“Rules should be followed but not overdone’ – this quote is attributed to Raja Ramanna, one of India’s former chief of Atomic Energy Commission. Thanks to my dad, who used to often use this quote, this has been one of a lifetime guideline / reference to me and often a fall back option for arguing sense when sensing bureaucracy at work.
Through this blog post, I like to touch upon two current happenings in the world of sports. The first one relates to Indian Cricket & the other to the world of Formula 1 racing.
As widely reported in the media, members of Indian cricket team have reservations regarding signing a clause related to whereabouts declaration in the proposed WADA agreement that deals with anti-doping. I really do not understand the reasons as to why they should have an objection when sportsmen from other sports not only in India but globally have been signatories to similar agreements. This includes champions like Roger Federer, Tiger Woods etc. While it is understandable that privacy and security are concern areas, is'nt that the same for sportsmen from other sports and also cricketers from other nations. What is the big issue in letting oneself being subject to random off season dope tests ? After all, its only a very low % of the sports people who perhaps actually get subjected to these random tests. Well, it can be argued that it is near impossible for them to declare in advance their precise whereabouts, but is it that difficult to make a declaration at a lesser granular level. The question is whether rules should be bent to accommodate Indian cricketers.
Another news making headlines is the return of the great man - Michael Schumacher - to Ferrari F1 team as a replacement for Felipe Massa. Obviously, this is great news for the sport, for TRPs, for Ferrari & fans like yours truly. A read through Schumi's official website reveals lots of interesting things about this champion. One of the things that comes out is supreme adaptability to conditions. This is something which he continues to display even now and the same is evident from a no-fuss no-reaction ( so far) to William's & Red Bull team managements objections to let the great man some test practice on the circuit before his second debut. While most competitors of Ferrari were OK allowing Schumi a test drive on the circuit ( though it is banned this year), Williams & Red Bull deny the great man a chance, something that could have allowed their latitude to be labelled as act of good sportsmanship.
For a sport that has lost its sheen, was a test practice request too much of an ask. Don't we have rules at work but sometimes relationships help bypass some of the rigidity for larger organizational good. Even in competitive sport, some sportsman spirit is fine in the game, despite minor deviation from the rule book.
Well, my take - even with rules as a roadblock, the big man will still make a significant impact. Go Schumi ! Go.
Indian cricket team - Sorry guys - Love it when you guys do well, but no special empathy for you on the WADA matter.
Through this blog post, I like to touch upon two current happenings in the world of sports. The first one relates to Indian Cricket & the other to the world of Formula 1 racing.
As widely reported in the media, members of Indian cricket team have reservations regarding signing a clause related to whereabouts declaration in the proposed WADA agreement that deals with anti-doping. I really do not understand the reasons as to why they should have an objection when sportsmen from other sports not only in India but globally have been signatories to similar agreements. This includes champions like Roger Federer, Tiger Woods etc. While it is understandable that privacy and security are concern areas, is'nt that the same for sportsmen from other sports and also cricketers from other nations. What is the big issue in letting oneself being subject to random off season dope tests ? After all, its only a very low % of the sports people who perhaps actually get subjected to these random tests. Well, it can be argued that it is near impossible for them to declare in advance their precise whereabouts, but is it that difficult to make a declaration at a lesser granular level. The question is whether rules should be bent to accommodate Indian cricketers.
Another news making headlines is the return of the great man - Michael Schumacher - to Ferrari F1 team as a replacement for Felipe Massa. Obviously, this is great news for the sport, for TRPs, for Ferrari & fans like yours truly. A read through Schumi's official website reveals lots of interesting things about this champion. One of the things that comes out is supreme adaptability to conditions. This is something which he continues to display even now and the same is evident from a no-fuss no-reaction ( so far) to William's & Red Bull team managements objections to let the great man some test practice on the circuit before his second debut. While most competitors of Ferrari were OK allowing Schumi a test drive on the circuit ( though it is banned this year), Williams & Red Bull deny the great man a chance, something that could have allowed their latitude to be labelled as act of good sportsmanship.
For a sport that has lost its sheen, was a test practice request too much of an ask. Don't we have rules at work but sometimes relationships help bypass some of the rigidity for larger organizational good. Even in competitive sport, some sportsman spirit is fine in the game, despite minor deviation from the rule book.
Well, my take - even with rules as a roadblock, the big man will still make a significant impact. Go Schumi ! Go.
Indian cricket team - Sorry guys - Love it when you guys do well, but no special empathy for you on the WADA matter.
Nice one Pinax!As they say rigidity leads to failure! We should have rules in life, but exception to the rules also for those rare moments which can make or break a life! It's a fine line, too lenient and the purpose of rules get defeated, calls for true experience to know when to hold and when to fold :-)
ReplyDeleteNiraj, very well said that its a fine line. At work life, we often come across bums who would not budge an inch from the instruction manual even when there is a need to you, with organizational value of agility being the sacrificial lamb. Rules, per se should not be the end. At the most, they should be seen as mechanisms to encourage discipline in the system & attempt to keep it free from bias. Let me give you a classic example from day to day life. For almost 6 yrs, I traveled from NOIDA to Gurgaon in the mornings to reach my work place. In a crossing from the road going towards Jaipur, we saw traffic cops during the office hrs monitoring the movement of vehicles. The rule book said - X seconds before the light turns green again for the traffic to move. While some cops would manage the traffic damn well by using their judgement on assessment of relative upstream, downstream & cross traffic, some of them who strictly followed rule book were a disaster. During those office hrs, the traffic from Jaipur to Delhi used to be minimal as compared to the reverse, so much that the ratio was about 8 vehicles is to 1. The thick rulebook cops would add to inefficiency by playing exactly the allotted time equally for both ways , thereby adding to the chaos on one side. The better sensed cops would manage the 400 odd secs in such a way so as to allow maximum time to the way where it was needed most. What a pain & pity it was to see these sticklers for rule. The rule is neither a means nor an end, it is just the check point in between. But when you start treating it as an end, you are as Ian Anderson says - Thick as a brick.
ReplyDeleteJust another thought which came by - One reason for reduced trust on automation obsession - it tends to kill human ingenuity, intuition and flexibility for innovating or improving things. Sometimes, it becomes like a rule book constraint.
ReplyDelete