Six Sri Lankan cricketers and their British assistant coach were wounded when gunmen attacked their bus as it drove under police escort to the Gaddafi stadium in Lahore.  Five policemen were killed.

The death toll was small by South Asian standards.  But what defined it -- beyond the audacity and apparent sophistication of the attack -- was the assault on the identity of a country where cricket, as in neighbouring India, is a national obsession.

"An ambush targeting the visiting Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore earlier this morning has literally sent waves of disbelief and shock across Pakistan," said a post on Metroblogging Lahore. "Citizens of Lahore are specifically terrified at the extent of sophisticated weaponry used by terrorists in an incident that caused unprecedented damage to the country's image and its cricketing future."

"Why can't we ever just have a slow news day ... every day there's something new," complained another post on Twitter.

South Asia is no stranger to violence, from the days of partition onwards. But there seems to me to be something qualitatively quite different in what is going on now, in which brutality and the alienation of the local population is not so much incidental but central to the method.

It's been there in the assault on traditional Pakistani music and culture, in the deliberately grisly videotaped beheading of a Polish geologist last month, in the targeting of girls' schools in the Swat valley and now in the attack on the Sri Lankan cricketers.

Even in darkest days of the Kashmir insurgency which set Pakistan and India at each other's throats you didn't see anything like this -- in fact one of the signs of normal life there came from boys out in the street playing cricket.  In Afghanistan, the hardline Taliban which banned most sports appear to have been less hostile to cricket, as Reuters Kabul correspondent Jon Hemming wrote in this feature about the country's fledgling national cricket team. I've even seen Pakistani soldiers spontaneously playing cricket the harsh terrain of the Siachen battlefield beyond Kashmir, bowling a few balls in the drizzling snow under the lee of steep mountain walls.

Pakistani officials are already speculating about Indian involvement in the attack on the Sri Lankan cricketers, in revenge for last year's assault on Mumbai.  This speculation will probably run and run -- it's echoing through comments on blogs and on Twitter. But it may obscure a more important point. When you attack a national institution like cricket, it's an expression of brute power, an assault on culture akin to the burning of books.

According to the Pakistani journalist Ahmed Rashid, quoted by the Independent: "I think this is a deliberate attempt to undermine the government at the time when there is a huge political crisis in the country. They are trying to create a vacuum of power in which eventually they can take over."

(Reuters photo: Pakistan's Salman Butt in match against Sri Lanka)

The Indian cricket board have worked hard to resurrect action on the field by persuading England to agree to return to complete a two-test series, offering all support to allay fears of their players for their safety.

The Indian media have been busy reporting the aftermath of the attacks and there has been furious debate in the British media whether it is proper for the England players to return to India this soon.

Whether sports should go on in turbulent times has been debated for ages. At the 1972 Munich Games, Olympics chiefs decided the show would go on despite Palestinian gunmen killing 11 Israeli athletes and officials.

Cricket teams are refusing to travel to Pakistan because of security concerns by teams in the wake of many suicide bombings.

Some even doubt whether the sub-continent can hold the 2011 World Cup.

Should cricket go on in India in the middle of the latest crisis? Can Indians turn their minds to their first love?

Instead, the ‘Prince of Kolkata’ was dismissed first ball in his final innings, becoming only the second cricketer after England’s Billy Griffith to score a century in his first test innings and a duck in his last.

India went on to win the test, sealing their first series victory over Australia in seven years. But Ganguly’s bid to go out with a bang had fizzled out.

Or so we thought.

After the match and the presentation ceremony, his admirers clamoured for the 36-year-old left-hander to come out of the players’ dressing room.

Ganguly obliged, took off his shirt and hurled it into the midst of his delirious fans.

It was a throwback to 2002 when a frenzied Ganguly took off his shirt and waved it from the Lord’s balcony after India achieved an improbable win against England in a one-day tri-series final.

Many felt the gesture simply reinforced Ganguly’s image as unpredictable and aggressive, although he appears to have mellowed since then.

At Nagpur, Ganguly showed his old flamboyance and popularity gained from elegant batting and leadership still remained.

Taking a final look at his fans, a bare-chested Ganguly walked off into the dressing room.

He had signed off in style.

Australia are suffering much more by the retirements of Glenn McGrath, Shane Warne and Adam Gilchrist than they would admit. Their replacements have come nowhere near making an impact on the game.

Their leading batsman Matthew Hayden has repeatedly failed and express paceman Brett Lee was so bad he was not given a bowl an entire session in the Indian second innings in Mohali.

Australia’s meticulous planning has also been called into question.

Their batsmen fell to the swing bowling of Zaheer Khan and Ishant Sharma while their bowlers have struggled to find any movement.

Captain Ricky Ponting admitted his team were outplayed in Mohali and was confident the number one test team would bounce back. A week’s break is expected to help the tourists pick up the pieces but will they really be a force in the Delhi test starting on Oct. 29?

India are favourites to win the Delhi test and clinch the series.

Is this Australian side capable of finding the answers?

His feats on the cricket pitch were the stuff of legend. He averaged 100 runs every three innings and by the time he retired in 1948 his test batting average was a record 99.94 -- perhaps the most famous number in cricketing history.

The world has seen some remarkable records broken over the past week at the Olympics in Beijing -- do you think it is likely that Bradman's 99.94 will ever be bettered? Can any modern batsman even compare?

The best days of modern greats like Sachin Tendulkar and Ricky Ponting appear over, but could England's great hope Kevin Pietersen catch up and overtake that magic average?

His victory in the 10m air rifle after a tense finish on Monday spoke volumes about his composure and has given his team mates the confidence they can go on and claim more medals in Beijing to shake off the unwanted tag as a “one-medal” nation.

While Bindra’s success is being toasted as a great sporting moment in India, it will also go a long way to help prove the country is much more than a cricketing nation.
His triumph ironically came on a day when the cricketers slumped to an eight-wicket defeat in Colombo, handing hosts Sri Lanka a 2-1 series victory following another batting debacle.

So, will Bindra’s effort inspire cricket-mad Indians to look beyond cricket and push them to excel in other sports?

Overnight leading golfer Jeev Milkha Singh, in superb form this season, almost did the unthinkable after he finished in the top 10 of a major when he tied for ninth in the USPGA championship.

Much needs to be done in terms of sports administration and infrastructure, but have the seeds of future success beyond the cricketing fields been sown?

Their innings and 239-run defeat on a good Singhalese Sports Club ground pitch saw a line-up boasting Virender Sehwag, Rahul Dravid, Sachin Tendulkar, Saurav Ganguly and VVS Laxman bundled out twice around four sessions of play.

Off spinner Muttiah Muralitharan, test cricket’s highest wickettaker, captured 11 wickets, but Indian batsmen were also clueless against debutant Ajantha Mendis, who snapped up eight with his mysterious mix of deliveries.

Indian batsmen have struggled under pressure against off spin in the past, contrasting with their command against leg break bowlers, including Shane Warne.

In Colombo, even the wristy Laxman misread the subtle googly from Mendis twice while Dravid looked even more unsure.

With the batting heavyweights towards the final stages of their careers, the concern in the Indian camp is understandable, Mendis having ripped through their younger set of batsmen in the Asia Cup final, scalping six for next to nothing.

Former batsman Sanjay Manjrekar acknowledges the challenge.

“Indian cricketers have traditionally been good players of spin but that doesn’t mean the current or future generation of cricketers will continue to be so,” he said on cricket website www.cricinfo.com.

“In fact the batsmen who have been part of the side since 2002-03 have been better players of fast bowling than the batsmen in the 90s.”

Dravid says one has to be a very good player of spin to break into the national side but then the demand changes.

“When you got into the Indian team, you had to become a good player of fast bowling to survive at that level,” the Deccan Herald newspaper quoted him as saying.

“Over time, playing so much fast bowling, focussing so much on that, some of the ways in which I played spin probably changed,” he says. “I used to be a lot more positive against spin.

Are the soft hands, supple wrists and deft footwork becoming a thing of the past for India? The second test starting in Galle on Thursday should provide some answers.

Their confidence will come from the sheer experience among their batsmen and their consistency in tests playing abroad in the last two seasons.

However, they will have to play aggressively if they are to overcome Sri Lanka, always tough to beat at home with the slow pitches not very different from those in India.

India’s modest record in Sri Lanka, where they lost 2-1 the last time way back in 2001, will surely play in their minds.

However, they have a few things going for them.

Although wicketkeeper Mahendra Singh Dhoni, the one-day captain and leggie Anil Kumble’s deputy in tests, has pulled out citing fatigue, the team have the personnel to step into that breach.

Dinesh Karthik, his likely replacement, is rated a better ‘keeper while Virender Sehwag, the vice-captain, is vastly experienced and will be motivated by the fact that his batting form is superb and he can show his leadership qualities to provide the selectors an extra captaincy option for the future.

Sachin Tendulkar, back after another injury layoff, will be determined to get the 172 runs that will carry him past Brian Lara’s record for most test runs.

However, the real battle could be between Sri Lanka’s formidable batsmen and the Indian bowlers.

Sri Lanka skipper Mahela Jayawardene, Kumar Sangakkara and Sanath Jayasuriya (he could return from test retirement for his first test in seven months) are in splendid form.

Sri Lankan batsmen have traditionally played Kumble well and Harbhajan Singh, has the tendency to lose rhythm if he does not take an early wicket.

On the other hand, Sri Lanka’s unorthodox spinner Ajantha Mendis, who sliced through the one-day line-up in the Asia Cup final, could be a challenge at least early on in the series, bowling in tandem with the wily Muttiah Muralitharan.

That means India, at best, may have to be content with a series draw.

Also, at 40-50 million rupees a year (about $1 million), he was a tad pricey.

Pepsi, which recently also parted ways with former captains Rahul Dravid and Saurav Ganguly, has signed on such young cricketers as Ishant Sharma and Rohit Sharma for its "youngistan" campaign, targeted at a younger demographic in a country where half the population is below the age of 25 years.

At least one ad in the new campaign features Shah Rukh Khan, the 42-year old super star, although in the role of an older -- the glasses are the giveaway -- guardian to the young actor Deepika Padukone and beau Ranbir Kapoor.

So are ageing movie stars surer bets than ageing cricketers? Tough question in a country that's obsessed equally with both. But there are some telltale signs.

Ever heard of an actor's house being vandalised after a movie bombed at the box-office? Even Dhoni has had his home attacked after recent defeats.

In the world of celebrity advertising, marketers appear to have a lemming-like approach to cricket: one big knock or wicket haul has them all beating a path to the door of the cricketer du jour, with the result that the recent Twenty20 extravaganza was a blur of cricketers on field and off it, endorsing everything from styling gel to lubricants.

But cricketers are at the mercy of our board, which adds and axes at will, and advertisers are known to have "escape clauses", particularly for younger players, that allows them to abandon a contract if the player is say, dropped from the national team.

Tendulkar, whose roster includes Adidas, Airtel, TVS Motor and Aviva, has been a top endorser for more than a decade, considered a lifetime in the notoriously fickle ad industry.

Some argue it is the uncertain nature of cricket that forces our players to embark on a seemingly exhausting round of endorsements.

Bollywood stars are equally non-discriminating, smiling for products ranging from luxury watches to fountain pens.

But who leads the crop there? Khan and the Big B, our evergreen hero, who command the highest prices, and between them endorse about two dozen brands.

What does SRK or the Big B have that a Tendulkar or a Ganguly don't?

"It does seem counter-intuitive, if brands say they want to connect with the youth, and there are so many younger actors to choose from," said Sumanto Chattopadhyay, executive creative director for south asia at Ogilvy & Mather.

"But clearly, SRK's not perceived as old, and no one else has that kind of superstar power."

So while Khan and Bachchan senior can be assured of a long inning, our cricketers have to resign themselves to even shorter stints as endorsers, he said, because of "overexposure" from the sheer amount of cricket they play, and because younger players are popping up with a greater frequency.

How about some sympathy -- and some change -- for our boys in blue.