High Quality
Open the downloaded document, and select print from the file menu (PDF reader required).
The god of large things
If there is one thing the argumentative Indian will accept as ineluctable fact, it is this: Sachin Tendulkar is god.Within that broad acceptance of the divinity of Indian cricket’s most enduring performer however lie twoconflicting thought streams, as irreconcilable as the gulf between the Shaivites and the Vaishnavites, or theSunnis and Shias. The first group holds that Sachin is god, period. It is an absolute deification that permits of no ifs and buts. The other group argues that this ‘god’ may walk on water or, on occasion, convert water into sparklingchampagne -- but like all gods, he fails with distressing regularity to avert the catastrophes that threaten tooverwhelm us.Of what use is a god who can walk on water to us who drown in the flood? This dichotomy, and the underlying reason for the deep fissure in what, when it comes to cricket, is amonotheistic nation, is best illustrated by the ongoing one day international series between India and Australia.While delving into specifics, keep in mind that (a) the team has of late developed the capability and moreimportantly, the ambition, to challenge for the top spot in the ODI rankings and (b) that Australia, the goldstandard in the sport, is in this series missing no less than eight of its first choice players and three of thereplacements.Ignore the defeat in the curtain-raiser October 25 at Vadodara: though the final scorecard will show that Indiawas just one boundary hit away from a win, the fact to be noted is that the batting collectively failed, and Indiaonly got within one stroke of the stiff target of 293 thanks to a barnstorming 84-run 8
th
wicket stand betweentail-enders Pravin Kumar and Harbhajan Singh.India won the second game, October 28 at Nagpur, by the convincing margin of 99 runs. Tendulkar’scontribution to the team’s massive score of 354 was four runs off 14 deliveries faced – but that should notmatter in a team game where the whole matters, not the individual components. On October 31 at Delhi, Indianotched up arguably its best win: chasing 230 on a wicket more suited to agriculture than cricketing industry,the team got there by an impressive six wicket margin. Sachin scored 32 and consumed 47 deliveries – andagain, it does not matter. The fourth game in the series, November 2 at Chandigarh, was the seminal moment of the series. India was 2-1up and looking to take the definitive lead. A brilliant bowling performance backed by fielding that was un-Indianin its athleticism restricted Australia to 249. India’s target, on a wicket where the batting conditions wereperfect, was 250 to win off 300 balls – a 50-run differential in the team’s favor. Opener Virender Sehwagskewed the arithmetic even further with 30 off 19 balls, reducing the target to 220 off 281 deliveries. India lostby 24 runs and allowed Australia to level the series – and the key stat that jumps out at you is this: Sachin Tendulkar 40 off 68 – an innings that contained 6 fours, but also 50 dot balls. In other words, Sachin’sinexplicably stodgy knock single-handedly wiped out the advantage India had taken into the chase. You could at this point turn the earlier question on its head and ask: why look at Tendulkar’s stats alone, afterharping on cricket being a ‘team game’? It is at this point that we leave cricket aside and get into theology: is‘god’ god, if you have to parse his deeds against those of the mortals? That question brings up a related issue: Tendulkar started the series needing 137 runs to achieve the statisticallandmark of 17,000 runs. Even the most ardent fan will concede that the milestone – a largely pointless onefrom a team point of view, and a largely superfluous one for an individual who, by reason of achievement andlongevity both, ‘breaks’ some record or other each time he walks out to bat -- had, for the course of the firstfour games, become a millstone around the batsman’s neck, forcing him into an ultra-defensive mode thatmilitated against the larger requirements of the team he was part of.It is this that has formed grist for the apostates who claim that Tendulkar increasingly plays for himself, not forthe team – and that if the team happens to benefit, it is merely an unintended by-product of personal ambition.Move on, now, to November 5 and the Rajiv Gandhi Stadium at Uppal, Hyderabad where an adrenalin-fuelledbatting performance by Australia left India facing an unlikely, almost impossible, target. India needed to get351 in 300 balls; Tendulkar needed 7 runs to attain his personal milestone. For 16 deliveries, the masterbatsman pushed, poked and prodded until finally, off the last ball of the fifth over, a clip off the pads throughsquare leg produced three runs that took him past his target. It was only then, with the mind freed of personalambition, that he felt himself free to turn his attention to the team’s requirement.
Add a Comment
jazzy22bleft a comment
jazzy22bleft a comment
jazzy22bleft a comment
uploaded a new revision for this document (#2)
uploaded a new revision for this document (#1)