who talks about this issue leave India’s football/soccer blues out of the equation. That’s a completely different argument. And I do want to add that while cricket is probably the most affected (in terms of monetary value), it is pertinant to note that the ordinance, in both its versions that we have spoken about here, covers sporting events of national importance and not just cricket.

I just wish to add that this sounds as surprising as my self-adopted guru doing a post last week highlighting a blog dedicated to Kamal’s career. Since he had advised me, his own protégé, “grow up or to stick to Rajini and Disney blogs and never come close to a political blog” like his, seeing that post has left me speechless. So much that a comment I put in vanished into thin air. Leaving me not just speechless, but comment less too.

Things like these only demonstrate that it is a new year after all. And that things change. WTF! Ya, go ahead and say it again for good measure.

* I am still hung over after the final season of The West Wing

* I digg Saturday Night Live

* Matthew Perry / Bradley Whitford, among others who are West Wing alums.

* Lines like the ones below that seem so relevant, much like the West Wing plots.

Danny Trip: They want to see you take fewer whacks at Bush and looks like they are getting their wish. So you throw it out.

Matt Albie: … ….

Danny Trip: … …

Matt Albie: Four years later and by the way, I’d be happy to take potshots at the Democrats, if one of them would say or do something..

and monologues like this.

Update: In case you are wondering what Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip is all about, NBC has made available the complete third episode (from last night) here.

Artist : Lazlo Bane
Song : Superman
Album: All The Time In The World

Out the door just in time
Head down the 405
Gotta meet the new boss by 8 a.m.
The phone rings in the car
The wife is workin’ hard
She’s running late tonight again

Well
I know what I’ve been told,
You got to work to feed the soul
But I can’t do this all on my own
No, I know, I’m no Superman
I’m no Superman

You’ve got your love online
You think you’re doing fine
But you’re just plugged into the wall

And that deck of tarot cards
Won’t get you very far
There ain’t no hand to break your fall

Well
I know what I’ve been told
You gotta know just when to fold
But I can’t do this all on my own
No, I know, I’m no Superman
I’m no Superman

That’s right

You’ve crossed the finish line
Won the race but lost your mind
Was it worth it after all

I need you here with me
Cause love is all we need
Just take a hold of the hand that breaks the fall

Well I know what I’ve been told
Gotta break free to break the mold
But I can’t do this all on my own
No I can’t do this all on my own
I know that I’m no Superman
I’m no Superman
I’m no Superman

Someday we’ll be together
I’m no Superman
Someday
Someday we’ll be together
Someday
I’m no Superman

QOTD: “Sanity is a madness put to good use.” – George Santayana