Autism is a very prevalent neurodevelopmental disorder that most of the times in countries like India goes undetected. While growing up we would have seen the odd case where in some of our mates would have shown great difficulty in communicating and forming relationships with other people and would often be engrossed in using language and abstract concepts. And they would be the subject of being made fun of. And we never realized that it might be some disorder that he/she would be suffering from.

We were first introduced to the idea  of autism from Amir Khan’s movie Taare Zameen Par. Though I haven’t seen the movie, having read the reviews I come to understand that the movie took on the subject in a very nice manner. So over the weekend while I was looking for a good movie to watch, I stumbled upon this movie X+Y also known in the US as A Young Brilliant Mind. At first I though that this would be a movie based upon some young math prodigy and decided to watch it. But boy was I surprised having watched the movie completely.

X+Y_poster

This movie by Morgan Matthew focuses on a teenage English mathematics prodigy who has difficulty understanding people, but finds comfort in numbers. As a young child who had been diagnosed with having Autism, he was found to be very good with numbers. A child who was very close to his father, he is in an accident where is father dies. While growing up with a single (widowed) mother now, he finds it difficult in communicating his feelings with others, including his mother. His mother, unable to understand his son completely, works in all possible manner to make him happy. Be it enrolling him to advanced mathematics classes at a very young age or to making sure he gets exactly what he likes to eat (in the exact prime nos.) she always tries to go beyond herself to keep Nathan happy. But still the mother and the child are unable to connect at an emotional level.

In the course of time, Nathan is being coached in Mathematics by Mr. Humphreys, who himself in his childhood was a math prodigy but couldn’t reach his potential as he suffered from multiple sclerosis, Nathan is selected amongst the final group from whom the Great Britain’s team for International Mathematics Olympiad (IMO) would be selected. The group travels to China to train with their Chinese counterparts. It is during this journey when Nathan faces unexpected challenges, such as understanding the nature of love. Nathan is now in a group of like minded students some of whom are ‘normal’ while some according to him are ‘more talented’ than himself. It is here in China where he meets Zhang Mei a chinese student who becomes his buddy and a very good friend. Over the training period Nathan understands that he suffers from autism which is not normal.

Having made it for the IMO team, on the day of the exam, Nathan faces the biggest crisis of his life whether to write the exam for the glory of his country or to go after Zhang Mei who was leaving Britain. And what follows is a very beautiful end for the movie.

What I really loved about the movie was the raw emotions of all the cast members in multiple scenes.  At times one does feel that the movie is being stretched or like its becoming like a documentary movie, but then again Morgan Matthews comes back with those emotion packed scenes which captures you back in the movie. The way in which the director has not treated any secondary character lightly is so wonderful. Be it Nathan’s teammate Micheal Ellis delivering a riveting characterization in trying to come to terms that he isn’t normal or Nathan’s mother fighting to keep connected to her son and how she has to give up on so many things, how she tries to find intimacy after so many years, Mr. Humphreys fight to accept what he has and finally accepts his conditions, how he understands what is going on in young Nathans mind is most amazing. But what I loved the most was those small recollection scenes where Nathan is reminded of his father while he is solving some Math problem, especially in the climax.

Its not a movie which you watch on any normal weekend. It isa beautiful film on many levels. You will laugh and cry through the highs and lows, satisfied by the richness of the emotional journey as it comes to a spectacular conclusion.

Indian Institute of Management Bangalore.

This name attracts some of the major talent from across India year after year. More than a hundred thousand enthusiast every year enter the Rat Race, and after belling the CAT and giving one of the so called most difficult interviews of their lives, a select few are then given admissions to the prestigious Indian Institute of Managements (IIMs).

Well the same was the case with me. By my fifth semester in IIT Madras, one thing was clear to me that I would not be pursuing higher deduction in Metallurgy or Materials Engineering and the opportunities in terms of Core Job were very limited in front of me. So either I had to get a good job during final year placements or I had to an MBA from the IIMs. We luckily for me both things happened. I was offered a job by Flipkart (at that point of time they were still in a start up phase and the role was an exciting one) and I was offered admission by IIM Bangalore. So now I was at a cross road. I had to make a pretty important decision. Should I take up the job with Flipkart or should I join IIM Bangalore? I had no experience of working, so will doing an MBA make sense? On the flip side would it be wise to do away with such an excellent opportunity which was in front of you. Honestly speaking it was a pretty difficult choice to make but finally as you might have guessed i decided to join IIM Bangalore.

Now I was the first person in my entire family who was joining a B-School. So I had no idea of how it works. As a young naive 22 year old who had just graduated from IIT Madras, I believed that the two years at IIM would be pretty much the same. Hostels, Academics, Extra-Curricular activities, loads of learning and fun. With all those dreams I entered the gates of IIM Bangalore to begin my journey which was supposed to make me into a world class manager.

The first week i.e. the Orientation week or “Con” Week was a pretty fun week. I was meeting loads of new people. Most of them had worked in the industry for at least a couple of years. I was building up expectation that yeah it would be a good experience to study in classroom that would be so diverse. (Not in terms of education but in terms of sectors. 90% of the batch was still made up of engineers) First week of class, the rosy picture continued. But then came the first quiz and reality came crashing. In IITs you study extremely hard no doubt but you compete more with your own self than with others. You study hard and see that I am getting something out of every course that I am taking. Grades, though very important, were not everything. But at IIM B what I felt was people gave more importance to grades than to the learning from the course. The pedagogy that is followed in IIMB is the one of case studies. You read the case from your room and class is meant to be the place where you discuss the case. Now this is possibly the best way how you can groom managers i.e. by giving them situations that have happened in past and check how you would react. And the diverse background will bring in diverse opinions and methods and solutions. And on a whole the class would learn. Well this is the ideal case. What I saw in most of the case was that many of the instructors failed to have a good control over the class. The so called CP (Class Participation component of the grade) drove individuals nut. Rather than giving their opinions what people were doing was they were merely stating case facts and then beating around the bush with the hopes that the longer I speak the better I will score on CP. And this just destroyed the classes most of the cases. And in majority of the cases the profs did not intervene in this madness. This more or less destroyed the experience of my MBA at IIM Bangalore.

The next thing about which I would talk is probably what MBA at IIMs is all about. Placements. Well at the end of two years I did ask this question to a few profs and did not get any answer – “Are IIM’s educational institutes or placement agencies?” What I felt was the people here are more concerned about their studies than about learning. I agree that yes we are shelling 18L over 2 years for taking up this seat. Many of us would have given up lucrative jobs and hope that we get a better job at the end of 2 years. But does it mean that all that we should care about? The extent to which people play games with each other so that they land their “dream” job is something that seriously amazed me. How much can you go, pamper the egos of your seniors so that they will put in a good word for you is just crazy. Is it that you have no belief in yourself or are you so insecure that you will do anything and everything just to get a bloody damn job. I still have no answers. Another institution that comes into question here is the one called Placement Committee aka PlaceCom. During the undergrad days I doubt that even once anyone would have questioned the integrity of the Placement Committee there. But here the sheer lack of transparency was baffling. The way in which rules were broken, bent, changed just to suit a select few was amazing. This might even put some of the politicians to shame.

The one thing that I would remember IIMB for is some of the great bunch of people that I met here. This includes both my senior batch, my batch and a few juniors. If it was not for IIMB I don’t think I would have met Rohit ‘Roti’ Suresh, Rohan ‘Rod’ Rodriques or Anusha and the other IQ (Quiz Club, one of the two things that made life at IIMB fun for me, other being football) junta. Then you had the wonderful people of my batch. Mahadev is probably the most talented and most underrated guy in my batch. This guy was seriously from another planet. His quirkiness, his creativity when it came to photoshoots, his puns will for sure be missed. The Despo 4 (Mahadev’s idea) was something that caught peoples attention and helped us to create some quizzing buzz on campus. Before I always underestimated myself that I cannot get things don. But hosting Nihilanth successfully was probably one of my biggest achievements here. The exchange term was an eye opener and a life changing experience for me and if it wasn’t for IIM B, I don’t think I would have ever left India. (I will write more about that soon.)

So in summary what will I remember about IIMB

1. CGPA is all that matters here

2. If you can beat around the bush here (GLOBE/FART) you will be successful here

3. If you can do good networking (pamper egos/ass lick) you will be successful here

4. If you can remember what is no 24th line of 234th page of Kotler then you will be successful here

5. Identify people early, kaam se kaam rakhna seekh jaao

 

P.S.: These are my personal thoughts. Readers thoughts are most welcomed

Who bought whom and why

Posted: February 4, 2013 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , ,

A total of 37 players were bought at the 2013 IPL auction in Chennai for a cost of $11.89 million. Here’s what the teams did during the auction and how they stack up.

Kolkata Knight Riders (Defending Champions)

Defending champions Kolkata Knight Riders didn’t bid for the first hour, and then they went after West Indies captain Darren Sammy, only to lose him. They bid aggressively for Ajantha Mendis, raising visions of Mendis and Sunil Narine bowling in tandem on the spinner-friendly Eden Gardens track, but couldn’t close the deal on him either. Only after nearly three hours and 45 minutes did they make their first buy and it was another Sri Lankan spinner Sachithra Senanayake, for a massive $625,000. The eyebrow-raising price confirmed their desire to have another spinner to back-up Narine. Later on, they bought South African all rounder Ryan McLaren at base price, filling the gap they had intended to fill with Sammy.

Knight Riders did not bid for anyone else and their two purchases exhausted their quota of 11 overseas players. They have ten spots open for Indian players.

Chennai Super Kings (Runners Up and 2 times Champions)

It might come to many as quite a surprise but CSK did not bid for a single batsman. They picked up five bowlers instead, which according to the team management was their sole objective. They failed to buy seamers like RP Singh and James Faulkner; and could not buy all rounders of the calibre of  Abhishek Nayar and Thisara Perera either. Dirk Nannes was their first buy of the day, but their most surprising purchase was South African bowling all rounder Chris Morris for $625,000, an amount that was more than 31 times his base price. Soon after getting Morris, Super Kings went after the Sri Lankan spinner Sachithra Senanayake too, but lost him to Kolkata Knight Riders.

Towards the end of the auction they picked up Australian seamer Ben Laughlin, Sri Lankan spinner Akila Dananjaya and the towering West Indian quickie Jason Holder, all at  their base price. They also contested for Australian quick Kane Richardson but were outbid by others.

By buying five overseas players, Super Kings exhausted their quota of 11 foreigners. They have 11 slots available for Indian players.

Mumbai Indians

The Manchester City of Indian cricket once again splurged their cash, filling up their quota of overseas players by buying five for a total cost of $2 million. Half of that went to securing the services of  Aussie all rounder Glenn Maxwell, who was the only millionaire in this auction, for whom they made the opening bid of $200,000.

Mumbai began the bidding for the day, making a late entry to buy Punter at base price of $400,000. They will now have the two highest run-scorers in Tests in a Twenty20 dressing room. Mumbai missed out on Pomersbach, but bought opener Phillip Hughes at base price immediately after. They also bought Australian fast-bowler Nathan Coulter-Nile for a surprisingly high price, considering he was the only uncapped player sold today, but got Jacob Oram for a bargain. All their purchases were from Australia and New Zealand.

They have spots for five more Indian players.

Royal Challengers Bangalore

Before the auction, Royal Challengers Bangalore had eight players in their squad who could bowl various kinds of seam. Yet, they felt the need to stock up in that department and bought seven more seamers – four specialists and three all rounders. At one stage they had bought three quicks in a row – Unadkat, Pankaj Singh and Ravi Rampaul – and could have had a fourth had Kings XI not outbid them for Manpreet Gony. The other players Royal Challengers bid for unsuccessfully were Nayar, Thisara Perera, Ryder and Morris.

Their most left-field pick was West Indian bowling-allrounder Christopher Barnwell, and they also managed to get Dan Christian at base price. In all, Royal Challengers bought the most players at the auction – seven – and have slots left for one more Indian player and one more foreigner.

Delhi Daredevils

Delhi Daredevils entered the auction with only $1.4 million in their purse and three slots remaining for overseas players. They spent about half that on filling those vacancies. Johan Botha and Jeevan Mendis, who was bought at base price, bolstered a weak spin attack, and Jesse Ryder could provide cover for when Kevin Pietersen and Ross Taylor leave for Test duty.

Daredevils also bid for the Indians Abhishek Nayar, Jaydev Unadkat and Pankaj Singh but fell away because of budget constraints. They have seven slots left for Indian players.

Kings XI Punjab

Kings XI Punjab were the most kanjoos franchise at the auction. They bid for only two players and got them: Australian batsman Luke Pomersbach, who played for them in previous IPL seasons, and Indian medium-pacer Manpreet Gony, who comes from Punjab. Going into the auction, they had $6.9 million left in the purse to fill slots for eight Indians and four foreigners. They spent only $800,000 and bought one of each.

Pune Warriors

Pune Warriors spent the most at this IPL auction – $2.5 million – on three overseas players and one Indian, bringing their squad strength to 33, the maximum number of players allowed. They bought a potential captain in from of Michael Clarke at base price, who is retired in T20’s for Australia, fought hard for Ajantha Mendis and were successful, secured the most sought after Indian in Abhishek Nayar, and splashed $700,000 on 21-year old fast bowler Kane Richardson, who has played only one ODI for Australia. They also bid unsuccessfully for Botha and Nannes.

What they did not do, however, is bid for a wicketkeeper-batsman – and they had variety to choose from – which means Robin Uthappa will continue doing a makeshift job in a specialist’s role.

Rajasthan Royals

Towards the end of the auction Rahul Dravid, who was at the Rajasthan Royals table, said they wanted bowlers who could bowl at the death, because that discipline had been a problem area the previous season, and were happy with the fast men they had bought: Australia’s James Faulkner and West Indian Fidel Edwards. They had also bid unsuccessfully for RP Singh, Nayar, Jaydev Unadkat and Coulter-Nile. Rajasthan’s only other buy was Sri Lankan wicketkeeper-batsman Kushal Perera at base price, which was a little odd considering they had released another Sri Lankan wicketkeeper-batsman Dinesh Chandimal in November.

They had $7.7 million left in their purse and spent only $630,000, the least among all the franchises. They now have slots open for eleven Indians and one overseas player.

Sunrisers Hyderabad

The newest member of the IPL family. Sunrisers Hyderabad, who replaced Deccan Chargers in the IPL, were in an auction for the first time. They had retained 20 of the old Chargers, and had slots open for 13 players (eight Indian, five overseas). They focused on beefing up their bowling attack and picked up three all rounders and two specialist quickes, bidding high for Thisara Perera and Darren Sammy and buying the others at base price. The ones that got away were RP Singh, Maxwell, Nayar, Gony, Edwards and Morris, all of whom were bought for high prices by other franchises.

I was watching the last ODI between India and Pakistan. As they had done throughout the series, the Pakistani quickies bundled up India pretty cheaply. And I thought India could win this match only through some divine intervention. Some 3 hours later what I saw was some miracle. India actually successfully defended such a small total against the Pakistani line up who had been destroying the Indian bowlers through out the series. It was then when I thought, “Do miracles really happen?”

I do not know about reality, but in sports miracles do happen. I would mention the top 5 moments which I believe were miracle.

Miracle of Istanbul


Liverpool’s run to the final of the Champions League was a miracle in itself, but there was to be one final, phenomenal twist for Rafa Benitez’s men. Finding themselves 3-0 down at half-time to hot favourites AC Milan, Liverpool looked set for humiliation. The  gods however seemed to be smiling on Rafa’s team and a second-half comeback was on after Steven Gerrard and Vladimir Smicer pulled two back for the Reds in quick succession. Xabi Alonso completed the dramatic six minute revival and, after a nervy final 30 minutes and extra-time, the final would be decided by penalties. Jerzy Dudek’s memorable performance in goal ensured that Liverpool would lift the trophy for a fifth time in the most miraculous of circumstances.

Manchester United vs Bayern Munich – 1999 Champions League Finals


The great comeback kings of the modern football era, Manchester United defined their dominance of the ’90s with a last gasp turnaround in the 1999 Champions League final. Trailing early on and finding themselves increasingly pinned back, Sir Alex Ferguson’s men would need a miracle to take the game to extra-time, let alone win it within 90 minutes. However that’s exactly what they did, as late goals from Teddy Sheringham and Ole Gunnar Solskjaer ensured United would cap of an historic treble in style. Football? Bloody ‘ell!

Tiger Woods


Widely regarded as one of the most incredible golfing shots, Tiger Woods’ audacious chip at the 2005 Masters showed a player at the peak of his powers. With the ball sitting just on the edge of the rough, Woods would need a miracle to hole, but in one stroke of his club lifted the ball on to the green and let the rest take care of itself

Trinity College ‘lateral’ touchdown


We all talk about the beautiful football that that Brazil and Spain play. But here is what the Americans would call as beautiful football. The final play begins on Trinity’s 39-yard line with two seconds remaining before 15 laterals (backward passes) complete an incredible score. It was voted Time Magazine’s No 1 sporting moment of 2007. Indeed beautiful Football!

Miracle on Ice

With the Cold War at its peak, a 1980 Winter Olympics ice-hockey clash between the USA and Soviet Union would provide the perfect setting for the two super-powers to flex their muscles, albeit with the Russians heavily favoured. Dubbed the ‘Miracle on Ice’, the fixture would see the United States face a Soviet side which had won nearly every world and Olympic title since 1954; the Americans were unable to field their professional stars in what was then an amateur Olympic tournament, forcing them to use college players in the ice hockey tournament (the Soviets were unhindered by this policy, as their [players were all officially classed as amateur, despite being effectively professional, leading to the term ‘shamateur’ being coined). With ten minutes left of the final third, the US took a surprise 4-3 lead, much to the disbelief of the Soviets, who bombarded the US goal to no avail. As the clock ran down, the crowd went into pandemonium, leading to commentator Al Michaels to deliver his famous line: “Do you believe in miracles?”

Race to 7,Race Course Road

Posted: January 30, 2013 in Uncategorized

What does an Tennis fan like the most? An epic battle between Roger Federer and Nadal for the ultimate glory of a grandslam. A cricket fan? A battle between bat and bowl between Sachin and McGrath. And if you are a F1 fan then Alonso and Vettel fighting out in the last few laps of the last gp for the championship. Well but for India, the mother of all battles is here. With India all set to go for polls in 2014 discussions have already began as to who will lead the two alliances into the polls. And as of now it looks that its going to be a head on battle between the Prince of Congress, Rahul Gandhi and the Macho ‘Pracharak’ from BJP Narendra Modi. So will be next to take over 7, Racecourse road from Dr. Manmohan Singh?

Amongst the two, one is a child of privilege, blessed with the most enduring brand name in Indian politics. The other is a child of hardship whose father was not even a sarpanch. One claims to be the legatee of the idea of a Nehruvian India; the other represents an alternate worldview of Hindutva nationalism. The BJP likes to present the contrast as ‘dynasty versus meritocracy’; the Congress would like to project it as a secular versus communal divide.

Modi is the great orator, something that the BJP had been missing since the days of Vajpayee. On the otherhand Rahul appears uncomfortable in large public gatherings. Modi wears the badge of CEO-style governance as his calling card with panache; the other talks of reforming ‘systems’ but has no ministerial experience. One is celebrated as an icon for a ‘neo-middle class’; the other claims to represent the aspirations of a young India beyond the bright lights. Clearly, in a presidential style race, Modi versus Rahul is a delicious prospect, and one which is guaranteed to attract eyeballs. A recent study shows that had such a race happened Modi had the support of nearly 40 percent urban class population whereas Rahul came a distant second with 19 percent support. However the fact is that the study did not consider rural India which contributes the majority of voters for India and it is the area where people are generally misled by the ‘Gandhi’ name.

However if we see both Modi and Gandhi have huge challenges before them before they can lay hands on the prized seat. Rahul Gandhi has not led Congress successfully in polls in any major state. Be it UP or Gujarat, the prince of Congress has failed miserably in elections. Also he is not that much in picture post polls. He comes and goes as he wishes. What needs to be seen is that can he be a 24×7 neta for the Congress? Another major problem that Gandhi faces is the weakening of the Congress at grass root level. Rahul is attempting to ‘democratize’ the Congress by opening it up to a new, more youthful leadership. Unfortunately, ‘the poison of power’, as he describes it, has so deeply coursed through the veins of the grand old party that Rahul has found it difficult to translate his good intentions into any radical overhaul of the party structures yet.

Modi on the other hand also has many problems of his own. Although he has been successful in taking Gujarat through a so called financial revolution, but the ghosts of 2002 riots will surely return to haunt him. His inability to control the violence in Gujarat back then still remains a black stain on his impressive tenure as a CM. Moreover he also has to face a lot f competition form within the party. BJP is known to be run by RSS from Nagpur and it seems that many RSS leaders are not happy in promoting Modi as the PM.  Modi has succeeded in virtually wiping out the traditional Sangh leadership in the state but to effect a similar transformation in the balance of power between Nagpur and the parliamentary wing of the BJP may prove a shade more difficult. His  individualistic, near-dictatorial style of functioning is looked at with suspicion by many people. Also the other partners of NDA like JDU’s Nitish Kumar do not approve of Modi leading the coalition into the polls. Can Modi do what Vajpayee did back then in 1999 needs to be seen.

Both Modi and Rahul realize that it is not only them who will make the government. In the current scenario it looks highly unlikely that any single party will get absolute majority to form the government. The powercake for government formation largely lies with UP because it has maximum representation in Lok Sabha. King makers like Mayawati, Mulayam, Mamata, Jayalalithaa, Pawar, Naveen Patnaik, Nitish, even a Jagan – would have to be brought under one large tent. Can Modi or Rahul do this? We don’t know that yet.

Whatever the political pundits might predict right now, but the entire chemistry might go wrong at any point of time. However what Rahul’s ascent and Modi’s likely emergence can do though is enthuse the rank and file of their respective parties. The Congress party organisation has only one glue that holds it together: The First Family. The BJP, too, desperately needs a charismatic face to boost the morale of its cadres. A Rajnath Singh as party president can only be the result of a desperate compromise formula; only a Modi-like figure can give the BJP a sense of self-belief that it sorely lacks at the moment.

Rahul versus Modi will, therefore, be a sell-out battle for the Congress and the BJP loyalists. For the rest of India, we have to be prepared for a surprise political grand slam contender.

PS:

My personal opinion of Rahul Gandhi as Prime Minister of India

main-qimg-4f4ecd698fa1bd269a8be99725452868

I consider that Rahul Gandhi would be like a Robert Arryn from the Game of Thrones, weak, incompetent, naive and destined to fail if pulled away from his mother’s care.main-qimg-dcbc7e065179864e57caaf144aae50f9

No. 1 INVEST FOR MAXIMUM TOTAL REAL RETURN

This means the return on invested dollars after taxes and after inflation. This is the only rational objective for most long-term investors. Any investment strategy that fails to recognize the insidious effect of taxes and inflation fails to recognize the true nature of the investment environment and thus is severely handicapped.
It is vital that you protect purchasing power. One of the biggest mistakes people make is putting too much money into fixed-income securities.
Today’s dollar buys only what 35 cents bought in the mid 1970s, what 21 cents bought in 1960, and what 15 cents bought after World War II. U.S. consumer prices have risen every one of the last 38 years.
If inflation averages 4%, it will reduce the buying power of a $100,000 portfolio to $68,000 in just 10 years. In other words, to maintain the same buying power, that portfolio would have to grow to $147,000— a 47% gain simply to remain even over a decade. And this doesn’t even count taxes.
No. 2 INVEST—DON’T TRADE OR SPECULATE
The stock market is not a casino, but if you move in and out of stocks every time they move a point or two, or if you continually sell short… or deal only in options…or trade in futures…the market will be your casino.And,like most gambler,you may lose eventually-or frequently.
You may find your profits consumed by commissions. You may find a market you expected to turn down turning up—and up, and up—in defiance of all your careful calculations and short sales. Every time a Wall Street news announcer says, “This just in,” your heart will stop.
Keep in mind the wise words of Lucien Hooper, a Wall Street legend: “What always impresses me,” he wrote,“is how much better the relaxed, long-term owners of stock do with their portfolios than the traders do with their switching of inventory. The relaxed investor is usually better informed and more understanding of essential values; he is more patient and less emotional; he pays smaller capital gains taxes; he does not incur unnecessary brokerage commissions; and he avoids behaving like Cassius by ‘thinking too much.’”
No.3 REMAIN FLEXIBLE AND OPEN-MINDED ABOUT TYPES OF INVESTMENT
There are times to buy blue chip stocks, cyclical stocks, corporate bonds, U.S. Treasury instruments, and so on. And there are times to sit on cash, because sometimes cash enables you to take advantage of investment opportunities.
The fact is there is no one kind of investment that is always best. If a particular industry or type of security becomes popular with investors, that popularity will always prove temporary and—when lost—may not return for many years.
Having said that, I should note that, for most of the time, most of our clients’ money has been in common stocks. A look at history will show why. From January of 1946 through June of 1991, the Dow Jones Industrial Average rose by 11.4% average annually—including reinvestment of dividends but not counting taxes—compared with an average annual inflation rate of 4.4%. Had the Dow merely kept pace with inflation, it would be around 1,400 right now instead of over 3,000, a figure that seemed extreme to some 10 years ago, when I calculated that it was a very realistic possibility on the horizon.
Look also at the Standard and Poor’s (S&P) Index of 500 stocks. From the start of the 1950s through the end of the 1980s—four decades altogether—the S&P 500 rose at an average rate of 12.5%, compared with 4.3% for inflation, 4.8% for U.S. Treasury bonds, 5.2% for Treasury bills, and 5.4% for high-grade corporate bonds.
In fact, the S&P 500 outperformed inflation, Treasury bills, and corporate bonds in every decade except the ’70s, and it outperformed Treasury bonds—supposedly the safest of all investments—in all four decades. I repeat: There is no real safety without preserving purchasing power.
No. 4 BUY LOW
Of course, you say, that’s obvious. Well, it may be, but that isn’t the way the market works. When prices are high, a lot of investors are buying a lot of stocks. Prices are low when demand is low. Investors have pulled back, people are discouraged and pessimistic.
When almost everyone is pessimistic at the same time, the entire market collapses. More often, just stocks in particular fields fall. Industries such as auto making and casualty insurance go through regular cycles. Sometimes stocks of companies like the thrift institutions or money-center banks fall out of favor all at once.
Whatever the reason, investors are on the sidelines, sitting on their wallets. Yes, they tell you: “Buy low, sell high.” But all too many of them bought high and sold low. Then you ask: “When will you buy the stock?” The usual answer: “Why, after analysts agree on a favorable outlook.”
This is foolish, but it is human nature. It is extremely difficult to go against the crowd—to buy when everyone else is selling or has sold, to buy when things look darkest, to buy when so many experts are telling you that stocks in general, or in this particular industry, or even in this particular company, are risky right now.
But, if you buy the same securities everyone else is buying, you will have the same results as everyone else. By definition, you can’t outperform the market if you buy the market. And chances are if you buy what everyone is buying you will do so only after it is already overpriced.
Heed the words of the great pioneer of stock analysis Benjamin Graham: “Buy when most people…including experts…are pessimistic, and sell when they are actively optimistic.”
Bernard Baruch, adviser to presidents, was even more succinct:
“Never follow the crowd.”
So simple in concept. So difficult in execution.
No.5 WHEN BUYING STOCK,SEARCH FOR BARGAINAMONG QUALITY STOCK
Quality is a company strongly entrenched as the sales leader in a growing market. Quality is a company that’s the technological leader in a field that depends on technical innovation. Quality is a strong management team with a proven track record. Quality is a well-capitalized company that is among the first into a new market. Quality is a well known trusted brand for a high-profit-margin consumer product.
Naturally, you cannot consider these attributes of quality in isolation. A company may be the low-cost producer, for example, but it is not a quality stock if its product line is falling out of favor with customers. Likewise, being the technological leader in a technological field means little without adequate capitalization for expansion and marketing.
Determining quality in a stock is like reviewing a restaurant. You don’t expect it to be 100% perfect, but before it gets three or four stars you want it to be superior.
No. 6 BUY VALUE, NOT MARKET TRENDS OR THE ECONOMIC OUTLOOK
A wise investor knows that the stock market is really a market of stocks. While individual stocks may be pulled along momentarily by a strong bull market, ultimately it is the individual stocks that determine the market, not vice versa. All too many investors focus on the market trend or economic outlook. But individual stocks can rise in a bear market and fall in a bull market.
The stock market and the economy do not always march in lock step. Bear markets do not always coincide with recessions, and an overall decline in corporate earnings does not always cause a simultaneous decline in stock prices. So buy individual stocks, not the market trend or economic outlook.
No.7 DIVERSIFY. IN STOCK,BONDS,AS IN MUCH ELSE,THERE IS SAFETY IN No.
No matter how careful you are, you can neither predict nor control the future. A hurricane or earthquake, a strike at a supplier, an unexpected technological advance by a competitor, or a government-ordered product recall—any one of these can cost a company millions of dollars. Then, too, what looked like such a well-managed company may turn out to have serious internal problems that weren’t apparent when you bought the stock.
So you diversify—by industry, by risk, and by country. For example, if you search worldwide, you will find more bargains— and possibly better bargains—than in any single nation.
No. 8 DO YOUR HOMEWORK OR HIRE WISE EXPERTS TO HELP YOU
People will tell you: Investigate before you invest. Listen to them. Study companies to learn what makes them successful.
Remember, in most instances, you are buying either earnings or assets. In free-enterprise nations, earnings and assets together are major influences on the price of most stocks. The earnings on stock market indexes—the fabled Dow Jones Industrials,for example—fluctuate around the replacement book value of the shares of the index. (That’s the money it would take to replace the assets of the companies making up the index at today’s costs.)
If you expect a company to grow and prosper, you are buying future earnings. You expect that earnings will go up, and because most stocks are valued on future earnings, you can expect the stock price may rise also.
If you expect a company to be acquired or dissolved at a premium over its market price, you may be buying assets. Years ago Forbes regularly published lists of these so-called “loaded laggards.” But remember, there are far fewer of these companies today. Raiders have swept through the marketplace over the past 10 to 15 years: Be very suspicious of what they left behind.
No. 9 AGGRESSIVELY MONITOR YOUR INVESTMENTS
Expect and react to change. No bull market is permanent. No bear market is permanent. And there are no stocks that you can buy and forget. The pace of change is too great. Being relaxed, as Hooper advised, doesn’t mean being complacent.
Consider, for example, just the 30 issues that comprise the Dow Jones Industrials. From 1978 through 1990, one of every three issues changed—because the company was in decline, or was acquired, or went private, or went bankrupt. Look at the 100 largest industrials on Fortune magazine’s list. In just seven years, 1983 through 1990, 30 dropped off the list. They merged with another giant company, or became too small for the top 100, or were acquired by a foreign company, or went private, or went out of business. Remember, no investment is forever.
No.10 DON’T PANIC
Sometimes you won’t have sold when everyone else is buying, and you’ll be caught in a market crash such as we had in 1987. There you are, facing a 15% loss in a single day. Maybe more.
Don’t rush to sell the next day. The time to sell is before the crash, not after. Instead, study your portfolio. If you didn’t own these stocks now, would you buy them after the market crash? Chances are you would. So the only reason to sell them now is to buy other, more attractive stocks. If you can’t find more attractive stocks, hold on to what you have.
No. 11 LEARN FROM YOUR MISTAKES
The only way to avoid mistakes is not to invest—which is the biggest mistake of all. So forgive yourself for your errors. Don’t become discouraged, and certainly don’t try to recoup your losses by taking bigger risks. Instead, turn each mistake into a learning experience. Determine exactly what went wrong and how you can avoid the same mistake in the future.
The investor who says, “This time is different,” when in fact it’s virtually a repeat of an earlier situation, has uttered among the four most costly words in the annals of investing.
The big difference between those who are successful and those who are not is that successful people learn from their mistakes and the mistakes of others.
No. 12 BEGIN WITH A PRAYER

If you begin with a prayer, you can think more clearly and make fewer mistakes.

No.13 OUTPERFORMING THE MARKET IS A DIFFICULT TASK
The challenge is not simply making better investment decisions than the average investor. The real challenge is making investment decisions that are better than those of the professionals who manage the big institutions.
Remember, the non managed market indexes such as the S&P 500 don’t pay commissions to buy and sell stock. They don’t pay salaries to securities analysts or portfolio managers. And, unlike the non managed indexes, investment companies are never 100% invested, because they need to have cash on hand to redeem shares.
So any investment company that consistently outperforms the market is actually doing a much better job than you might think. And if it not only consistently outperforms the market, but does so by a significant degree, it is doing a superb job.
No. 14 AN INVESTOR WHO HAS ALL THE ANSWERS DOESN’T EVEN UNDERSTAND ALL THE QUESTIONS

A cocksure approach to investing will lead, probably sooner than later, to disappointment if not outright disaster. Even if we can identify an unchanging handful of investing principles, we cannot apply these rules to an unchanging universe of investments—or an unchanging economic and political environment. Everything is in a constant state of change, and the wise investor recognizes that success is a process of continually seeking answers to new questions.

No.15 THERE’S NO FREE LUNCH
This principle covers an endless list of admonitions. Never invest on sentiment. The company that gave you your first job, or built the first car you ever owned, or sponsored a favorite television show of long ago may be a fine company. But that doesn’t mean its stock is a fine investment. Even if the corporation is truly excellent, prices of its shares may be too high.
Never invest in an initial public offering (IPO) to “save” the commission. That commission is built into the price of the stock—a reason why most new stocks decline in value after the offering. This does not mean you should never buy an IPO.
Never invest solely on a tip. Why, that’s obvious, you might say. It is. But you would be surprised how many investors, people who are well-educated and successful, do exactly this. Unfortunately, there is something psychologically compelling about a tip. Its very nature suggests inside information, a way to turn a fast profit.
No. 16 DO NOT BE FEARFUL OR NEGATIVE TOO OFTEN
And now the last principle. Do not be fearful or negative too often. For 100 years optimists have carried the day in U.S. stocks. Even in the dark ’70s, many professional money managers—and many individual investors too—made money in stocks, especially those of smaller companies.
There will, of course, be corrections, perhaps even crashes. But, over time, our studies indicate stocks do go up…and up… and up.
With the fall of communism and the sharply reduced threat of nuclear war, it appears that the U.S. and some form of an economically united Europe may be about to enter the most glorious period in their history.
As national economies become more integrated and interdependent, as communication becomes easier and cheaper, business is likely to boom. Trade and travel will grow. Wealth will increase. And stock prices should rise accordingly.
By the time the 21st century begins—it’s just around the corner, you know—I think there is at least an even chance that the Dow Jones Industrials may have reached 6,000, perhaps more.
Chances are that certain other indexes will have grown even more. Despite all the current gloom about the economy, and about the future, more people will have more money than ever before in history. And much of it will be invested in stocks.
And throughout this wonderful time, the basic rules of building wealth by investing in stocks will hold true. In this century or the next it’s still “Buy low, sell high.”

Pranab Mukherjee bowed out of active politics and staked claim to the largely-ceremonial office of President of India. The opposition BJP, which has no chance of getting a candidate of its choice elected to Rashtrapati Bhavan has labelled Mukherjee as one of the worst finance ministers in recent history.Is it true?

Pranab Mukherjee took over the office of Finance Ministry from P Chidambaram in January 2009 after the latter was moved to Home Ministry. P Chidambaram had faced a lot of opposition from the Left Parties during his term as a finance minister. Mind you during the rule of UPA 1, the left parties were a part of the government. Pranab da was expected to face less hostility than his predecessor and thus was expected to be more effective. This air of expectancy continued when he was re appointed as the Finance Minister in May with the UPA beginning its second term as four months was too short for him to get things moving. But three years later nothing much has changed.

As he looks to shift further up on Raisina Hill from North Block to Rashtrapati Bhavan, India’s economy is taking the exactly opposite path.

During his tenure at North Block, the stately Delhi building which houses the finance ministry, India witnessed an economic growth rate of 5.3% in the last quarter of 2011-12, the lowest in the past nine years.

The rupee fell to its lowest ever level, global rating agencies threatened to downgrade the country, the fiscal deficit went out of control, and a lack of political consensus derailed critical reforms. Economists and business leaders blame Mr Mukherjee for “policy paralysis”, which has led to a slump in domestic and foreign investment.The middle class is unhappy over sharp hikes in taxes and fuel prices. The poor are angry about double-digit food inflation and graft in welfare schemes. The industry questioning minister as to whether he wants development or not.

The Indian economy has been plagued by muddleheaded policies under him. In his last budget in March, Pranab da proposed tax policies, including retrospective amendments, which seemed designed to frighten away foreign investors, including relatively long term ones such as private equity funds. Whats worse is that the timing was so wrong as India was on the verge of running up its largest ever current account deficit and needed to be mindful about its foreign investors. Also his inability to introduce FDI in insurance sector and the inability of India to transition to GST are seen as some of his biggest failures.

Bureaucrats seem to be blaming Omita Paul, Pranab da’s adviser for all the arbitrary decisions that seemed to have been taken by Mukherjee. However, an adviser can only be as powerful as the minister wants. the rot always starts from the top. Pranab Mukherjee indeed seems to have left the Ministry in a state of mess. So it seems when Samajwadi party supremo Mulayam Singh Yadav announced that he would be backing Pranab da’s bid for presidency – and thereby virtually guaranteeing his chances of victory – he unwittingly did Indian economy a great favour.

Recently I was reading an editorial article titled “10 questions you wish somebody would ask Sachin” and what I realized was how frustrated journalist have become just because they don’t seem to have gotten a chance to interview Sachin one on one. Damn! “Selfish gene-cum-genius” that is what this guy calls Sachin. Does he have a personal issue with Sachin or is he just a dumb guy I don’t know, but even to a layman it would be very clear that this guy has some serious issues with Sachin. Now let me try to answer some of his questions.

1. Match Fixing issue of 1999-2000. The darkest phase in world cricket. And he says how come Sachin had no idea that some of his team mates were involved in match fixing. Let me ask him “How many SA players were aware that Hanse Cronje (May his soul RIP) was involved in match fixing or how many Aussie players knew that Shane Warne and Mark Waugh were approached by bookies?” To question the moral values of any player is the height of dumbness and it is clearly shown by the author in his article. And were the players involved in fixing so dumb that they would discuss such topics in dressing room. And how are you so sure that Sachin if he had any doubt had not known the responsible authorities aware about his concerns. Just that you were not made aware about this does not mean you start questioning that guys character.You journalist are always in close vicinity of politicians.Right. Then how come you don’t get hints of scams that they are involved in? Care to reply?

2. The issue of DRS. May I remind you that over the past few series it is India who has suffered because DRS has not been used and as a result we have lost last two series 4-0. So why does BCCI not agree for the implementation of DRS? The BCCi clearly says that the technology used in DRS is not 100% accurate. Many incidents in the past have shown that the technology is not able to accurately predict as to what might have happened. So whats the use of implementing a technology which is not yet 100% accurate. And how come you start blaming individual players like Dhoni and Sachin that they are influencing BCCI. Mind you BCCI might take decisions but they have to take opinions of players as they have a more accurate experience of such things. So what here you are saying is that Sachin should not even voice his opinion an in the previous question you were blaming him for not saying anything. Ain’t this a paradox!

3. Sachin is rich. True. He applied for wavier of custom duty.True. So? Who accepted it? The government. Was this an exception made only for Sachin? Hell no. How can you not remember SRK’s Jannat issue or Subhash Gai’s issue of land for his academy or for that say Adarsh scam. Here atleast Sachin had made an official request for this. Still you get troubled. Tell me have you never broken any law in your life so far for anything. Have you journalist never invaded the privacy of people in order to get stories. Hell yeah you have. So bugger off.

4.Aren’t there too many people in India who take stands on various issues that you now want cricketers to join them. I mean apart from their grueling cricketing schedule where they are away from their family for long times now you want them to take stands on issues thereby reducing the amount of time they spend with their family. Dude! BTW for your information do you know that Sachin has adopted many schools where he pays for the education of children.No. I thought so.

5. Man this question should be directed towards people who are elected to Parliament and end up doing no work like Naveen Jindal, Govinda et al. And Sachin did not asked to be selected as an MP. He was selected by the government. So blame them. Say you are an activist and the government in recognition of your work selects you to become an MP of RS. First would you decline it? Secondly suppose that a parliament session coincides with some of your say important activities as an activist, what would you give up? Parliament session or your work as an activist. Again why make you an activist. Say as an journalist. Would you give up the post of MP or would you give up journalism? The post is one of honor and a luck few are selected for it. I for sure won’t dishonor the post by declining it. Again my Dharma is my work, my profession. I won’t give up that too. So basically i am in a big dilemma and need “educated” people like you to help me in such a situation. By calling being a parliamentarian a hobby you are actually dishonoring the post, but i don’t think you care.

6. Let me ask you would you do a better job if you are made the PM of India? Can you pull Kingfisher out of bankruptcy if that job is given to you? Can you lead Indian cricket team better than Sachin? I don’t know. But what I do know that Sachin is not a leader. He is a fantastic player which any captain would love to have in his team but as a leader he is not up to the mark. But again not all players are excellent leaders. Roy Keane, an ex Manchester United player was a decent footballer but he was a natural leader and led his team to may great victories. He never had the flamboyance of Beckham nor the flair of Giggs, all he had was his leadership and today we consider him as a Manchester United Legend. Also captaincy record depends a lot on the kind of team you lead. Ricky Ponting is a great example of this. Compare his record prior and post retirement of Shane Warne, McGrath, Gilcrist and Hayden and you will see the difference. And calling Anil Kumble an average cricketer what we see is your ignorance. Most pundits believed that Kumble should have been handed the captainship well in advance. By the way you see things you can also say that Warne would have made a better captain than say Steve Waugh but he was never allowed to lead a team. I don’t think you are the right person to make a call on issues like captainship.

7. This is an issue where I hate the media the most. Sachin gets out in 90’s they start criticizing him. Sachin scores a relatively slow 100, then narcissist people like you start blaming him. What do you expect from him man? Cut him some slack. Sachin has represented India over 450 ODI’s and 150 Tests. And you say he is selfish.Huh.You start saying that he is now playing for records. Who first created all the hype about Sachin’s 100th century. Who kept pestering him with questions about his 100th ton. He has been carrying India’s hope on his shoulders for over 20 years now. And in the end always why does media make him the scapegoat. After all he also is human. Emotions sometimes get the better of a person. Who would not slow down when nearing 100th 100 at a age of 38. Even Sehwag would. All journalist like you like to do is somehow target someone and make a sensational news. And start questioning their integrity by saying that this is not a one-off incident. Sir this was history in writing. India considers cricket as religion and Sachin as their God and Sachin slowed down for his supporters so that they can finally rejoice and that burden that pestering of media would finally end. And you media people still blame him for that.(sic)

8. Again an issue where only lunatics like you can write. Sachin is not a finisher. True So what . Sachin is a guy who creates a platform for the middle order to come and end the game. If your middle order can’t do that why do you blame Sachin. In how many games has Sachin single handedly saved India from blushes and even lid India to victory? Innumerable. How do you forget Sachin playing for India in 1999 World Cup right after the demise of his father because for him his country came first. Hist century at Chennai where he nearly led India to victory even with a back injury. His 90’s have bought more victory to India then any player. His 2003 inning against Pakistan is a very good example.This video might refresh your memory.

 

You say that he does not finish the game. But he leads India to scores where they can hold their heads high. His century in the first finals in the CB series was a major reason why India defeated Australia and won series in Australia. You seem to remember his failures but do not remember his innings like 119 at Perth on a lightening quick wicket as a 19 year old boy, his first test century against England which helped India to save the test, his 175 against Australia at Hyderabad where India nearly chased down 350+ score (No one other than Sachin played decently and you would say that Sachin did not finish the game), his century against England where India chased down 250+ runs on final day to win the test, his centuries against the Proteas which saved India from the blushes multiple time. But how would you remember this.Sachin has played for the teams more than you would care to remember. He has even volunteered to bowl in crunch situations and taken the team to safety. but you won’t remember all this will you?

9. Why do you care if a person is boring or not? If someone says something you will be a dick make some stupid totally senseless story out of it, put it 24×7 on TV and be a pain in the ass for that person. So don’t you think it is better to be safe rather than fall a prey to hungry hounds like you journalist who are always putting their noses in issues that do not matter to you.

10. Well to that I can ask only this thing, would you have written this same article if you had more access to Sachin. Would you have been such a dick if you had made some stories about Sachin more often. I realize that you are under immense pressure from your editor or someone to get a good story about Sachin but you are not getting any opportunity. Well bad luck. All i wish is that you stop being such a dick and start watching the sport with an open mind. Because by writing such bull shit you are not only writing utter shit about a gentleman but also you are insulting people like Sir Bradman, Viv Richards, Warne, Micheal Holding, Mike Atherton, Shaun Pollock,Imran Khan, Wasim Akram who consider Sachin as the greatest modern day cricketer and also thinking that institution like Wisden are waste. My advice put your efforts more constructively and you might be rewarded in future.

//

How interim is interim? And isn’t any and every manager at Chelsea an Interim Coach, whether he be The Special One, Jose Mourinho, or the curiously employable Aram Grant, currently in charge of yet another major club in the shape of Partizan Belgrade with initially negative results? Well talking about the current coach will be only an interim one or not we will have to go back a few days.

The date was 24th April 2012. Venue was Camp Nou. And this happened there

 

Roberto Di Matteo became only the second Chelsea coach to propel them into the Champions League Finals to be held at Munich. What is it that this guy has done differently which is bringing Chelsea so much success that AVB could not bring. And is it time to hand Di Matteo full time job as the manager of Chelsea FC?

Since taking over the job, Di Matteo has only lost once in 15 matches. His 10 wins have put Chelsea in the FA Cup final and the Champions League final, despite looking horrible in each of those competitions.He revitalized the club, and he has the Blues playing great football. Yes, they still sit at sixth in the league, but if they win out, they have a very good chance of finishing in the top four.

On March 3, this season seemed lost for Chelsea. Since then, Di Matteo has put the club in great position to win at least one trophy this year, if not two. He has put them in a great position to win, and the players have responded.

Andre Villas-Boas had a plan to be successful at Chelsea, but he didn’t have the players necessary. As a result, he admitted that he would be looking for new players in the transfer window, which obviously alienated the players that would be on the way out.In doing so, Villas-Boas lost his dressing room. The players did not respond to him, and his tactics didn’t fit their strengths. Consequently, Chelsea were in some trouble.

When Di Matteo came in, he started putting players in situations where they could succeed. He trusted them, and they responded. Against Barcelona, Di Matteo didn’t even think twice before dropping John Obi Mikel to centre back once John Terry was red carded. He, along with Branislav Ivanovic, played relatively well holding down the backline with no other defenders eligible to play.

Even without defenders, Di Matteo committed to parking the bus. Every Chelsea player’s average position was behind midfield; meanwhile, eight of Barcelona’s 10 field players’ average position was across the midfield line.Chelsea camped out, and it worked out.

After the game, Di Matteo wasn’t even taking credit for the tactics.”The second half wasn’t so much about tactics as passion, pride and desire to get to the final,” he said.

What are the other reasons that he might take up the full time job. If we compare what Mourinho did and what Di Matteo does at Chelsea you will find a lot of similarities.

Villas-Boas embraced the Mourinho 4-3-3 at Porto and, as a result, seemed a perfect fit when he took over at Chelsea last summer.
Formations, however, are neutral and mean nothing when a team’s general style of play and individuals’ prescribed roles are not taken into account.In an attempt to build a new Chelsea side capable of reaching the heights of Mourinho’s two-time champions, Villas-Boas tried to emphasise mastery of possession and an aggressively positioned defence that a squad largely built by Mourinho could not adjust to.Di Matteo has reverted to Mourinho’s more direct, counterattacking style of play and while they rode their luck not to concede against Barcelona, the Blues’ goal was a textbook quick break up the field.
Didier Drogba, restored as centre forward for most of Di Matteo’s most important matches, has looked back to his best and the Chelsea defence has offered more resistance from a deeper starting position. Even Fabregas had to concede that Chelsea under Di Matteo was like the old Chelsea he knew.

While the likes of Ramires and Gary Cahill have been impressive this season, there has been no doubting the contribution of Chelsea’s most experienced players to their current run of form.Both John Terry and Ashley Cole were outstanding in defence against Barcelona, while Frank Lampard operated in a restricted defensive midfield role without a hint of the frustration and disillusionment which he occasionally displayed under Villas-Boas.
Drogba, despite the stunningly long periods of time he spent lying on the turf for no apparent reason, was on his feet when it mattered to grab the winning goal and worked hard throughout the evening in order to lead the attack.Villas-Boas’ failed attempts to replace the likes of Lampard and Drogba with younger models may prove valid in the long run but for now Di Matteo has been sensible to rely on the remainder of Mourinho’s ‘untouchables‘.
Di Matteo, competing in Europe’s premier competition as a manager for the first time, has similarly utilised the know-how of the old guard.

Two managers, two unlikely victories in the last 16 of the Champions League.

Mourinho celebrated Costinha’s last-gasp winning goal by rampaging down the Old Trafford touchline when Porto progressed to the quarter-final of the 2004 competition at the expense of Manchester United.

Di Matteo was able to keep his emotions in check until the final whistle before entering the field of play to congratulate his players by leaping on many of them following their 4-1 second leg victory over Napoli.
Fernando Torres had played nearly an hour as a substitute when Di Matteo clattered the unsuspecting striker with a hug before moving on to a more willing recipient in Lampard.
Mourinho’s sideline antics have occasionally landed him in hot water with the footballing authorities but his clear passion for the cause only serves to further endear him to supporters.It was difficult not to smile as a former Stamford Bridge midfield idol embraced his successor having achieved a result that has triggered the rebirth of the Blues’ trophy hopes this season.

Di Matteo has attained success with Chelsea by reaching 2 cup finals. Can he propel them to their first ever Champions League Title. Can’t say as of now. But what can be said is that Roberto di Matteo has proved his mantle. And even though I might be a Manchester United fan, I would like to see him appointed as a full time manager at Chelsea. And I would end with this meme,

Guardiola says,

Di Matteo replies,

 

Paul Scholes through the ages

Image  —  Posted: April 17, 2012 in Uncategorized