When confronted its proponents quite defensively retreat to calling it a game. Nevertheless since it has changed formats to fit into television watching possibility (20-20 is more successful in this than the one layers) it is of course commercially driven by the convenient breaks between overs. The inevitable change to shorter formats for TV watchability was easily predicted more than 30 years ago.

What Chaudhuri touches and what must be admired is that it has managed to bridge class, caste and religion in India. Credit must also be given to the Indian administrators for leveraging the game commercially to the extent that in its shorter formats it has evolved into a sport.

Yes the coverage is the thing (medium is the message?) and here the numbers, graphs, trajectories in both cricket and elections essentially are accompanied by a high level of verbosity (logorrhoea?). In the both cases difficult to hide the lack of real and interesting action on the screen.