Himanshu Shekhar
Sachin Tendulkar’s contribution to improving Indian cricket is nowhere near his tremendous influence on it.
Whether one admits it or not, Tendulkar is synonymous to cricket. He is the heartbeat of millions of cricket fans across the globe. He is not a model; any more than, say, Neville Cardus was a model for aspiring cricket writers.
But my big grudge with Indian cricket’s biggest name is – unlike Cardus, who changed the course of cricket writing, Tendulkar has done little - apart from illuminating the craft that he practices - to shape the future of the game which has given him everything.
Here are a few examples.
The pro-DRS-camp has resigned to the fact that it will only take an umpiring error, which sends back Sachin at the score of 99, to convince the whole of India about the merits of the system.
To have or not have a DRS is a different debate altogether. But that statement, often made or written in a lighter vein, signifies the influence of Sachin Tendulkar in Indian cricket.
Going back to the parallels drawn with Cardus, unlike him, Tendulkar has always been an establishment figure.
It’s not that one asks him to get into an ugly fight, for the way he has conducted himself over the years has been nothing less than an inspiration. However, his silence on key issues concerning the administration and running of the game leaves people like me baffled.
No one expects an Amol Muzumdar or a Paras Mhambrey to come out in the open, voicing their opinion and get on the wrong side of the authorities.
But Tendulkar can. However, he never does it.
Take for example, the case of mindless number of IPL games. The tournament can easily be cut and re-sized into a format to give it meaning. Many have raised their concerns, but one has heard little from the Little Master. He carries huge respect in the dressing room. But, has he provided any kind of
leadership when it was actually required? The best thing he did in time of crisis was to step down as the India captain.
Last time Tendulkar reportedly took a stand, an entire tour was on the verge of being scrapped. Upset with the three-Test ban on Harbhajan Singh in the monkey-gate episode in Sydney, Sachin reportedly sent a message to Sharad Pawar, the then BCCI president: “In this hour of crisis, the board should stand by him. I suggest we should play in Perth only if the ban is lifted.”
The rest is history. The ban was toned down and the tour went ahead.
If Tendulkar cares for the reputation of cricket in India, or he bothers a little for the appalling state of India’s premier domestic tournament, the Ranji Trophy, he should voice his opinion. He has been oblivious to the running of the game when he could have done a lot.
It was no surprise that his childhood friend and cricket buddy Vinod Kambli broke down in tears, suggesting that Tendulkar could have done more. ‘‘We are very close... we were very close. He could have done a little more, but he didn’t,” Kambli was heard saying.
By no means has one suggested that Tendulkar should have meddled in the selection matters. Had Kambli actually taken some cue from his routine, the situation would have been different. But did Imran Khan wait for Inzamam-ul Haq to come to him and then offer advice? Doctors give advice. Leaders just motivate, inspire and push their men to achieve newer heights.
All these years he has never raised a voice against the powerful. India needs a systematic change as far as saving the game is concerned. But his silence on key issues grappling Indian cricket is getting to a disconcerting level. Will we ever see Sachin Tendulkar breaking the disciplined system-obliging image for issues which really matters to the cricketing world and India in general?
Centuries ago, English philosopher Sir Francis Bacon had a lot to say on human nature and virtues. “Silence,” Sir Francis claims “is the virtue of the fools.”
