© CricInfo “If the countless columns and chapters published about Bradmanwere placed end to end, they would stretch, on a still day, fromthe pavilion end to the pyramids and would reach beyond thebounds of credibility,” wrote Ray Robinson in
Partab Ramchand16-Aug-2002
© CricInfo”If the countless columns and chapters published about Bradmanwere placed end to end, they would stretch, on a still day, fromthe pavilion end to the pyramids and would reach beyond thebounds of credibility,” wrote Ray Robinson in his classic . Substitute Sachin Tendulkar’s name forBradman’s, and the sentence would still read as a truism inmodern cricket.When Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar is in majestic form, reams of proseare written about him. When he does not make runs, even morereams are written, perhaps more gleefully than in the earliercase. Why is he not making big scores? What is wrong with histechnique? Is his temperament suspect? Is he feeling the strain?Is the pressure of carrying the side getting to him at last? Isthere something physically wrong with him? Have the bowlersfinally sorted him out?Columnists are quick to dissect and bisect Tendulkar’s battingstyle. His footwork and hand-eye co-ordination are analysed tothe minutest degree, and overnight experts come up with ideas andsuggestions as to what he should or should not do, what approachhe should adopt, what his attitude should be, and how he shouldtackle the bowlers.These self-appointed experts can be an unbalanced lot. A lack ofunderstanding is almost their prerogative. When he does notdeserve particularly high praise for one of his knocks, Tendulkaris lifted to the level of a demigod. When he should be shown somesympathy, his detractors can be extremely uncharitable,attributing all sorts of reasons some of them even personal for his failure to raise his batting average or figureprominently in the team’s victories.It is to Tendulkar’s credit that he remains calm and unruffled.Sunil Gavaskar recently said that he did not read the newspapersfor much of his playing career. One would like to think thatTendulkar has followed in his mentor’s footsteps, for it might beimpossible even for someone as phlegmatic as him not to beaffected by some of the comments and headlines in newspapers andwebsites of late.Admittedly there is some cause for alarm when someone likeTendulkar, who combines the three essential qualities of talent,technique and temperament in abundance, fails to live up to hislofty reputation. Naturally there is some despondency when hisTest career average – not too long ago hovering close to 60 -plummets to 56. Of course there will be questions raised when hegets out to shots that are unwise.But let’s not get carried away. “Going through a bad patch,” asthe cricketing cliché goes, is something that has affected theworld’s greatest players, right from WG Grace to Vivian Richards.The immortal Victor Trumper once got three ducks in a row onlyto get 166 in the next Test. Dennis Compton averaged 7.57 in theAshes series in 1950-51, but a few months later he scored 112against South Africa. Our very own Sunil Gavaskar had wretchedruns in Australia in 1980-81 and against England four yearslater. Each time his cricketing obituary had been written, and onboth occasions, Gavaskar bounced back.Is Tendulkar feeling the pressure? Perhaps. Have the bowlerssorted him out? Maybe. As one who has watched many of hisinnings, all I can say without going into any lengthy analyses- is that there is a strange hesitancy in his strokeplay. It isnot as spontaneous as it has been for long. From a dazzlingstroke-playing batsman, he appears to have taken over the role ofan accumulator.That change in approach may be pardonable for someone like KenBarrington, who arrived on the scene in 1955 as a gay strokemaker and returned four years later as an accumulator. Barringtonwas a thoroughbred professional. He played for his bread andbutter and, as he himself said, was not particularly gifted. Hehad to come up through hard work, dedication and determination -qualities that stood England in very good stead for a decade andsaw Barrington end his Test career with an average of 58.67.Tendulkar, on the other hand, is prodigiously gifted. He is anatural stroke-player, even a dazzling one. He has thecapabilities to demolish any attack and to have the bowling athis mercy. Shane Warne was devastated, more than once, byTendulkar, to the extent that the Australian, one of the greatspin bowlers of all time, admitted that the thought of the littleIndian at the crease gave him nightmares.Perhaps the pressure is finally telling on Tendulkar; perhaps thesometimes unfairly high expectations of his countrymen havefinally dented his confidence; perhaps his entry during crisissituations time and again has made him diffident in going for hisstrokes; perhaps bowlers and opposing captains have finallysorted him out; perhaps it is because he is getting on in years.After all, it must not be forgotten that he is in his 30th yearand has been playing for almost 13 years.I am not saying that I subscribe to all or any of these viewsthat are among those generally making the rounds. All I am sayingis that it is ultimately a case of mind over matter. Tendulkar isstill a great batsman, still the number one player in the world -let there be no doubts on that score. He has it him to demolishthe best of the bowlers and make nonsense of the opposingcaptain’s elaborate strategy and tactics. I would not even agreewith the view that age could be catching up with him. I wouldonly urge him to be inspired by the example of Vivian Richards -the pre-eminent batsman in the world before Tendulkar and oneof the West Indian master’s knocks I never get tired of talkingor hearing about.The scene was the Ferozeshah Kotla in New Delhi, and Richards,then 35, had also been around for 13 years. The West Indiesrequired 276 runs for victory, always a formidable target on apitch favouring spin. Richards entered early on the fourthmorning at 91 for three, and it soon became 111 for four. Indiawere now the favourites. After all, the bowling line-up startedwith Kapil Dev and Chetan Sharma and continued with Ravi Shastri,Arshad Ayub and Maninder Singh. Everything now depended onRichards.
© CricInfoIn a glorious display of hitting, he put the bowling to the swordand threw the tight field placements into disarray. Racing to 109not out off just 102 balls with 13 fours and a six, the WestIndian captain won the match almost off his own bat, living up tohis reputation as the leading player of his day. The manner inwhich he counter-attacked in a tense situation was something thatonly Richards was capable of, and long before the end, which camewith West Indies winning by five wickets, the Indians hadvirtually given up.That is the kind of batting in which Tendulkar should freelyindulge. Some indication of this approach was seen in his 92 off113 balls at Trent Bridge. There was a fierce determination inhis eyes, and yet some of the strokes he played were his own. Thetime is now ripe for him to decimate the bowlers and put detailedstrategic plans to rout. He should not be bothered unduly byseemingly tactical bowling changes and field placements andshould go boldly for his strokes. After all, is he not the bestbatsman in the world?