Heads and Helmets

This post is with respect the High Court inspired move to enforce wearing of helmets in Chennai from June 1st. I think a lot of people took it seriously (for their own good) and bought helmets in the run-up to the D-Day. Media, particularly the FM stations played a part in encouraging people to buy helmets. On June 1st, when I was driving to office, I saw that most of the two wheeler riders (say 90%) were wearing helmets. I could guess that many of them have just bought helmets because the helmets looked new & shining. I thought it was a great beginning. Next day came the news that Chief Minister (CM) has asked police not to enforce the law strictly and soon you could see that most of the people on the road were not wearing helmets. It was disappointing. I for one, couldn't understand the rationale. Well you either enforce the law or don't. What is that don't enforce strictly! People naturally took the hint and soon things were same as before. Then came the change to the law that Women & Children are exempted. Why is that.. don't they have heads too!! every day you read in newspapers about fatal accidents and in most two-wheeler fatalities, the rider was not wearing helmet. In fact, a few months ago, a friend of mine died in a accident. He was sitting in the pillion and he did not wear a helmet.
I didn't hear or read about any major opposition from the people to the helmet wearing enforcement in the first place. Only a few politicians seem to oppose it. So why!!
I would say Leadership is not about pleasing everyone. Its about taking right decisions, even if it is unpopular with people. Eventually good decisions will be recognised by people and will become part of the legacy.
I just hope that whoever bought the helmet will continue to use it.

Federer's road to Greatness is through Nadal

This one is for the tennis folks. I am writing this after watching the French Open final yesterday. It was not a bad match, but considering the high expectations of Federer, it was disappointing. Like many, I was hoping for a Federer win, but anyway felt Nadal won't give up easily. Federer had many chances, but he did not take it. He strengths like serves & forehand deserted him and Nadal anyway was hammering him on his backhand. What was disappointing was that Federer did seem to put him much of a fight.. atleast his body language didn't suggest so. He had that look of a beaten man long before the match ended. Having said this, Nadal is a worthy Champion and he deserved the French Open. Almost everybody agrees that Federer is hugely talented, probably having the best game ever. But it is almost like he expects the opponents to rollover in awe (like Royalty), which anyway seemed to be mostly happening so far in other surfaces. He hasn't needed to try too hard. But clay is a different ball game and Nadal the reigning champion is not going to give up a inch and he has that warrior mentality who seem to treat every point as a life and death issue. It is clear that, for Federer, the road to French Open title will have to pass through Nadal. How he deals with this will define his legacy. There is already talk of whether Federer is the greatest player to play all time. I think it is meaningless. You have to be the greatest player in your time, then only you become for all-time. Greatness is not only about winning, but how you react to pressure and challenges in you way and overcome it. In that sense, Federer has some distance to cover.