This is being written while watching the final of the men’s singles at Wimbledon. It’s not often that you get the top two seeds contesting the final at a Major, but that’s what is happening now, and the tennis is out of this world. The speed, the ferocity of the shots, the power, the placement, all are on display. There is the odd drop shot too, just to, maybe, show that it’s not all power. The desperation to win the title can be seen in the way both Jannik Sinner and Alexander Zverev are sliding, slipping, but still recovering to get to the ball.

If all this is so breathtaking on TV, then one can imagine what the atmosphere would be like at Centre Court itself. The remarkable thing is that, despite the massive effort required for every point, both players hardly seem out of breath. It’s a testament to the supreme fitness that is required to win a Major.

That’s why, when a journalist asked Novak Djokovic after his five-hour, 15-minute quarterfinal win how he and Lionel Messi, both 39 years old, could keep playing at such a high level, the 24-time Grand Slam winner had a ready reply.

He said he wished he could have played 90 minutes. What’s this about comparison all the time? Be it across different sports or within the same one, why is there a need to compare players, even those from the same team? Why this desperation among fans, too, to suggest that the guy they support is better than the other and, in the process, belittle the other guy? Why not just enjoy the one whose fan you are and not worry about anything else? There’s no question that tennis has become faster, and the ball is being pummelled harder than ever before.

If for Sinner it turned out to be a Sunday to celebrate, England cricket fans too had plenty to cheer.

Their team became No. 1 in the ICC T20 rankings after defeating India 4-0 in the five-match series, with the first game being washed out. England played far superior cricket and seemed to have done their homework on just about every Indian player. This is a good Indian team, but they were totally outplayed in all departments of the game. Even so, what was disappointing was that there seemed to be no learning from the previous game, and the same mistakes were repeated. While the opposition does not allow you to play at your best, what was needed was to do what was in your control. Here, the bowling of no-balls showed that there was a carelessness that became expensive. Out of all the things in the game, this is the one thing that a player has 100 per cent control over. Today, with all the technology, measuring tapes, analysis of run-ups and suchlike, there is simply no excuse to bowl a no-ball in any form of the game. That is especially true in the white-ball format, where the next ball becomes a free hit. That often changes the course of the game, as was seen in the second game, where India were in a good position till the no-balls came along. The momentum shifted in just one over, and a game that could have been won was lost.

The BCCI is going to do a review of the defeat, and there are rumours that a few heads could roll. That would be an extreme step, for barely four months ago India were the world champions and still are No. 2 in the ICC rankings.

There’s been a lot of talk about how playing on flat batting pitches has spoiled the Indian batters. Even on the so-called flat pitches in the IPL, most of the Indian batters struggled against the short ball. That is more of a technical failing. With the weight on the front foot and the back foot locked, there is simply no transfer of weight to deal with a ball climbing towards the face. That said, the short boundaries are also to blame, as many of the sixes hit just about clear the boundary rope and so could be catches elsewhere. This has to be looked at urgently if India is to reclaim the ODI title on the faster, bouncier pitches in South Africa.

Every ground in India can have longer boundaries, but is there the will for that? That is the question. We shall soon see.