Author: Anshuman Rawat

Author. Entrepreneur. Filmmaker. Journalist.

Categories
Sport

The Top Three Takeaways from the Chelsea-Manchester United Draw

The latest edition of the Chelsea-Manchester United clash was the proverbial tale of two halves: The Blues absolutely mastered the surprisingly docile visiting Red Devils that had displayed enormous attacking intent with the team selection. The domination, though, was not reflected by a mere one-goal lead via a crisp Antonio Rüdiger header.

Then came the hour mark of the match and everything changed. Manchester United players changed gears and scored two goals via Anthony Martial, while Chelsea discarded ‘Sarri-ball’ and embraced the long-ball like there was no ground in the middle. It was through sheer madness of injury-time melee that Chelsea managed to find an equalizer via Ross Barkley in the 96th minute.

What that, in essence, means that both the teams played only one half, and therefore, did not deserve to win the whole match.

In the end, it would’ve felt like a loss to Jose Mourinho. But overall, Maurizio Sarri would be the more disappointed one for handing over the top spot to City and Liverpool.

As a match, there were three major takeaways from the match:

Hazard is NOT a 38-Games-a-Season Player:

Prior to the clash of the two titans at Stamford Bridge, Eden Hazard was consistently being placed alongside Ronaldo and Messi. Talking to the media prior to the match, even Mourinho said that Chelsea would win the Premier League if Hazard keeps firing.

However, the ‘if’ that Mourinho hinted at is what has been the bane of Chelsea supporters, and indeed football aficionados.

Arsenal legend Paul Merson recently pinpointed the issue when he said that “the problem with Chelsea ace Eden Hazard is he can go missing for six months at a time”.

Was today the first day of those six months? Almost certainly not ㅡ but he did go missing for a big chunk of the match time. He also lost the ball a few times and was not accurate with his ‘cute’ flicks and other trickery.

To give credit where due, Hazard himself accepted that aspect of the game last season after ‘going missing’ against Barcelona in both the legs of the Champions League match.

Contrast that with what Messi produced at Wembley a few weeks ago against Tottenham Hotspurs in their Champions League match.

Title Contenders Chelsea Need New Contenders Both at the Front and the Back:

There is more or less a consensus developing across the Premier League is that Alvaro Morata is coming to the end of his Chelsea career, a new striker is arriving in January. He has scored two goals in the Premier League so far at an average of over 300 minutes per goal!

Unfortunately, his substitute Olivier Giroud hasn’t scored even a single goal. In fact, he played and won the FIFA World Cup without scoring a single goal!

Clearly, Sarri needs a forward that can put the ball in the opposition goal ㅡas early as during the January window.

Adding to the woes is the volatility at the back. Marcos Alonso and David Luiz are both great talents, but not necessarily great in defence.

Luiz pulled out of position which led to Manchester United’s second goal. Alonso, while continuing to lie on the ground, though one can barely fault a player for lying prostrate on the ground after a collision, gave an easy target for Martial to fire in the second goal.

In any case, the two represent a case of turning a winger and a mid-fielder into defenders.

At the moment Sarri looks adamantly in support of the two ㅡ despite having the likes of Andreas Christensen and Gary Cahill in the ranks. But, he might need a Bonucci or a Rugani to become a really reliable title contender.

It Promises to Come Good for Manchester United, Eventually

Twice in two matches now, Mourinho’s boys have come back from behind to lead. But for a mad scramble at the end, twice they would have won.

How did it happen, amid all the negativity surrounding the team, and especially the manager?

It happened because Mourinho is a great coach. He no longer needs to prove that. Unfortunately, his personality gets in the way of a fair assessment of his managerial acumen. This writer believes that he is very different from, but just as good as Pep Guardiola. And he proves this in the way he manages most of the ‘big matches’. He may not win them, he may not even be attractive, but he manages to extract what needs to be for the team.

Today, he again managed to completely blunt the Hazard factor. A year ago, it was Ander Herrera who was assigned the job. Today, it was Ashley Young. With a misfiring striker and a shackled talisman, Chelsea could’ve gone only as far. And but for the error by Paul Pogba (missing his marker) that led to the first goal, and the late chaos in the 16-yard-box, he would’ve pulled off a perfect execution.

Add to that the fact that man-to-man, Manchester United is one of the best teams in the Premier Leagueㅡ something acceded by Sarri before the match. It is perhaps an issue of emotions and/or egos, that is stopping the team from gelling. Once that is sorted out, and it would be, eventually, it promises to come good for Utd.

Categories
Huffington Post (UK) Journalism Sport

England At The Ashes Look Like Deer Caught In Headlights

What was billed as a close Ashes series prior to the first Test at the Gabba in Brisbane has now been reduced to a one-horse race

After a day that saw Australia lose just one wicket and a relative Test rookie Mitch Marsh pile on an unbeaten 180, apart from the small matter of an unbeaten double century by Oz captain and the man of the moment Steven Smith, England assistant coach Paul Farbrace said, “We don’t have that extra pace and we haven’t got the highest quality of magical spin. We’ve got what we’ve got and we’ve had to work exceptionally hard”. An exaggerated version of the statement could well be, “We’ve got what we’ve got, we just have to learn to bat, bowl and field”.

Exaggerations are like that – outlandish. But they tend to convey the core import of a conversation.

England is not competing in the current Ashes, because England is “not playing”. The performances of its key stars, namely Alastair Cook, Joe Root, James Anderson, Stuart Broad, and Moeen Ali, can best be described by the reflexes of a deer caught in headlights. Make no mistake, that is not only half the English team, but the only half that is experienced enough to be leading a fight in a tough battle like an away Ashes series.

Alastair Cook, who played his 150th Test in Perth, has made a total of 83 runs in the six inningsat an average of 13.8 in the three matches so far. Captain Joe Root fared slightly better, scoring 175 at an average of 29. Amid a largely untested upper and middle half of the batting line up, these two fine batsmen were expected to lead the way for England. Lead they have not, scoring a grand total of 258 runs between them in the first three Tests.
Contrast the collective effort of the top English duo with Steven Smith alone’s 239 in the first innings of the third test, and you get the picture.

The bodies are toiling, the sweat is flowing, the shirts are getting dirty, but the brain just does not seem to be guiding them well.

At the other end, with Anderson, Broad, Voakes and Overton being different expressions of the same variety, the success of the English bowling depended a lot on the variety provided by their ‘number one spin bowler’, Moeen Ali. Alas, he fared just as bad as the batsmen mentioned earlier. In the six innings of the first three matches, Ali took a measly three wickets for 317 runs, at over 100 runs per wicket. In contrast, Australia’s number one spinner Nathan Lyon, till writing this piece, has taken 14 wickets for 347 runs at 24.7 runs apiece.

Clearly, the English team has not spoken with either the bat or the ball. Since ability cannot suddenly disappear overnight, it clearly seems to be a case of the heart not giving company to the body on the pitch.

Is it because of the controversy surrounding Ben Stoke’s exclusion from the Ashes party due to an altercation outside a Bristol nightclub in September, a little before the Ashes tour?

Did the incident during the early stages of the tour that involved England wicket-keeper Jonny Bairstow greeting Australian opener Cameron Bancroft in a bar in Perth with what eventually was termed as “non-malicious meeting of heads” add to the psychological chaos? After all, it was considered weighty enough to lead to a midnight curfew being imposed on the squad.

And then, there was the bizarre one of England batsman Ben Duckett being suspended pending an internal investigation by the ECB after he was involved in an incident at the same bar, in which he is believed to have poured beer over the head of James Anderson.

There’s a lot going on in a captain’s mind already. He certainly can do without such ungainly distractions. Bairstow indeed accepted prior to the third test that the off-field incidents have let Root down.

This is not to pin all the blame for the performance on the field to those incidents. It is just to say that the English brains do not seem clutter-free enough to be facing the Oz challenge. The bodies are toiling, the sweat is flowing, the shirts are getting dirty, but the brain just does not seem to be guiding them well. They know who and where they are, they see the Aussies coming hard at them, but they are not able to react to it.

Categories
Huffington Post (UK) Journalism Sport

Chelsea Need to Focus On January Transfers And Barcelona

Languishing 14 points behind leaders City, Chelsea would do well to shift focus to the Champions League, after due reinforcements in the January transfer window

Before their stumble in the away London derby game against West Ham, Chelsea had won six and drawn one of their previous seven matches, including the Alvaro Morata header-inspired 1-0 home victory over Manchester United.

And yet, the chances of retaining the League looked all but improbable even before the defeat to The Hammers because of Manchester City’s imperious form and its formidable fourteen-point lead over third-placed Chelsea. As things (read current form and points tally) stand, Chelsea – or any other team for that matter — can win the League only if City themselves decide to squander the advantage.
Chelsea manager Antonio Conte seemed to have thrown in the towel for the title race after the defeat at the London Stadium:

“When you lose four games my experience, my previous experience tells me that it’s impossible to fight for the title. In 16 games to lose four games it means the target must be another.”

But Chelsea supporters need not drop their shoulders. They should see this as an opportunity. With the League defence prospects all but evaporated, Antonio Conte can opt to give his all to the biggest one of them all – the Champions League.

Of course, a 1-1 home draw with Athletico Madrid at home in the last group stage match meant that Chelsea’s horror show in Rome has came back to haunt them, as they finished second in the group – and got paired with Barcelona in the 16 draw.

The first leg will take place at Stamford Bridge on Tuesday February 20 and Chelsea will travel to the Nou Camp on Wednesday March 14.

Not the best way to start the knock-out stage, right?

Yes; and no. Chelsea are one of the bogey teams for Barcelona, if you subscribe to the term. The 2011 Champions League Champions from London, who had broken Barcelona hearts with a come-from-behind win in the second leg of that year’s semi final at the Camp Nou, are unbeaten in the their last seven matches with the Catalan giants. How many teams boast of statistics like that!

The two sides have met 15 times previously, with the bragging rights being split almost unnaturally evenly – five wins apiece for the two sides and five draws. Beat that in terms of offering an even contest.

Barcelona manager Ernesto Valverde has already expressed his respect for the opposition and singled out the threat that Alvaro Morata poses to his side in the last-16 tie:

“It’s a tough draw for us because of the magnitude of the opposition. With the signing of Morata they’ve added pace in attack, while (Eden) Hazard is very good between the lines.”

What makes things very interesting in the meeting of the two former champions is the record of Lionel Messi. Royal blue goalpost is certainly his most favourite target. The five-time Ballon d’Or winner is yet to score against the reigning Premier League champions in his eight attempts thus far! And what do they say about all Messi teams – stop Leo and you win more than half the battle against Barca. Or some percentage of that.

Of course, it is never that straight-forward. But the point is, unlike what the ‘armchair (read “social media”) experts’ might tell you, this is a tie that can go either way.

Antonio Conte alluded to something similar in a press conference when he exhorted his players, especially the mercurial Eden Hazard, to go for it across the two legs against Barcelona:

“The tie will see Eden Hazard come up against Lionel Messi and Conte has issued a war cry to his most influential player and his team-mates. ’This type of game is a good chance for every player to show the right value, not only for Hazard, but for every player in the right way.”

Even prior to the clarion call by the boss, the Blues dressing room was prepared for the pairing – and is said to be not too daunted by the task ahead.

But if the assured calm needs to kick the talk on the pitch, there will have to be a couple of additions to the squad during the January transfer window. Conte has gone hoarse crying for reinforcements since the beginning of the season. With the Premier League defence probably gone, the Chelsea hierarchy might finally heed to the request.

But the simple action now could prove to be a tricky one – what with most A-listers would’ve already played the group stages of the Champions League, making them ineligible to play for Chelsea in this season. So, while a Sandro from Juventus is a must for the long term, short and mightily important objectives demand Chelsea augment their defence (David Luiz suspect and Antonio Rudiger and Gary Cahill both not the most reliable currently) and midfield (since Tiémoué Bakayoko clearly needs more time) with immense talents from sides that have not featured in this year’s Champions League.

Consider this – four very good matches out of the remaining seven, and Chelsea could actually be a champion. I know you are thinking, “if wishes were horses”. But the emphasis is not here on the number of matches. It is about how straight-forward, though not easy by any stretch of imagination, it is to plan – as against planning for 22 more matches in the Premier League.

By the time you read this, Chelsea would have already played Huddersfield Town at the John Smith’s Stadium. Another loss for Chelsea can really put everything at stake, but a win might offer precious little to change the eventual fate. And that is indeed the point of this piece.

Categories
Foreign Policy Association (US) Journalism

Doklam: China’s War Drums and the India-Bhutan Treaty

 

This article was first published on the Foreign Policy Association blogs here.

Summing up the general state of awareness in the world that we are living in, an overwhelming majority of the world seems to be either unaware of or unconcerned about the potentially catastrophic confrontation building up in the last two months in the Himalayas between India and China, the world’s two largest countries, which also happen to be the world’s second and the fourth largest economies, and, most worryingly, two nuclear armed nations that have the world’s most well-oiled defense apparatus.

The standoff, which is threatening to spiral out of control from the Chinese side, started when the one-party led Communist nation’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) started constructing a motorable road from Dokola in the Doklam area towards the Bhutan Army camp at Zompelri on June 16, 2017.

Bhutan, which believes the area is its territory, swiftly reacted, and in a press release issued on June 29, 2017, stated clearly that “the construction of the road inside Bhutanese territory is a direct violation of its agreements with China“.

The Bhutanese foreign ministry further said:

” Boundary talks are ongoing between Bhutan and China and we have written agreements of 1988 and 1998 stating that the two sides agree to maintain peace and tranquillity in their border areas pending a final settlement on the boundary question, and to maintain status quo on the boundary as before March 1959. The agreements also state that the two sides will refrain from taking unilateral action, or use of force, to change the status quo of the boundary. Bhutan hopes that the status quo in the Doklam area will be maintained as before 16 June 2017.”

At the core of the dispute is the question of where the final tri-boundary point — the point at which India, China, and Bhutan meet — lies.

China argues that the India-China-Bhutan tri-junction is at Mount Gipmochi (Gyemo Chen), much south of Batang la, the place that India and Bhutan consider as the tri-junction.  China claims 89 sq km in Doklam (along Gamochen at the border, to the river divide at Batangla and Sinchela, and down to the Amo Chhu River) as its own.

But it is one of only four areas – as per Bhutan – over which China and Bhutan, who do not have diplomatic relations, have a dispute and have had 24 rounds of talks. China, however, claims much more than that and considers a total of seven areas as disputed areas.

China, it may be noted, has territorial disputes with virtually every neighbour of its. And if its conduct in the South China Sea and with Japan over Senkaku Islands is any indication, China does not really believe in giving in to other nation’s claims.

Therefore, much before the official press release by Bhutan, and just two days after the construction work by China began, on June 18, 2017, India sent around 270 troops, with weapons and two bulldozers and stopped the Chinese troops from constructing the road.

In a 15-page document released by the Chinese Foreign Ministry on the same day, Beijing said that “over 270 Indian soldiers, carrying weapons and driving two bulldozers advanced more than 100 meters into the Chinese territory to obstruct the road building of the Chinese side, causing tension in the area.”

It further accused India of raising the number of Indian soldiers to 400.

India’s ministry of defence, however, brushed aside the Chinese accusation of escalation and said that India has been maintaining 350-400 troops at Doklam ever since the stand-off began.

The Indian action is in accordance with the India-Bhutan Treaty of Friendship of 1949, which advocated India’s guiding role in Bhutan’s diplomatic and defense affairs.  Though the 1949 treaty was superseded by a new friendship treaty of 2007 that replaced the provision that made it mandatory for Bhutan to take India’s guidance on foreign policy.

The 2007 treaty provided broader sovereign rights to Bhutan by, for instance, not making it mandatory for Bhutan to take India’s permission in matters such as arms imports. But it did not alter much the inherent attached interests of the two nations.

Article 2 of the 2007 India-Bhutan Treaty says:

In keeping with the abiding ties of close friendship and cooperation between Bhutan and India, the Government of the Kingdom of Bhutan and the Government of the Republic of India shall cooperate closely with each other on issues relating to their national interests. Neither Government shall allow the use of its territory for activities harmful to the national security and interest of the other.

While sovereignty is the principal concern for Bhutan, the dispute for India beyond just the size of the territory in Doklam.

Picture Courtesy: Indian Defence Review

India is alarmed that if the Chinese do complete the motorable road in the Doklam area, it will give China an imposing access to India’s strategically vulnerable ‘chicken’s neck’ in the Siliguri Corridor, a 20km wide corridor that links India’s seven northeastern states to its mainland.

It may further be noted that Bhutan’s own administrative apparatus can get severely compromised if the Chinese inhabit Doklam as Bhutan’s communications network as it is connected through Siliguri in India.

At the moment, it is a stalemate. India is refusing to pull back its troops from the area that it says belongs to Bhutan. And China is threatening a bigger war every new day.

UPDATE:

As on August 28, 2017, India and China reached a consensus on disengagement of border personnel at the  faceoff site. A release by India’s ministry of external affairs said:

In recent weeks, India and China have maintained diplomatic communication in respect of the incident at Doklam. During these communications, we were able to express our views and convey our concerns and interests.

On this basis, expeditious disengagement of border personnel at the face-off site at Doklam has been agreed to and is on-going.

.

Categories
Huffington Post (UK) Journalism Sport World Diary

Chelsea Remains The Team To Beat

This article was first published on The Huffington Post (UK Edition) here.

If there was one message that rose above all the others after the engaging and edgy Premier League encounter between Tottenham Hotspurs and Chelsea at Wembley, it was that despite all the doomsayers pronouncements about disharmony and dejection at Stamford Bridge, the rest of the teams in the league would have to work desperately hard to take the trophy off Chelsea’s hands.

Chelsea’s defence organiser and captain Gary Cahill, midfield creator Cesc Fabregas and stand-alone genius Eden Hazard, were all missing – while new signing Tiemoue Bakayoko and last year’s hero Pedro were both far from 100% fit. Add to that a new boy up front, a new boy in the back three, and an old boy in a new position in the midfield – and you know why playing the last year’s runners-up was always going to be an exercise of having the back against the wall for Chelsea.

But that didn’t matter in the end. Because Chelsea proved to have something that only the real champions have – self-belief, tenacity, and an enormous sense of timing.

They went forward in the first seven or eight minutes and should have been a goal up if Morata had not missed a sitter by heading out a sublime cross by César Azpilicueta. Then, as they realised that Spurs were getting into the game, they decided to ‘allow their opponents to come to them’. And when got their second opportunity, they made the most of it with the man of the match Marcos Alonso scoring the first goal of the match via a sublime, world-class free kick. And then it was back in the trenches, till Mitchy Batshuayi scored an unfortunate own goal. With barely any time left, Chelsea went out again, got lucky because of first Hugo Lloris’ unfathomable throw straight down the middle and then bungling it decisively by letting Alonso’s shot from an angle under him.

That play was Chelsea manager Antonio Conte’s well thought-out switch to 3-5-2(Willian just behind Morata) from the last year’s 3-4-3.

The Italian had set up what is known as the catenaccio tactical system. In Italian, catenaccio means ‘door-bolt’, thereby implying closing any opportunities for the opponent to score. Well, one can argue that is another name for ‘Mourinho’s Parked Bus’. The difference is that in the case of Mourinho, it was a natural style for him for all seasons whereas Conte’s approach was a dire tactical response to a dire situation.

Conte used the catenaccio tactical system like most Italian teams are known (accused?) to use it – a counter-attacking option wherein the team sits back, hopes to get one or two chances to invade the opponent’s box, make use of the chances, and then apply the ‘door-bolt’ to things.

Mitchy almost spoiled it. But Alonso made sure that in the end, it worked out precisely as planned.

In other words, injuries, suspensions, and depleted squad size or not, Conte is not only aware of and open to a variety of tactical options but also has the ability to quickly drill them decisively into a team that has its own share of impetuous personalities. This, again, is something that only the real champions have in them.

The game on Sunday, the first-ever league game at the national stadium, typified the recent abrasive clashes between the London rivals. A red card looked round the corner at many stages of the match – with my Blues fans taking to social media to ask how Jan Vertonghen’s tackle on Victor Moses was any different from the one that saw Chelsea captain get a straight red in the match against Burnley. But it was amply clear to viewers that Chelsea players seemed to be under strict instructions from Conte to avoid getting a red fourth match in the running.

Just as one defeat was not the end of the world, one victory is not a panacea for Chelsea’s problems. The questions remain: Would Morata be able to fill the big shoes of Diego Costa? And hey, when is that saga going to end – before it starts affecting the dressing room in a major way? Is Bakayoko really an upgrade on Nemanja Matic? Where are the defence backups?

But if the victory at Wembley is anything go by, we can be sure that Chelsea are the champions of England not because of ideal circumstances of the previous season. They are champions because they can fight to win despite everything. And that’s why Antonio Conte’s Chelsea remains the team to beat.

Categories
Huffington Post (UK) Reflection

Death Of A Pet

This post was first published on the Huffington Post (UK) here.

The final resting place

As with most mornings, I was reading the newspaper in bed while my pet turtle Tobi was in the water in his transparent plastic container by our bedroom window. This was his hour of basking in ‘passive sunlight’. But something felt different. I noticed that he was in an unusually calm floating state for a bit.

I tapped the container near his head: “Tobi, what’s the matter, buddy?“

He immediately responded by opening his mouth in a threatening manner – it looked an image straight from the Jurassic Park. Now, he was always the feisty one, but this one was a first. “Rascal,” I cursed him lovingly and went on to my business.

A few minutes later, when I returned to the room, he was in almost the same state. I knew something was wrong. I picked him out of the water to have a close look. Nothing. I put him on a flat surface – and for the first time, his neck mimicked his body and rested – limp – on the surface. Normally, he would have pulled back his neck into his shell when being put on the floor.

It was time to rush to his doctor.

It happened all so quickly that it is not difficult to see his arrival as an event of yesterday.

My daughter has long been persistent about having pets at home. So it was only a matter of time before we brought ‘something’ home. Fortunately, though, we managed to pull her ambitions significantly back from dinosaurs (well, not quite), to make her agree to the smallest and, what we imagined to be, the most manageable pet – a 40-gram, two-month-old red-eared slider turtle (terrapin) that could live in a small glass flask.

We might as well have gone for fish, but turtle seemed more exotic. Such was the discerning passion!

But once we bought him home, it was love at the first movement – what with the little brat being a feisty mover both in water and across the floor. We named him Tobi Rawat.

Soon, our individual and collective days began with “Good Morning Tobi“ and culminated in “Good Night Tobi“. We would talk with him incessantly. We really believed that he understood it all, and responded precisely with his movements and – hell – even facial expressions.

None of us would feel alone at home as long as Tobi was there, well, somewhere in the house.

He was an absolute box office too. His method of basking in afternoon sun was the stuff of legends. He would rest his body on his bottom shell (‘Plastron’), stretch out all his four limbs in the air, pull out his neck to the maximum and then, almost with disdain towards us lesser mortals, turn the neck on one side. He would then stay like that for many minutes, oozing copious amount of well-earned arrogance. Such swagger!

And then, that morning, he rested still, floating in the water.

It was time to rush to his doctor.

Dr Mugdha Rakshit, founder of the Happy Pets Clinic and alumni of the Royal Veterinary College, University of London, was quick to sense it after taking Tobi in her expert hands.

“What happened,” she asked me, without caring much for a reply. “He’s no longer there“.

I was shocked beyond my wits.

Almost at that instant, as the doctor worked her seasoned fingers and palms on the little one, Tobi moved ever so slightly and then opened his mouth.

Yes, just the way he did that at home when I had tapped his container.

“He’s gasping. Not entirely with a lot of life left within,” explained the doctor.

It became difficult for me to forgive myself when she said that Tobi probably had left us 30-45 minutes ago.

Did I leave him to die in the water – when he perhaps was gasping for life? There is no way I could’ve guessed. He was a water species. He was in the water.

“Maybe there was an insect bite or something and there was a hypersensitive reaction to it, causing perhaps a paralysis that caused him to drown in water.”

Perhaps. No tests were carried out to ascertain the absolute cause.

I sunk to an unknown low for a couple of days.

The doctor has since suggested that we go for another one.

I’m not so sure about that one.

For starters, I’m not at a place currently in life – emotionally – where I can withstand more such losses.

That apart, I’ve never been a ‘pets type of a person’. I can’t say with any sort of conviction if that is because of any philosophical reservations that I might be having at the sub-conscious level.

For instance, writing in the Journal of Philosophy, Jessica Du Toit of the Department of Bioethics, National Institutes of Health, USA, asks the question, “Is having pets morally permissible?“

It reads in line with many other similar voices. Presenting ‘The Case Against Pets’, Rutgers (USA) law professors Gary L Francione and Anna E Charlton argue that “domestication and pet ownership violate the fundamental rights of animals.”

In her line of reasoning, Du Toit says:

“[…] we need to consider whether (a) pets are harmed as a result of their being pets and, if so, whether these harms outweigh the benefits; and (b) pets are wronged as a result of their being pets“.

The argument – or the premise, if you will – becomes quite pertinent in the light of the fact that our doctor kept on reminding us, “management is the key”. ‘Right amount of sunlight’, ‘freedom to choose between water and basking on rough stones’ etc formed the key to ‘management’.

I believe we did just as well as anybody with that. But did we do just as Tobi would’ve wanted it? Precisely as he would’ve wanted?

Who can ever tell? And that might be the whole point of Du Toit and her community.

Tobi was with us for barely 11 months. At the risk of embarrassing myself, I just don’t quite feel the same after him. He weighed 60 grammes, just about filled my palm, and – from what I am told – he, as a species, couldn’t have been too keen on human interaction either.

So what explains this sinking feeling?

Did he, with his presence, help me plug a hole within, somewhere?

Tobi, buddy, I miss you. You were my first.