The history of Indian cricket is riddled with phases of turmoil. The
sending back of Lala Amarnath from England in 1936 as a discplinary
measure, the well publicised war of words between Indian captain
Amarnath and BCCI president De Mello in 1949, the period of turbulence
in the 1958-59 season which saw four players lead India in five Tests,
the sordid happenings, on and off the field during the disastrous 1974
tour of England, the clash of the titans (Kapil Dev vs Sunil Gavaskar)
ten years later. So the situation now may evoke a feeling of deja vu
among cricket fans. But the shock waves in the latest tragic episode
of Indian cricket are the kind that threaten to rip apart the very
fabric of the game in India.
The latest episode has the overtones of a Shakesperian tragedy and has
as many characters as they are in the Mahabharata. Tendulkar,
Azharuddin, Mongia, Ganguly, Jadeja, Kapil Dev, the five selectors,
the BCCI. But this is a sob story with a difference. On the face of
it, there appear to be no heroes, only villains. And it is a script
full of complexities and inanities. While unravelling it, one is bound
to come across more and more skeletons in the cupboard. But then that
is Indian cricket all the way.
To begin at the beginning. A disastrous World Cup campaign, coming on
top of other reverses, saw Azharuddin out of favour and Tendulkar was
appointed captain for a second time at the start of the
season. Unwilling at first to shoulder the burden, Tendulkar
reluctantly agreed to take over the responsibility, after being
persuaded. Not exactly the best way to take over a job as highly
pressurised as the Indian captaincy. But in agreeing to commence his
second term as captain, Tendulkar did extract his pound of flesh. He
wanted more powers, more freedom, greater say in team selection. It
was with this tacit understanding between him and the board that the
Indian team left for Australia.
Too many things happened for the worst `Down Under' and not all the
negative aspects were on the field of play. Losing the series by a
clean sweep and getting beaten black and blue in the Carlton & United
series was bad enough. But what was even more of a dampener was the
fact that all was not well within the team, that there was something
very wrong between the BCCI and the team management, between the
selectors and the team management, and between team members and some
of the discarded players, notably Azharuddin and Mongia. The
humiliating treatment meted out to Mongia by the team management, who
made it very clear that they did not want Azharuddin in the team,
Kapil Dev disclosing that the former Indian captain was not a popular
man in the dressing room and the open confrontation between the team
management and the selectors on matters of team selection all added to
the weird melodramatic soap opera being enacted that could not fail to
harm Indian cricket.
Things moved towards the tragic climax on the team's return. The
failures of most of the young players left the selectors with no
option but to bring Azharuddin back from cold storage. At the same
time, the BCCI decided it was time to assert itself. To prevent any
anti-Azhar tirade, the officials decided not to invite Kapil Dev for
the selection committee meeting, breaking the tradition of calling the
coach to attend the deliberations. Taking the cue, Sachin Tendulkar
announced that he was stepping down from the captaincy owning moral
responsibility for the drubbing in Australia. A few days before, vice
captain Saurav Ganguly made it clear that he would prefer to bat at No
5, whoever was in the team - an oblique reference to Azharuddin. This
was a significant remark for, in the past, the batting order from No 3
to 6 has been Dravid, Tendulkar, Azharuddin and Ganguly.
Tendulkar's timing on the field of play is exemplary. But his timing
off the field is all awry. If he really was serious about owning moral
responsibility, he should have quit soon after February 1, the day the
team landed in Chennai. Like Wasim Akram, who stepped down owning
responsibility for Pakistan's disastrous tour, almost immediately
after arriving from Australia. However much he may deny that his
resignation has nothing to do with Azharuddin's comeback, not many in
the country will take his statement seriously. To be fair to him
however it must be said that he took over the captaincy last year on
certain conditions, which have been elaborated earlier. Recent events
have eroded his power to the extent he can no longer have the team he
wants. Aware of this, he decided to quit is what one can make out,
even if things are seen from Tendulkar's viewpoint.
It takes time to build or rebuild. When Tendulkar took over last July
the mood was upbeat. The new captain had the country with him, a new
crop of young players were making their presence felt and the
performances in the various one day tournaments at the start of the
new season were quite heartening, considering that the side was
without Tendulkar, nursing his back injury, for most of the
period. Even granting that the successive reverses in Australia
constituted a debacle, it must not be forgotten that India were beaten
by the strongest side in the world. Also, Tendulkar's batting was not
affected by the extra load of captaincy and it might have been better
to invest in the future by continuing with the policy of youth for
some time under the same leadership. Constant chopping and changing
cannot help in the rebuilding process and calling back the old guard
must have irked Tendulkar and Kapil Dev, especially when they had made
their stand on the issue quite clear. Not involving the captain and
the coach in the selection process is a blunder of the first magnitude
and for this the BCCI stands guilty in the court of the cricket fan.
So what happens now? Indian cricket lies in shambles. The silver
lining is that it has no place to go but up. But first there has to be
a healing process. What is needed now is a strong personality as
captain who can put personal egos into the background and lead from
the front, selectors who give the captain and coach their due, and
officials who can take a long term view and not tinker with the
selection. All this takes time but a start has to be made. Why not
now, when the current scenario urgently calls for a start to be made
in this direction?