Rahul Dravid is gone, V.V.S. Laxman too, and now Ricky Ponting has joined them in the arena outside the stadium called ‘real life’. Mahela Jayawardene speaks of making way for a youngster, and he is only 35. Send not to know for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for us. Retirements are reminders of our own mortality.
A sporting career does not exist in a vaccum. It needs fans to complete it—the yin to the onfield yang. Fans who measure their lives in goals scored and runs made by the great players have to readjust their sights when these names leave the scene. More, they are made acutely conscious of a significant portion of their own lifetime being enshrined as history. The cliche ‘end of an era’ applies not just to the impact of the recently retired; it speaks for the millions who will never see a favourite in action again.
This is a painful period for fans of the modern greats. Jacques Kallis, 37, must be having private chats with himself. And what of Sachin Tendulkar, set to turn 40 in four months, by which time he will have been playing for 24 years?
My son was a year old when Sachin made his international debut. Sachin has been as much a part of his growing years as falling off bicycles, homework in school, maidan fantasies, rock concerts and quantum theory. A whole generation, born when the Berlin Wall was standing and the Soviet Union was a superpower, when Nelson Mandela was still in prison and Mike Tyson was deemed unbeatable, might barely remember how things changed. But Sachin was at the crease, and all was right with the world.
It is not unusual for sports fans to bookmark their lives with the performances of their heroes—wedding anniversaries as adjuncts to a national win or a great individual performance. Tendulkar might have played international cricket for over two thousand days—at least some of those are bound to have coincided with significant dates in the lives of millions. Where were you when V.V.S. Laxman made his 281 in Calcutta? Or when Rahul Dravid made 148 both in Johannesburg and then in Leeds? These two, firm friends, quit within days of each other, announcing their decisions at press conferences. Not everybody is so lucky.
Nor does everybody finish with a century like Greg Chappell did, or even a double century like the West Indies star Seymour Nurse. Players from the subcontinent have usually had to be pushed out. The great Kapil Dev had become a pale shadow in his final Tests. He was carried around so he could overtake Richard Hadlee’s record for most wickets. Gundappa Vishwanath played on after a traumatic tour of Pakistan, hopeful of a recall. Pakistan’s stars retired and unretired with comic frequency.
Sunil Gavaskar went with dignity after a fabulous innings of 96 on a rank turner (a phrase reintroduced into common currency by Mahendra Singh Dhoni) in Bangalore. He invited a few reporters to his room, thanked them for their support, and then said that the Lord’s bicentenary match in England would be his final one. He made 180-plus for the World XI—at a venue where he famously did not have a Test century.
Men who play for long—17 years in Ponting’s case—do so because of a combination of passion and pride. No one likes their world to end with a whimper. But when a bang does occur, the temptation is to believe that the worst has been overcome and the salad days are back. To make a century (or 96) and quit because you feel in your heart that you didn’t move well enough or let mediocre bowlers dictate matters to you for long spells—that requires a high degree of self-awareness. Sometimes the knowledge comes in a flash. In the case of Adam Gilchrist, it came when he dropped a relatively straightforward catch from Laxman. Suddenly, he knew it was over.
The reverse is possible too. The certainty that it isn’t over yet. A couple of years ago, Dravid was going through such a terrible patch that the ‘R’ word was being bandied about freely. His best innings ended under 20; his worst went on for long and put on display all the weaknesses, natural and acquired. Yet, clearly, as subsequent events showed, the time hadn’t come. If Dravid had quit then, he—and we—would have been deprived of those centuries in England, where he became only the second batsman after Don Bradman to make three in a single series.
When Ponting called it a day, he made one thing clear: “This is not a decision that’s been made by the selectors, this a decision that’s been made by me. There were probably moments when they thought long and hard about ending my career and I’m glad I’ve got the opportunity to finish this way and on my terms”.
This is going out in the manner of Sinatra’s song—My Way—and is the dream of every sportsman. The fantasy involves quitting at the top, winning the final match for your team, and moving aside without any regrets. It is tough, as Tendulkar is discovering now. When you know nothing except the game and then that is taken away from you, nothing remains but a dark abyss. No country has a system that helps players psychologically at the end of their careers. To tell them that the end of a career in sport is not the end of the world.
Dravid made the point that players used to the adulation and respect of being at the top of one profession find it difficult to adjust to being second best in any other. Hence the temptation to postpone the inevitable.
I have a friend on a wheelchair who loves to drive. One holiday we drove for miles. He told me the destination was incidental, the drive itself was fulfilment: “It is when I am in control.” The cricket field is where Tendulkar is in control, and it is understandable if he doesn’t want to let go.
Sport can be cruel. Before you properly mourn the passing of one champion, another is ready to take his place. When Gavaskar quit, there was much breast-beating. End of an era. Two years later, Tendulkar appeared. Similarly with Viv Richards and Brian Lara, Allan Border and Ricky Ponting.
The Dravids and Laxmans and Pontings and Kallises and Tendulkars are our heroes—they will not necessarily be the heroes of our children and grandchildren. Vinoo Mankad, whom Virender Sehwag hadn’t heard of, was my father’s hero; Virat Kohli is my son’s. The first Test match I reported on outside India was the one in which Tendulkar made his debut. In cricket, we are joined at the hip.
Fans have their Tendulkar moments, their Ponting moments. In the end, the records don’t matter. What matters is the shared consciousness. They came, we saw, and we concurred. Their talent enabled us to conquer everydayness. Our expectations goaded them further. It was symbiotic. We mourn because each time a sportsman retires, he peels away another layer of what makes us who we are.
(Suresh Menon is Editor, Wisden India Almanack, and author, most recently, of Bishan: Portrait of a Cricketer)
Read Suresh Menon’s column with interest (In One Autumnal Face, Dec 17). His contention that sports replaces its champions and thus they should retire when their time is up is generally true, but there are exceptions. Sometimes, the decision to retire is not up to the individual, but is taken by the controlling body. Now that our cricket team is in a process of transition, with younger players still finding their feet, there must have been a message to older players to hang for a while till the new team is well-formed. Sachin Tendulkar, I am sure, finds himself in such a situation today.
Venkatesh Iyer, Chennai
An era has surely come to an end, the most charismatic batsman of our times has retired. Ponting’s journey through the ’90s was ours too. The Tasmanian devil decimated the best of attacks on his day, and was one of the fittest players in the circuit. His achievements lie before one’s eyes: three World Cup titles as captain, a 5-0 sweep of the Ashes Tests, two Champions Trophies. Also remembered are that unforgettable 140* in the ’03 WC final, the 156 at Old Trafford during the ’05 Ashes series, and a marauding 143* against South Africa.
Anoop Hosmath, Mysore
The Indian cricket team has finally met its Waterloo, as England decimated it in the Tests at Mumbai and Calcutta. It was an ignominious defeat, and has punctured the pride of the bcci, whose president expressed displeasure at the pitch. In fact, it’s the board which is responsible for Team India’s undoing. The board is mighty upset at the showing, but the country is more upset at its autocratic attitude, putting more emphasis on money, rather than improving quality at the grassroots level. In the ongoing Ranji format, many players make meaningless triple and double hundreds on featherbed tracks against mediocre bowlers. And on slightly difficult tracks even ordinary bowlers become demons. It’s when they face quality opposition that their true colours are exposed.
Shanmugham Mudaliar, Pune
Tendulkar’s appalling drop in form—an average of 15 in a few Tests—has caused a huge concern in selectors’ minds. Yet, because it’s Sachin, no one wants to annoy him by his advice. It’s instructive, at this juncture to recall how Ponting and Gavaskar went out. The board now has to take a tough call.
K.R. Srinivasan, Secunderabad
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
Cricket is a game to be enjoyed by the spectator. One loves being represented by a national team, and one admires the opposing team too. The player is not a commodity, and he is being measured in monetary terms, because of the cash at his disposal, even when the govt. prints currency notes, so that goods and services can be availed of easily by the ordinary consumer, and the govt. has no idea how the notes will be exchanged in any circumstance. The Reserve Bank is the institution which gives the INR credibility, and if the note is destroyed for any reason, it is not a material loss, apart from the paper, ink, and the symbol of the govt, being not repairable on that note, paper being highly perishable. We feel it right when we speak as we like of national icons, because of currency. I feel very uncomfortable, when Mr. Amarnath feels Dhoni should retire, but is every person the great former player, and should players not be selected, because of what the citizen feels, keeping in mind that we have our own ideas on Indian team selection? I felt very disappointed when Saurav Ganguly became captain. He kept a low profile, and he did score a century, which was beautiful, against England on debut. He then went on to captain India in a season, where every series that season seemed a festival, in Australia, and in Pakistan. The selectors saw in Ganguly, a great captain, and I do too.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT