04 April 2007

Sachin... Sachin...

And in the cross-fire of dirty linen, one voice stands out today. And interestingly, it is the only voice that is not from a 'source'. And that voice belonged to Sachin Tendulkar.
Come to think of it. When was the last time that Tendulkar showed any kind of emotion to the press? Over the past seventeen years, I can only think of two. And neither comes close to this. The first was when he relinquished his captaincy after a disastorous tour of Australia. The second was the post-match conference after a century against Kenya in the '99 World Cup, the day after his father's funeral.
And thus spake Sachin of hurt and dissappointment and 'heart and soul' and how no coach has ever questioned his attitude. It has made certain that in this war of Chappell versus the senior players, the ex-coach has to lose. No TV expert, no former captain has ever (will ever?) questioned Sachin's love for the game. Only the most fickle of fans has ever said that Tendulkar is stretching his playing career, just for the green. Jadeja said today morning, that 'he has never missed practice in seventeen years'. Of course, a coach will know more about it that Jadeja, but then it is the perception that counts.
It might be a disciplinary issue too, you know, this coming-out-in-the-open-thing. There are rules saying exactly when a palyer can talk to the press. So when a player braces disciplinary sanction to be emotional before the nation after seventeen years, he has to be believed. I will be extremely surprised if Chappell walks out of this one.


Rohit Sharma said...

The question, aju, is not whether sachin tendulkar is to be believed or not.. because it is very clear that he has no hidden agenda.. and therefore sachin tendulkar is obviously saying the truth when he says his attitute was questioned.. but the point is slightly different. the real question is.. what is greg chappel's basis for questioning sachin's attitude.. is it not possible that sachin tendulkar might just have lost a bit of that commitment?? not intentionally of course.. but envisage this.. the person has been used to opening fr 12 years or something.. and he s done nothing wrong.. even in his later years, he has scored at a run a ball.. and yet.. we put up saurav ganguly to open who clearly des not have the skill to score as fast as tendulkar can.. and therefore, tendulkar's role is minimal in the side.. this is because if saurav ganguly does his job and manages to play out 20 or 30 overs after making a measly 60, the need is for players like yuvraj or dhoni to come in.. so tendulkar does not fit in there.. but if ganguly fails and there is a minor collapse.. then tendulkar is expected to stem the rot.. thereby asking him to perform a role that does not come naturally to him, a role that dravid finds himself more comfortable in.. hence.. he is asked to perform a role that he is not entirely comfortable with in either case.. can a person just feel uncomfortable in such a situation and lose a litte bit of his passion for the cause??
i mean i personally did not see how we could decide to send in ganguly to open above tendulkar.. like imran khan said, it is better to avoid a crisis than to play in one.. and with ganguly opening.. all that tendulkar was required for was to play in a crisis or be unwanted due to need for youth..

John said...

Thanks Pervy. Appreciate you taking me seriously.