So how do you begin to describe London? A city that goes more than a thousand years into history, has seen tragedies and renewal, hosted events of great proportions, been home to the first parliament of the modern era, been the colonial capital of the world and still continues to be a financial nerve center and a cosmopolitan menagerie in a Europe growing increasingly wary of external cultures.

A city of spiral staircases. That is what I would call it based on my experiences over a rapid weekend tourist tour of some of London’s major sights. To get a view of London city, you have to embrace the spirals. And it is not just a simple of matter of a few steps to get from one floor to another. To get a real bird eye view of London, you can circle around on the London eye or you can take, in my opinion, the slightly more romantic option of climbing 300 stairs of spiral case and reach the roofs of some of the city’s oldest standing structures.

Right at the center of London stands the St.Paul’s Catherdral. It is believed that a shrine to St.Paul, who was the most influential of early Christian missionaries, has stood at the sight since the early AD years. The current structure, modeled on the great basilica of the Vatican, was constructed in the 17^th century, after the Great Fire of London destroyed the then existing building. Located on Ludgate Hill, considered to be the highest point in terms of altitude in London, the cathedral was designed by Sir Christopher Wren, one of the principal architects behind the reconstruction of London post the great fire of 1666. The cathedral was to be the showpiece of the reconstruction efforts and was completed within Wren’s lifetime, achieving consecration in 1708.

Ludgate Hill is not the only aspect that provides height to St.Paul’s Cathedral. The church has three levels that you can choose to climb to capture a view from the heights. And here is where the spiral staircases come in. Take 259 spiral steps and reach the Whispering Gallery that runs inside the dome of the church. At 99 feet above the ground, you can soak in a grand view of the cathedral underneath or whisper something into a hole in the wall for your partner to hear from another hole many feet away.

The first spiral staircase leading up to the Whispering Gallery

A view of the Cathedral below from the Whispering Gallery

If that is not good enough, you can take another 119 narrower spiral steps to reach the Stone Gallery, which forms an outer perimeter of the dome. From here you a get 360 degree windy view of the city. Even on a cloudy day marked with incessant London drizzle, the great sights such as Big Ben, the London Eye, Tate Gallery, the Shard and Tower Bridge are easily visible. I had the privilege of standing at the gallery on a particularly typical cloudy and windy London day and had trouble holding on to my SLR camera as I tried to click away.

The steps leading up to the Stone Gallery

Millennium Bridge and Tate as seen from the Stone Gallery

At the Stone Gallery

And if vertigo has not struck you by then, soldier on and take another 128 steps on a narrow steel spiral staircase within the deepest interiors of the cathedral to reach the Golden Gallery. Located on the peak of the dome at 85 meters above the ground, the gallery has radius of just about 4 feet and finds it difficult to accommodate two people side by side. On a windy afternoon, managing your footing in that space can be quite tricky. The view of London from there though is worth the effort!

The steel spiral that leads to the Golden Gallery - highest point of the Cathedral

The Tower Bridge and the river Thames as seen from the Golden Gallery

At a slight distance from St.Paul’s Catherdral lies the next set of spirals. The great fire of London in 1666 destroyed virtually the entire town and presented a massive challenge towards reconstruction. 3 years after the fire, as a new London city came up, it was decided to ‘preserve the memory of this dreadful visitation’ in some manner. Christopher Wren was the architect again coming up with a design of a single stone column that stood at a height (62m) which was the exact distance from the spot where the fire had originally started. Built into the core of this structure, simply called ‘The Monument’, were 313 narrow spiral stairs that take you to a caged viewing platform at the top which offers panoramic views of London. On my climb, I came across young kids, old couples and young men and women all making their way slowly up the half lit staircase in an orderly fashion and it made me wonder why we can’t ever get the Archaeological Survey of India to open up the climb to Qutub Minar in Delhi again.

The Monument now stands in the middle of a busy office district

The sculpture at the top of the Monument depicts the concept of fire

And finally the spiral that contains 313 steps

Climbing up the monument is considered quite a feat and upon your descent, at the exit, a staffer hands you a mock certificate that states that the holder has climbed the steps to the top!

The spirals continue in many pockets of the Tower of London as well, the oldest structure in the city whose foundations were laid by the first English king, William the Conqueror in the 11^th century. The Tower was notorious through the ages for being a place of banishment and in certain unfortunate instances, even the site of executions (The most famous one being of the second wife of Henry VIII, Anne Boleyn).

London’s modern architects don’t seem to have forgotten the old inspiration. I made acquaintance with a spiral that leads to the cafeteria on my very first day in the office building. The stairs do give your head a dizzy tour and can pose a challenge for those challenged by the heights, but when you are exploring history that is four centuries old or trying to grab a bite of food in the middle of a busy office day, I think it is probably pointless to crib and more sensible to adopt a stoic English pose and just climb on.

Not to be outdone, the architects at my temporary office also added a touch of whirl

|

This article first appeared on the Big Show in December 2011. The link to the original post is here

In military circles it is often light heartedly remarked about Russia and Afghanistan that invading armies over the centuries passed by the skeletal remains of previous empires that had tried and unsuccessfully attempted to conquer those lands. In the cricketing context, it is perhaps an exaggeration to compare the unforgiving vastness of western Russia or the rugged and inhospitable mountains of Afghanistan with the pleasant and warm lands of coastal Australia. The analogy though begs the question – Is Australia the most difficult country to tour, especially for the sub-continent teams?

Statistically, Australia remains the team to beat at home. Its winning ratio over the last decade (2001-2011) is a staggering 74%. The years of total dominance in the first half of the last decade contribute significantly to this healthy number. This record at home becomes more respectable when compared with other major countries – In the same period, South Africa has a winning ratio at home of 57%, England of 61% and India itself of only 47%. Neither are Australia’s numbers bloated due to runaway successes against minnows. Its winning ratio at home in the analyzed time period against England and South Africa combined has been 67% (2 out of every 3 tests). Interestingly the only test series to have been lost at home have also been against these two countries – The 3-1 Ashes loss last year against England and a 2-0 defeat against South Africa in 2009.

For the sub-continent giants Pakistan and Sri Lanka, there has been little joy Down Under. Pakistan has lost all 6 test matches in the last decade and while Sri Lanka has only managed to draw 1 and lost the other 3. Yet, amidst all this carnage of numbers, one anomaly stands out. Against India, the Aussies have won 3, lost 2 and drawn the remaining 3 – that gives a win ratio of 38%. Against no other country at home has this number dropped below 65% for the last decade.

MS Dhoni’s team faces the expectations of maintaining this competitive posture and given the ‘perceived’ troubles with Australia in the recent times even go ahead and retain the Border-Gavaskar trophy that has been in their possession since the home series of 2008. Six months ago, this script seemed a fairly promising adventure; post England, the tale is now one of redemption. For India all the marketing jargon of ‘final frontier’ is now secondary. They must first prove to themselves and then to their fans that the ability to meet opposition head to head on foreign soil, the single biggest achievement of Indian cricket in the first decade of the 21^st century, is still alive and burning.

On each of their previous two tours, India punched above their weight. Man for man, their batting perhaps matched that of the Aussies but never have the bowlers looked as threatening as the home side’s. In 2004, Zaheer Khan showed a glimpse of his brilliance (5/95) at Brisbane before departing for the rest of the series. In 2007, he again flattered to deceive and after a 4 wicket haul in the opening test at Melbourne, missed the rest of the tour with an injured ankle. Another premier bowler, Harbhajan Singh, also missed 3 tests on the 2004 tour with an injured shoulder and made more noise off the field than on it on the 2007-08 trip. In Australia, in 4 tests, Harbhajan has taken 9 wickets at an unflattering average of 73. On both occasions, India discovered new bowling talents in Irfan Pathan and Ishant Sharma, rookies who came back home with enhanced reputations, but it was one man who held their bowling effort together and kept the Australian batsmen honest. For a spinner, Anil Kumble had two outstanding tours of Australia in 2003 and 2007 taking 24 and 20 wickets respectively at averages of 29 and 34. On both occasions, he was India’s leading wicket taker by a distance. In a country where away spinners leaked 46 runs for each wicket (since Jan 2006), Kumble with 44 wickets at an average of 35 is the leading wicket taker amongst spinners in Australia over the last ten years.

This time though India go without their holding and strike bowler of the last two efforts, which makes it absolutely imperative for the fragile ankles of Zaheer Khan and Ishant Sharma to last the distance in the Test matches. It would be a surprise and not an expectation for India’s bowlers to consistently bowl out Australia and it is their batsmen who would have to land the heavy blows to keep the team in the bout. It is on the continued success of Dravid, Tendulkar, Laxman, Ganguly and later on Sehwag that the positive results away from home were achieved. In Australia, Sehwag, Laxman and Tendulkar average above 54 while Dravid, despite a poor last tour, still averages 48. The batting order will feature two first time travelers this time – Gautam Gambhir and Virat Kohli, with Rohit Sharma who impressed in the ODI outings in Australia in 2008, as the first backup.

Unlike England, if India is to make a match of it in Australia, their batsmen have to make up for the deficiencies that their bowlers will perhaps frequently display. And therein lies the weight of India’s burden. Dravid has had a wonderful year and looks assured and settled. Laxman had patches of brilliance and Tendulkar has been laden with artificial mental burdens of late. Sehwag has only now struck form (and how!) and Gambhir averages below 30 in his last 25 test innings with no century to show. Buffering this line up are Kohli and Dhoni - for the first, this can be a career defining tour if he manages to avoid the fate that England dished out to Suresh Raina; for the second, this would perhaps be a visit where he may be required to play above his test average of 38. Indian batting faces a collective challenge which would demand the shedding of indifference and inconsistency and the adoption of bold and certain postures. The pitches would be quick, barring Sydney and the engine of Indian batting would have to chug into life quickly and swiftly. A slow start would only create the danger of a repeat of this summer, when more than the English bowlers, the lack of certainty and confidence of the batsmen did them in.

Facing India would be an Aussie side that has tasted victory against both South Africa and New Zealand recently, has discovered a new found depth in bowling riches and would in all probability have an in form Ricky Ponting awaiting India. The gaps would remain at the top and at the bottom – an opening combination that contains a Shane Watson unable to bowl at full effectiveness denies Australia the comfort of a quality all-rounder, and a rookie spinner in Nathan Lyon may not pose too many uncomfortable questions to the Indian batsmen. Barring that, Australia will come hard with (speed) guns blazing at India and will perform the basics in fielding and catching well.

For India, the story is familiar and yet slightly deviant. Their batsmen must win the big moments for them but this time they will perhaps be afforded lesser buffers of luxury by their injury prone and inexperienced bowlers. History can often be a strange companion. It can comfort, as the statistics in the opening part of this article indicate, or it can sow doubts and suspicions, as the memories of England this past summer may testify. India have fought Australia to a stalemate during their last two trips Down Under; its critical, for the sake of their immediate Test match future, that they leave a more promising legacy behind on this trip that what exists in the harsh battlefields of Russia and Afghanistan.

Statistics Source: espncricinfo.com

|