Sunil Gavaskar gave India a newfound respect in international cricket

By H Natarajan

He was India's greatest batsman but Sunil Gavaskar's legacy to Indian cricket goes beyond batsmanship. He instilled in the Indian cricketer a pride, and ushered in an era of professionalism. His authoritative presence earned India a newfound respect in international cricket, and its cricketers the means to a good living.

When Gavaskar came into the Indian team in 1971 players got Rs 750 per Test; by the time Gavaskar moth-balled his kit, it had increased by at least ten times. Today's cricketers have Gavaskar to thank for their astronomical match-fees.

Gavaskar stood up for what he believed in and didn't have any qualms about taking on the establishment or the established: recall him calling the selectors court jesters, his firm stance against umpiring in Pakistan, and his face-off against Dennis Lillee in Australia.

More often, however, his bat did the talking. In 1971, Gavaskar was a 21-year old lad on his maiden Test tour. By the end of the Caribbean tour in 1971, the world saw evidence of a cricketing legend in the making: he made an astonishing 774 runs from four Tests. He was a key figure in some of the fourth innings epics in cricket history: 102 out of 406 for 4 in Port-of-Spain - the highest by a team to win a Test; 90 out of 347 against Australia at Madras in Tied Test II; and 221 out of 429 for 9 in a historic draw against England at the Oval in 1979.

Gavaskar was consistent against all opposition and in all conditions. He played in what could be called the Golden Era of fast bowling, when coming up against the likes of Dennis Lillee, Jeff Thomson, Andy Roberts, Michael Holding, Malcolm Marshall and Imran Khan was routine. The traditional struggle of India's flat-track bullies overseas even against average bowlers should put Gavaskar's worth in perspective. Significantly, he never wore a helmet in his career.

Gavaskar's overseas average is better than that at home, while 18 of his 34 hundreds have come abroad. He finished with 13 hundreds against West Indies a figure most batsmen would be happy with against all comers. The most memorable among those 13 must be the blistering 94-ball century at Delhi in 1983-84 that saw him catch up with Don Bradman's tally of 29th Test centuries.

Initially Gavaskar looked out of sort in one-day cricket but he eventually adapted. He led India to victory in the world Championship of Cricket in 1985 and over shadowed his partner Krishnamachari Srikkanth at Nagpur to score 85-ball hundred in the 1987 World Cup.

The maestro's sense of timing was immaculate. His last Test innings was also arguably his finest - 96 in the fourth innings on a beast of a wicket at Bangalore against Pakistan in 1986-87. In his penultimate one-day innings he struck a century. In his final first-class match he made 188 against a World Xl at Lord's on the occasion of the MCC Bicentenary. His exit was as delightfully scripted as his entry. It was a fitting goodbye from the Kohinoor among India's cricket jewels.

(The above article appeared in the Outlook magazine dated July 8, 2002 when Sunil Gavaskar was one of the nominees for the Electrolux Kelvinator Wisden Indian Cricketer of the Century Award. The article is reproduced in the author’s blog as a tribute to Gavaskar on his 60th birthday)

Grass greener on the other side of Wimbledon for Henin

By H Natarajan

She did not possess the glam quotient of Maria Sharapova, the height advantage of Venus Williams or the muscular power of Serena Williams nor was there hype and hoopla around her. Physically, she was small in build and short in inches. But in a sport where it’s an accepted belief that size does matter, Justine Henin disproved that theory by showing that it’s not size but stature that matters. And in terms of stature, she was towering.

Justine Henin was the “best of her generation” as the legendary Billie-Jean King proclaimed. Henin was just 25, No 1 in the world and on the threshold of attempting a fourth straight title triumph on the red clay of Roland Garros. So why this shocking exit at this young age and when right on top?

Walking away from a life that has given it all – name, fame, mega wealth and all the other trappings that come with high-voltage success and celebrity lifestyle – is never easy. It’s not easy even one hears the disturbing creaks of a body showing the effects of wear and tear. Here, too, Henin underlined that she was in a league of her own with her stunning decision to give it up all at the prime of her career and when she had plenty left in the gas tank. Her decision was reminiscent of the great Bobby Jones who bid farewell 78 years ago after becoming the only golfer to win the Grand Slam or, as it is also known, the "The Impregnable Quadrilateral". Jones was just 28 years old.

The “Big W” was the only major missing from Henin’s seven Grand Slam and she could well have delayed her decision by a month to have a final crack at the premier grass court event in the world. The shocking and untimely finality of her decision was hard to accept.

It was about rediscovering lost joys and unfulfilled ambitions that she perceived as having more life than pure professional pursuits. As she explained: “I’m going to appreciate going for a run with nothing at stake, just doing it for pleasure. I’ve never put my feet in skis, and next year I think I’ll be doing it the whole winter. I want to rediscover the small pleasures, not look at my watch all the time because I have to get to training the next day.”

There are enormous personal sacrifices to make in the run-up to becoming a champion and the price to pay is very high at times. Champions usually start very young and have to lead life away from the emotional cocoon of their families. The coaches are the parents and the playing arena their homes. And these homes require young hopefuls to undergo killing schedule and unflinching discipline. Small pleasures and comforts that most children in the world outside take for granted have to be sacrificed in pursuit of their goals. This has its adverse effects.

In the case of Henin, the price, tragically, was a bit too high than most. She lost her mom to cancer at the young age of 12, got estranged with her dad for a while, had to live through the horrors of losing almost losing another family member when her brother met with a car accident and had to endure the pangs of a failed marriage. Her personal life was a mess. Retirement was probably her way of getting the balance right in her life, getting a life outside the five star hotel rooms and tennis courts around the world.

After finishing as the World No 1 for three years, after winning four French Open, two US Opens, one Australian open and finishing runner-up twice at Wimbledon, after clinching 41 titles on the WTA Tour and after pocketing the Olympic gold and after raking in nearly $20 million on the tour, Henin must have reached saturation point.

“Maybe people will think I'm still young, but in life there are no rules...There is a page that turns today and I feel no regrets. On the contrary, it's more like a release, more like a relief, more of a look toward the future." Indeed. Henin made her own rules: be it defying and triumphing against the odds as a five-feet, five-inch, 57-kg player pitted against six-foot-plus giants like Lindsay Davenport, Venus Williams and Maria Sharapova or keeping faith with one coach for 11 long years. And she is leaving on her own terms.

"This is the end of a child's dream," she said while announcing her retirement. And not winning Wimbledon is no big deal; the grass on the other side of Wimbledon is greener for Henin.

Fair play and justice take a ‘free hit’

By H Natarajan

Those who believe that there is no sense of fairplay and justice in this world need not look beyond the happenings in the Indian Premier League (IPL).

First there was the furore created by the presence of cheerleaders. I have no issues with the cheerleaders; the IPL brand of T20 cricket has a carnival touch to it and the splash of glitz and glamour is not out of place and especially appeals for the younger generation. But what hurts is: How can the moral police justify the presence of the cheer girls in public when the bar girls have been stopped from earning their livelihood through dancing in private. The bar girls were fully clothed from top to bottom compared to the revealing outfits that we get to see in high-profile places, especially in the metros, and kept their distance from customers while dancing. Yet, the state government deemed, in their sense of judgment, that what was happening was vulgar and needed to be banned. It was an action that drove thousands of families, including young children and old parents depended on the salaries of the dancers, to great miseries. Many of the bar dancers ended up committing suicides.

The cheer girls, in comparison to the bar dancers, wear skimpy outfit and showing copious skin. Most importantly, it’s been done in a public place frequented by even young children. Now, if the alien culture of cheer girls is okay, why discriminate our desi bar girls? The question is relevant to cricket because RR Patil, the State Home Minister who is also the second in command to CM Vilasrao Deshmukh, is from the National Congress Party headed by Mr Sharad Pawar, who is also the chief of the Board of Control for Cricket in India.

Of course, Patil – he wears the tag of “Mr Clean” and is otherwise a refreshingly different from most politicians and is– would like to point out (and possibly rightly, too) that some of the bar dancers are also doubling up as call girls. But the point is: Were they guilty of that in the place they were dancing? If so, then they girls and the bar owner should have been arrested and the bar closed. To condemn the entire profession for the ‘sins’ of a few was a bit too much. The sad irony is that many of the girls who were making an honest living by merely dancing were forced to take up prostitution to feed their families.

Justice was not seen to be done again when Charu Sharma was sacked as the Chief Executive of Bangalore Royal Challengers – a convenient scapegoat – when the guys who were mainly responsible for the poor showing escaped the guillotine. The flamboyant Vijay Mallya, the owner of the Challengers, has gone on record to say that he regretted not being involved in the selection of the team at the auction and went by the judgment of Charu and captain Rahul Dravid.

Who can pull up Mallya for his own mistake which he has admitted himself? And does Mallya have the cricketing expertise to select international players? Most importantly, his statement unambiguously reveal that his team has been let down at the very selection stage itself which Dravid was principally responsible. Yet, Dravid escapes the axe while Charu cops it! Reportedly, coach Venkatesh Prasad, too, would have been shown the exit, but for Dravid’s intervention.

Clearly, there is a miscarriage of justice in both of the cases mentioned above.

And indications are that there are attempts to get Harbhajan Singh off the hook or, at worst, relatively lightly for an offence which has a maximum penalty of life ban. The BCCI has appointed an enquiry commissioner, Sudhir Nanavati, to probe the off-spinner’s slapping of a fellow-player on the field of play. And Nanavati had revealed that the footage of the incident was shocking while match referee Farokh Engineer went on record while telling journalists that "what actually happened is a lot more serious than you guys think." Yet, the probe may prove to be a waste of time and money with Harbhajan, at best, escaping with a slap on the wrists. Rashid Patel and the late Raman Lamba copped 13 and 10 months bans respectively after a disgraceful, on-field fight during a 1991 Duleep Trophy. Harbhajan actually slapped an India team-mate. If he is let-off with anything less than at least the tenure of ban slapped on either Patel or Lamba, the BCCI would not be seen in good light. Yes, there would be pressure on the BCCI to reprieve Harbhajan who is a key member of the Indian team, but it’s equally important to send a resounding message across – especially to players who may think that they can get away with anything because of their status.

The happening in recent weeks reminds me of what George Orwell, the great English novelist and essayist, had said: “Serious sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up with hatred, jealousy, boastfulness, disregard of all rules and sadistic pleasure in witnessing violence. In other words, it is war minus the shooting.”

Cricketers who shed blood, sweat … and tears

By H Natarajan

The sight of sporting heroes shedding tears often leaves an indelible mark in our minds because we assume these men to be granite strong - physically and mentally. Breaking down publicly is something we perceive as alien to their personality. We assume our heroes to be supermen, but behind the public veil they are almost as normal as anyone else. They may be super in their skills but they are as human as anyone else when it comes to emotions.

Sreesanth underlined the fact when he sobbed before live television cameras. It may well have been a scene from boys playing cricket in the neighborhood than the high-profile Indian Premier League – the playground of the most celebrated cricket talent in the world. The world has seen Sreesanth wearing the garb of a tough cookie, almost a bully - a David willing to take on towering Goliaths like Andrew Symonds and Andre Nel. Yet one tight slap across his face brought down the veil of Sreesanth’s tough image along with torrent of tears.

The young paceman is not the first cricketer to break down in public, though he may be the first to cry publicly for physical assault. There have been many, many instances in the past when cricketers have cracked under emotional stress.

One of the earliest known instances of a cricketer crying publicly was during the 1967 India-West Indies Test at Calcutta (as Kolkata was known then). The Eden Garden was bursting at the seams after local authorities sold more tickets than there were seats. Predictably, trouble erupted and the players had to run for their personal safety. As the mob let out its fury, speedster Charlie Griffith - a hulk of a man – ran for his life. He thought that the crowd was out to kill him in retaliation for ending Nari Contractor’s international career on India’s 1961-62 tour of the West Indies. The big-made Barbadian was reportedly crying as he ran, when in actual fact the spectators were trying to help him get to the safety of Grand Hotel after pockets of the stadium went up in flames on New Year’s Day.

Peter Lever, also a fast bowler, was another to experience distress after he had pole-axed Test debutant tail-ender Ewen Chatfield with a short ball. It hit Chatfield on the temple as he staggered and collapsed. He lost consciousness and was twitching and moaning. His heart had stopped. But for the timely intervention of England physio Bernard Thomas, Chatfield would have been dead. Lever, meanwhile, was on his knees crying bitterly. "I honestly thought I had killed him as I saw him lying there in convulsions. I felt sick and ashamed at what I had done and all I could think when I got back to the pavilion was that I wanted to retire." Mercifully, Chatfield survived and went on to enjoy a fairly long Test career.

A fast bowler broke down yet again in public – this time at Sydney in 1975. Michael Holding, playing just his third Test, saw the umpire Reg Ledwidge turned down a caught behind shout off his bowling against Ian Chappell. The young Jamaican could not contain his disappointment and burst into inconsolable tears and had to be comforted by Lance Gibbs who rushed in from gully.

International sports brings with it enormous stress and none feels it more than the captain as the buck finally stops with him. Australia had lost 0-3 against the West Indies in West Indies and followed that up by being 0-2 down at home. Kim Hughes, the Australian captain, was under pressure and he could take it no more. He walked into a press conference and announced his resignation as captain from a prepared statement, but could not finish reading it completely as he broke down in tears.

Indian men are generally known not to cry in public, but Dilip Vengsarkar proved to be among the exceptions after his valiant effort to give Mumbai victory in the 1990-91 Ranji Trophy final ended in the narrowest of failure – a two-run defeat – against Haryana. Vengsarkar was heart-broken at the other end on 139 after last man Abey Kuruvilla was run out. The sight of Vengsarkar sobbing and taking a long time to make his way into the gloom of the Mumbai dressing room is still fresh in my memory.

Vengsarkar’s Mumbai team-mate, the maverick Vinod Kambli, was another to break down publicly after match referee Clive Lloyd declared that India had defaulted its 1996 World Cup semi-final against Sri Lanka at Eden Garden after the hosts failed to quell the crowd trouble that had erupted following India’s capitulation during the run-chase.

Another of India’s legendary cricketer, the tough Kapil Dev Nikhanj, famously broke down inconsolably on the Karan Thapar TV show, `Hardtalk India,' after he was accused by a team-mate, Manoj Prabhakar, of having sold himself to bookies. It was one of the most unbelievable and sad sights to see the strong fast bowler crying bitterly – his words an incoherent mess in the emotional turmoil.

The betting and match-fixing saga saw another public outburst when Hansie Cronje cried during his confessions before the King Commission in Cape Town. Cronje was another physically huge man and a superstar, but when emotions reach a critical point, it can break down the strongest of men.

One of the saddest displays of emotional outburst was when Adam Gilchrist broke down during a Test match in South Africa. One of the most loved and respected players in the world, Gilchirst broke down under the onslaught of rumors alleging sexual liaison between his wife Mel and Australian team-mate Michael Slater. A website published that Slater had an affair with Gilly’s wife Mel and went on to question the paternity of the couple’s child, Harrison.

Gilchrist penned his thoughts in his book, Walking to Victory: "I felt sick in the stomach. It was the start of the toughest period in my life. Mel was at home with three-month-old Harry, so we couldn't even be there for each other. Whatever I suffered, it was many times worse for Mel -- having her integrity abused like that when she is not even a public figure. “

Gilchrist said his emotional churn peaked in the course of his double hundred in the first Test against South Africa. “On reaching my ton, I did not know whether to jump for joy or give a determined 'up yours' to the crowd and whomever it was who had started the rumour. In the end, I had no control over my reaction. I simply ran off the wicket, raised my bat to acknowledge the team and the support staff, felt the emotions bubble up and squatted with my head down. It was the first time I remember crying on the cricket field."

The Gilchrist couple went on to sue the website and the matter was subsequently settled out of court.

Retirement is another time when a player faces emotional upheaval of having to leave the turf that has given him so much for him and his family for many, many years. Leaving all that and going into a whole new world is a life death for many. Even a big man like Inzamam-ul-Haq could not bottle up his emotions till he reached the privacy of the dressing room when he cried publicly when given a guard of honor in his farewell ODI.

As the Jewish proverb goes, what soap is for the body, tears are for the soul.

Tears are perfectly natural and shows the human side of the mega stars.

Harbhajan & Sreesanth – Brothers in harm

H Natarajan

If Harbhajan Singh’s audacious assault on Sreesanth in full public view and before TV cameras exposed him as a spoilt brat, then the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) also stands culpable as an erring parent failing to reform a wayward child. The Board has not only been tolerant but, worse, defended the off-spinner’s outrageous behavior in the past.

Bhajji’s slap was not merely on Sreesanth but on the BCCI as well. Harbhajan, in turn, was ‘slapped back’ with a 11-Indian Premier League (IPL) match ban worth Rs 2.7 crore, but the BCCI could add a further five-Test or 10 One-day International (ODI) ban as per the ICC sanction, but who will chastise the BCCI for its own failure as a parent?

The late Hanumant Singh was the first to point a finger at Harbhajan’s misdemeanor by throwing him out – along with two others – of the National Cricket Academy. If Hanumant, suave, cultured and fair, could be provoked to take a tough action against a youngster, then it was an indication of the players’ indiscipline. The then NCA director NCA reportedly told a friend: “I would like to be proved wrong on this, but my experience says he (Harbhajan) will be an embarrassment to the nation.” Prophetic words.

Sreesanth may have subsequently called Harbhajan his ‘older brother’ and the off-spinner may have hugged his ‘younger brother’ at the hearing before the match referee. These histrionics were purely for the camera men – just like the Greg Chappell-Sourav Ganguly posings at the pool table in Zimbabwe. Make no mistake, the episode involving the two loose cannons will have a huge impact on the Indian team when the two share the same dressing room the next time they turn out next for a Test or ODl.

Harbhajan has his strong supporters within the team and they will certainly not take it kindly to the fact that it was Sreesanth’s provocation which triggered the ugly turn of events. Sreesanth is a known baiter, a habitual offender and someone who has scant respect for anybody (seniors or juniors, opposition or team-mates) when he is in the mood to show his abominable aggro – which is just about every time. Harbhajan may have copped the punishment, but it’s Sreesanth who is likely to face the heat of the Indian dressing room. I for one will not be surprised if he is treated like a pariah by his Indian team-mates.

Bhajji’s slap tore apart the façade of toughness that Sreesanth’s portrays on the field when he sobbed liked a child on copping it on the face.

It seems increasingly evident that quite a few in the present Indian team are unable to handle their instant fame and money and are acting in a fashion that’s unquestionably detrimental to the health of millions of impressionable young minds watching them on TV and at the grounds. The escalating rise in aggression, now leading to physical violence, is clearly getting out of hand. While nobody advocates Munnabhai-style Gandhigiri, no right-minded person would also like to see boorish behavior, totally alien to Indian culture. Players like Sachin Tendulkar, Anil Kumble and Rahul Dravid are tough blokes without finding the need to indulge in disgraceful antics like his doing pelvic-jigs, making faces that suit Ramsay’s horror films than a cricket field, or indulging in ridiculous theatrics – all of which the exhibitionist Sreesanth has been guilty of.
Sreesanth’s needling cannot be condoned and needs to be penalized with exemplary punishment. But there is no excuse for anybody – least of all a player with ten years international experience – to lose control of himself the way Harbhajan did. Bhajji’s act has weakened an already depleted Mumbai Indians. Worse, it has brought the team loads of negative publicity. Harbhajan is seen a publicity nightmare with Mumbai Indian getting rid of hoardings in which the off-spinner’s face appears.

Bhajji has shamed Indian cricket, brought ill-fame to the IPL, let down his team and, more importantly, his sponsors Reliance who have paid huge money to buy him. The slap on Sressanth was also a slap on the Indian Cricket Board which had gone to extraordinary lengths in defending him a few months back in Australia. One can imagine the repercussions internationally had the same offence been committed against, say, Ricky Ponting or, to turn the argument around, had Andrew Symonds slapped Harbhajan.

It would be safe to say that one has not heard the last on the fracas. The BCCI has appointed Sudhir Nanavati - a senior advocate of the Gujarat High Court and also the Chairman of the BCCI Finance Committee - to go into the matter. And if the commissioner does a good job, it would come as no surprise to see Sreesanth coming in for punishment as well to make an example out of him.

The BCCI, following the Harbhajan-Symonds flare-up, had advocated for a ban on sledging. Now that shit has hit the fan, the BCCI should take the kind of action that would deter potential from daring to cross the line that would bring the game into disrepute.