She was not the first one. In 2002 Champions trophy Set Max had tried with a model, who knew about cricket better than Mandira but had bad Hindi. Mandira was bought for Hindi speaking audience, which does not make sense as most analysts on panel were non Indians.
She's spot on when she said "they used to come back from school and watch Shanti and grew up to watch the world cup".. I didn't watch shanti but I remember watching the first episode.. Then for the 2003 world cup I was in class 10 giving my board exams. In the final when Australia made 359, the show mid innings her face said it all. Aaj toh India haarega.. But Kapil Dev tried to be like "It's not impossible!!".. If it was some other seasoned anchor they would've hid their disappointment but not Mandira... When Sourab said this was 16 years ago, I suddenly felt really old 😂😂😂.. I'm 31..
I'm 38, bro. So I feel your age pain. I honestly enjoy having some 'civilians' in these boxes just to normalise context - as much as I enjoy great analysis.
Sorabh, the question I would have liked you to raise is: in a country where women cricketers struggle to get due recognition, if sony tv wanted to broaden the audience to women , why not bring in women cricketer on the panel? .. truth is they wanted a pretty face who can talk reasonably smart ... it was sexist to begin with and not empowering women as she would like to think it was ...saying they wanted a “lay person “ is just to cover up the sexism of the decision .. she was probably not being taken seriously by the panel because she was a woman but she was not a credible woman; not just because she was a woman
2003 was fairly young days for women's cricket in India..Anjum Chopra probably retired from that first Bonafide generation of good women's cricket and joined the panels around 2007 or so..also, Sony wanted a familiar face e as presenter and a presenter's job is completely different from an analyst
@@rohitsaha9317 If they looked hard they would have found another person with the right knowledge but anyway like you said familiar face played a role and let's face it glamour works. That is what draws the crowds. If it was only sports then women's cricket would have been just as popular. Or hockey would have just as popular as cricket. But neither have the same glamour associated as with Men's cricket. Mandira had sincerity and brought some class with the glamour which is more than they could have asked for. She didn't deserve the criticism and vile comments she got.
@@dreamysap let's face it, the quality of gameplay is not even close to the same in Women's cricket as men(as of now)..if it had been like Badminton, Chess or even Tennis, I think it would have garnered more spotlight..but surely things are improving
@@rohitsaha9317 The quality will improve as more people take up the game. Which will happen with enough training, infrastructure and money and fame. Which will happen the more popular the game is. And it's a cycle.
With all due respect to Mandira, i think her stint delayed the entry of women in the studio. I think Sony got it all wrong. I remember watching the broadcasts and mandira came off as unprofessional. There is a space for layman hosts in sports broadcasts but mandira's role wasn't just taking bytes. If was painful watching her trying to keep up with experts. I think a mayanti langar is much more of a role model when it comes to women in cricket broadcasting. I was among the boys drawn to her because of the way she looked, i will admit. But beyond a point there was too much second hand embarrassment.
Viewership for the pre-match, lunch and post-match shows jumped considerably because of her presence. She was never there for expertise but, it worked esp. bringing more kinds of people watching cricket. And if you speak to female anchors who do sports now - they will tell you how she paved the way.
@@pantonfire maybe, but for a sports fan like me, it felt unprofessional. And as far as i remember it took a long time for a woman to host shows again. Maybe it was the experts who resisted or producers themselves shied away. But there was a period lost between mandira and mayanti. All i am saying is she should have been prepped better. Or someone more in the know should have been chosen. I blame Sony, not Mandira.
Jack Dowson 1. More views so more money which isn’t bad since even Sourabh needs to earn 2. Categorising will make it easier for people to find what they like, which otherwise wouldn’t be possible. Such as this topic would have attracted me but if Pant put a podcast with Madira Bedi then I wouldn’t have clicked as I am not her fan.
Full podcast w. Mandira here: anchor.fm/sorabh-pant
My Audible podcast on the lockdown: smart.link/5e2bu447wjlya
Bhai Kya mast chess khelte ho!!!!
Big fan!
@@aadityabehl3785 Hahaha. Sagar Shah is my mental mentor.
@@pantonfire I was also referring to ur comedy!!!
She was not the first one. In 2002 Champions trophy Set Max had tried with a model, who knew about cricket better than Mandira but had bad Hindi.
Mandira was bought for Hindi speaking audience, which does not make sense as most analysts on panel were non Indians.
She's spot on when she said "they used to come back from school and watch Shanti and grew up to watch the world cup".. I didn't watch shanti but I remember watching the first episode.. Then for the 2003 world cup I was in class 10 giving my board exams. In the final when Australia made 359, the show mid innings her face said it all. Aaj toh India haarega.. But Kapil Dev tried to be like "It's not impossible!!".. If it was some other seasoned anchor they would've hid their disappointment but not Mandira... When Sourab said this was 16 years ago, I suddenly felt really old 😂😂😂.. I'm 31..
I'm 38, bro. So I feel your age pain. I honestly enjoy having some 'civilians' in these boxes just to normalise context - as much as I enjoy great analysis.
She has made one hell of success stroy
Say whatever you want to,But Mandira was perfect for Extraaaaaaa Innings.If she returns,she'd kill it.
This is one of my favourite interviews ❤
Hey sorabh !! I m very tensed about my entrance exam ....what do u think will it be postponed or not ?
It will be postponed but you study like it hasn't been postponed that would really help and don't worry
Study because it's interesting and a challenge - if the exams happen or no, that puts you in a good place :).
Amazing reply 🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌
spot on Fraiser crane reference (y)
She is beautiful :)
came here for the hat n Mandira Bedi. If it was just the hat talking to Mandira, I would still watch it.
14:30 anu malik left the chat
I didn't know vinod kambli was this funny 😂😂
I think he is. This isn't kambli tho. Hence
. You know..
I've been this way since 1996.
@@pantonfire hahaha.. Sahi!
Sorabh, the question I would have liked you to raise is: in a country where women cricketers struggle to get due recognition, if sony tv wanted to broaden the audience to women , why not bring in women cricketer on the panel? .. truth is they wanted a pretty face who can talk reasonably smart ... it was sexist to begin with and not empowering women as she would like to think it was ...saying they wanted a “lay person “ is just to cover up the sexism of the decision .. she was probably not being taken seriously by the panel because she was a woman but she was not a credible woman; not just because she was a woman
Good point. In any case people should have gone after Sony rather than Mandira!
2003 was fairly young days for women's cricket in India..Anjum Chopra probably retired from that first Bonafide generation of good women's cricket and joined the panels around 2007 or so..also, Sony wanted a familiar face e as presenter and a presenter's job is completely different from an analyst
@@rohitsaha9317 If they looked hard they would have found another person with the right knowledge but anyway like you said familiar face played a role and let's face it glamour works. That is what draws the crowds.
If it was only sports then women's cricket would have been just as popular. Or hockey would have just as popular as cricket. But neither have the same glamour associated as with Men's cricket.
Mandira had sincerity and brought some class with the glamour which is more than they could have asked for. She didn't deserve the criticism and vile comments she got.
@@dreamysap let's face it, the quality of gameplay is not even close to the same in Women's cricket as men(as of now)..if it had been like Badminton, Chess or even Tennis, I think it would have garnered more spotlight..but surely things are improving
@@rohitsaha9317 The quality will improve as more people take up the game. Which will happen with enough training, infrastructure and money and fame. Which will happen the more popular the game is. And it's a cycle.
Love the pahadi hat!! :)
I love it too.
10:45
Literally everyone trying to understand what he just said
She maybe the pioneer by mayanti Langer has taken her place in cricket
Tum kya mast kaam karta hai Pant bhai
Maybe Mandira didn't get the show name cause it's Frasier not Fraser.
With all due respect to Mandira, i think her stint delayed the entry of women in the studio. I think Sony got it all wrong. I remember watching the broadcasts and mandira came off as unprofessional. There is a space for layman hosts in sports broadcasts but mandira's role wasn't just taking bytes. If was painful watching her trying to keep up with experts. I think a mayanti langar is much more of a role model when it comes to women in cricket broadcasting. I was among the boys drawn to her because of the way she looked, i will admit. But beyond a point there was too much second hand embarrassment.
Viewership for the pre-match, lunch and post-match shows jumped considerably because of her presence. She was never there for expertise but, it worked esp. bringing more kinds of people watching cricket. And if you speak to female anchors who do sports now - they will tell you how she paved the way.
@@pantonfire maybe, but for a sports fan like me, it felt unprofessional. And as far as i remember it took a long time for a woman to host shows again. Maybe it was the experts who resisted or producers themselves shied away. But there was a period lost between mandira and mayanti. All i am saying is she should have been prepped better. Or someone more in the know should have been chosen. I blame Sony, not Mandira.
feels good to be nice and early
20th comment: She's almost 50!
6:31
Dude, put entire podcast with a person at a time.
Jack Dowson 1. More views so more money which isn’t bad since even Sourabh needs to earn
2. Categorising will make it easier for people to find what they like, which otherwise wouldn’t be possible. Such as this topic would have attracted me but if Pant put a podcast with Madira Bedi then I wouldn’t have clicked as I am not her fan.
@7.35 Tony Greig
maybe at 15:38 it's Monica Bedi
possible, they both are of almost same age
Nope :). I know the answer.
@@pantonfire looks like it time to finally attend a Pant Standup and try to get the answer! xD
0:22, 2003 is also back in the day. I was born in 2003.
jordindian might know, who's MD they keep asking that in their songs.
Even i don't get who's gonna Watch Post match News Channel Show .
Mandira Bedi in Cricket..... was alright to be honest not thr best but also not the worst
Too dark, not you but the set.
Dude ...you need to take some serious fitness tips from her . 😂
look at her ...half of her age are still sleeping while she is working out...
wow 1 minute ago
Bhosra
MD..... Madhuri Dixit
First
Bhosar Pant
15:35 filler injections detected
🤣🤣 dude just say the name lol
She was truly horrible!!! Skin show thats all that was....