Unsung Hero of Indian Cricket

Our cricketers are really lucky. No, not because of all the moolah they rake in. Not because of the demi-god status most of them enjoy. Not even because of the opportunity they have taken for granted to represent the country on the sports field. They are lucky because the Anna movement has deflected public attention and anger from the drubbing they received in cricket, at the hands of a resurgent English side. Considering the huge margins of defeat, this must certainly rank as one of our worst overseas defeats in cricket. What makes it worse is that it was handed out to an outfit that was ranked the World No.1 in Test cricket for the last 20 or so months.

Through all the din of subdued criticism somewhat immobilized by the shock of defeat, very few seem to have noticed the Wall of Indian Cricket, who alone stood tall throughout this series. To have equalled and then surpassed the legendary Sunil Gavaskar’s tally of Test tons during the England series was no mean achievement. Dravid already stood as the second-highest run-getter in Test cricket behind only Sachin Tendulkar. Somehow, I can’t help thinking, though, that the man has never got his due. He has, undoubtedly, been the unsung hero of Indian cricket.

Admittedly, he lacked the natural ability of a Sachin or the flair of a Saurav. He even lacked the charisma of a Dhoni as captain. However, in his own quiet sort of way, the man has served Indian cricket with a rare distinction, be it as a batsman or a wicket-keeper or a slip fielder. Whenever the chips have been down Dravid is the man the team management has invariably turned to for the rescue act, and he has seldom disappointed. Not for nothing did he earn the sobriquet, The Wall. His solid defence, his ability to play a long innings and his sense of focus became the pivot around which many a team score was put together any number of times.

The latest, and perhaps, one of the best instances of his ever-abiding commitment to his team was evident in the last Test match of the series versus England. Dravid not only carried his bat through the first innings when he scored his 35th Test ton, but also came out to open the innings again when India were forced to follow on. That has been the spirit with which the man has played his cricket. What makes his achievements truly remarkable is his gentlemanly behaviour on and off the field. His modesty and humility have earned him many friends and admirers even among his rivals.

Despite all these obvious qualities of head and heart that made him the cricketer he has been for India, his achievements have hardly been acknowledged in our Tendulkar-obsessed country, whose shadow he has had to play under. Left out of the ODI and T20 sides a few seasons ago, without even so much as having been offered an explanation by the selectors, Dravid went on to do reasonably well in the IPL although his captaincy came in for some criticism. Personally, I did not find it at all surprising that Dravid should have announced his retirement plans in England from ODIs and T20 cricket when the selectors suddenly rediscovered the virtue of including him in the ODI squad to play versus England.

It was his way of telling the selectors, “I'm not a use-and-throw commodity…” And yet, the manner in which Rahul Dravid did that was so typical – it was all done in such a dignified manner. He reluctantly consented to play in the ODIs versus England, but said that would be it. No more. A thorough gentleman, Rahul Dravid, must surely rank as one of the unsung heroes of Indian cricket.

Who will fast at Jantar Mantar for them?

Television footage of 10-year-old Moin a few days ago, who was battered to death by his employer, was disturbing and depressing to say the least. What made the story more shocking was the fact that the culprit who snuffed out an innocent young life, happened to be the victim’s uncle. This unsavoury episode of human misery has brought into sharp focus, once again, the sordid saga of young kids, not even at the threshold of adolescence, being made to labour relentlessly at cramped sweatshops all over the country for a pittance. Made to work for 15 hours a day, most of these exploited children receive just two modest meals a day and a cramped little corner to sleep, as compensation.

Children continue to be abused and exploited in our country despite legislation, which lacks teeth and remains enshrined in our statute books. Forced child labour is but one instance of the misery these little ones are subjected to. What about child prostitution? India has become a safe haven for paedophiles from all over the world who flock here to prey upon minors to satiate their deviant sexual urges. The arrest, trial and conviction of two Britons, Duncan Grant and Alan Waters for sexually abusing boys at an orphanage in Mumbai, is merely the tip of the iceberg. With lax laws and corrupt officials most such offenders go scot free.

The girl child has her own sorrows in apna Bharat mahan. She has things going against her right from the time she is conceived in her mother’s womb. The moment her gender is detected prenatally, thanks to unscrupulous medical practitioners, her very life is often in danger. Female foeticide has already tilted the gender balance in favour of males in most states of India according to the latest figures made public.

While laws exist that prohibit prenatal sex-determination tests, law enforcement agencies are unable to detect and bring to book culprits who break the law. An overarching patriarchy that prefers a male offspring, coupled with the scourge of prospect of having to raise a dowry for daughters that poor families have to contend with have made the girl child an unwanted commodity in the family economy.

This bias extends to all the rights and privileges that any girl child should otherwise be entitled to, be it education or nutrition. They are forced to sacrifice both in favour of their male siblings. Is this the kind of India we hope to build in the future? We pride ourselves on being a predominantly young country. Do we care enough about our precious human capital? Do we care enough about the future of our country? Yes, corruption is an issue – a big issue. But, how about starting a revolution to protect our children and fighting for their rights? Are there no takers?

Anna Hazare's "revolution" is not without flaws

I’ll allow others, more eminently qualified than me, to speak on this one, before I say anything.

Wrote Tavleen Singh, well-known columnist, in her weekly newspaper column:

“Without reading the Jan Lokpal Bill that Anna Hazare is trying to ram down our throats, actors, writers, social activists, television anchors and sundry other supposedly educated Indians leapt on to Anna’s bandwagon… If they had bothered to read the draft that Hazare’s Leftist advisors have drawn up, they would have noticed that its worst flaw is that it is undemocratic in the most frightening way. It is not an ombudsman that it seeks to create but a despot with the powers to investigate, judge and punish anyone he suspects of corrupt practices… This is the way of totalitarian countries. It is not India’s way.”

Neera Chandhoke, professor of political science at the University of Delhi, stated in an article in a prominent national daily newspaper:

“Certainly corruption is a major issue and needs to be fought, but according to procedures and norms, and in keeping with the mandate of the Constitution. The country is not Ralegan Siddhi, where alcoholics are flogged to make them give up their ways. India is democratic, and in a democracy even guilty people have rights. Anna Hazare may have earned the status of a big brother, but no democrat can allow him to turn this Lokpal into another big brother right out of the pages of George Orwell’s projected nightmare.

More worrying are the political beliefs held by this gentleman. He wants corrupt people to be put to death! In a civilized society, surely, the very idea of capital punishment is anathema. What gives cause for even more anxiety is the extraordinarily low opinion that this Gandhian has of the very people who had rallied around him during his fast. “Ordinary voter [sic] does not have awareness” he is reported to have said in a meeting with the press. “They cast their vote under the influence of Rs 100 or a bottle of liquor or a sari offered by candidates.” Does not contempt for the ordinary Indian citizen defy the very rationale of democracy, and that of its major claim to legitimacy, that of equal moral status?” asks Prof. Chandhoke.

In another article, Madhu Kishwar, founder-editor, ‘Manushi’, and professor at the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, Delhi, says:

“Our politicians have indeed failed us, so have many others — the judiciary, the police, the bureaucracy and religio-spiritual leaders. Many of these worthies are no less venal than the worst of our politicians. No politician can get away with corruption and crime without the collaboration of the bureaucracy, police and the judiciary…

Let us remember that Mahatma Gandhi, Jayaprakash Narayan, Bal Gangadhar Tilak, and B.R. Ambedkar all fought elections. Those who claim to draw inspiration from Mahatma Gandhi cannot afford to be so self-righteous. The arrogance of “tyaag” is no less dangerous and corrosive than the arrogance of money and power. If the movement is ready to welcome celebrities who may well be evading taxes and bypassing laws, why single out elected representatives? Merely making the Lokpal a supra-government body and giving it full powers to make its own appointments will not ensure that the institution becomes worthy of the trust reposed in it…”

An editorial in The Indian Express titled, ‘Rs 100, a sari, a bottle’, with the sub-head, ‘That’s all Hazare says a vote means. Who gains from such disdain for democracy’, states:

The line between this disdain for the voter that Hazare expressed and the belief that he can nominate a committee to draft a bill is clear and damning. This institutionalizes the contempt for established parliamentary democracy that Hazare has revealed, one he shares with those in the Indian urban elite who do not trust a state that rests on the votes of the poor and “illiterate” — votes they imagine are cast thoughtlessly and for a bribe… If 80 crore Indians — the number of voters — are so corrupt as to be bought for Rs 100, which Jan Lok Pal will clean things up?”

Need I say more? Is Hazare’s cure worse than the disease? That is what the ordinary Indian citizen needs to ponder over, cutting through all the hype and frenzy generated by a fawning media that looks for a new hero every day.

Hey Ram! Bisexual Bapu?

The reaction in our country to the latest biography of Bapu is so very typical. The hue and cry that was raised over it was not at all unexpected. After all, in which other country in the big wide world do they ban books and films at the drop of a hat? The book in question is, ‘Great Soul: Mahatma Gandhi and His Struggle with India’, by the Pulitzer-Prize-winning author Joseph Lelyveld. The author has put under the scanner Gandhi’s relationship with his German friend, Hermann Kallenbach, with whom he had lived for four years. He has highlighted the "special bonds" these two men had shared with each other. This has been construed as “intimacy” between them in the Western media.

Obviously, the language Bapu has used in his letters addressed to Kallenbach has tickled the imagination of reviewers of the book. It has made them speculate that Bapu may well have been a bisexual! It made some to even conclude, glibly, going by irresponsible newspaper headlines in the UK and the US, that Gandhi actually abandoned his wife to live with his male lover. Understandably, Indians are outraged. But then, are we not overreacting? Have our 'netas' who have called for an immediate ban on it, cared to read even excerpts of the book? Are we not capable of debate based on logic and reason? Can we not call the bluff of those, who betray a superficial understanding of the complex and multifaceted personality that Gandhi undoubtedly was, by taking them on intellectually?

After all, Lelyveld himself has clarified publicly, and for the record, that he did not brand Gandhi either a racist or a bisexual in his book. He went on to state that the word, “bisexual” does not figure anywhere in his entire book. Besides, the letters he has quoted from have been in library archives for decades, and open to public scrutiny. Sudhir Kakar, a psychoanalyst, who has written about Gandhi's sexuality and reviewed some of his correspondence with Kallenbach, said he did not believe the two men were lovers. "It is quite a wrong interpretation," Kakar has stated. "The Hindu idea is that sexuality has this elemental energy, which gets dissipated. If it can be sublimated and contained, it can give you spiritual power. Gandhi felt his political power really came from his celibacy, from his spiritual power.” This is Kakar’s take on it, which may well have been the case.

So then, the “father of our nation” was not a bisexual, as claimed by some who have got it all wrong in their decadent minds. Great! I wonder, though, do our leaders need to be perfect in the conventional sense of the term? Should they be incapable of the follies and foibles that normal human beings can fall prey to? The problem with us is that we accord iconic status to our leaders and celebrities. We deify them. We condition ourselves into accepting a larger-than-life image of them, which is of our own making. This national tendency, or cultural trait if you prefer, is what makes us feel so uncomfortable when new light is shed on old facts. This is what makes us squirm when someone even so much as hints at the humanity of our heroes, implying their inherent imperfections, and we are instantly up in arms. 

It is sacrilege. It is utterly blasphemous to cast aspersions on the character or motives of national heroes whom we have elevated to demi-god status. To think of it, even if Bapu did indeed fall for his German friend, who happened to be a body builder, does it detract from his unparalleled contribution to the national movement of India? In any case, many of his practices aimed at sublimating his sexuality were controversial. Some of them may even be repugnant to people of other cultures. So, it makes me wonder what the fuss is all about. It is time we grew up a bit.

I’d like to conclude with what Gandhi himself had said once, in reaction to being addressed as “mahatma”. He did not accept the tag. In fact, he dismissed it outright and preferred to call himself, “alpatma”. Gandhi was realistic enough to accept his limitations as a human being. Unfortunately, his followers were not able to grasp this reality.

Indian Cricket on a New High

Indian Cricket has come a long way. When "Kapil's Devils", as they came to called, lifted the coveted Prudential World Cup trophy at Lords, which was then considered the Mecca of World Cricket, many a cricket aficionado was tempted to dismiss it as a grand fluke. Even our team seemed half-embarassed, at that time, accepting the trophy, although they had achieved the impossible. Yes. They had beaten a team that was arguably the most potent cricketing outfit ever to walk onto the meadow, for a bout between bat and ball, in the annals of the gentleman's game.

However, 28 years later, this Indian team is not at all apologetic about its aspirations to dominate the cricketing world. And, in Mahendra Singh Dhoni, they have found a captain, who in Imran Khan's words, "is not just a captain, but a leader!". His innings in the World Cup final at the Wankhede Stadium in Mumbai, was the best example of a leader leading from the front. It took courage to walk out to bat ahead of the in-form Yuvraj. It took courage to leave out Ravichandran Ashwin yet again, and opt for the mercurial Sreesanth. And, what an innings "captain cool" played. So much so that, it dwarfed the brilliant innings played by both Mahela Jayawardane and Gautam Gambhir, and, deservingly, earned him the Man of the Match award.

To think of it, while all of India wanted our team to lift the trophy and buck the trend of the host nation never winning the Cricket World Cup, there were many who did not give our boys in blue much of a realistic chance. They preferred to bet on Sri Lanka who were the runners-up last time around, or felt it would be South Africa this time, who would finally be able to shed the label of "chokers", which had stuck to them for so long. Some even considered New Zealand the dark horses, while others reminded all and sundry not to rule out Australia, even if they had not played their best cricket lately.

Earlier, cricket commentators had flayed the selectors for not having picked another wicket-keeper, just in case Dhoni got injured. Some of them bemoaned the fact that the Indian squad was one pacer short. While the tournament was well underway, the exclusion of Ashwin in the playing 11 also received plenty of flak, especially when we played on spinner-friendly tracks. And. when the Indian quickies, barring Zaheer, had not been very consistent, Ashwin's exclusion seemed even more indefensible. However, as they say, "all is well that ends well". Who will remember any of the doomsday predictions of any of these naysayers today? Who will remember the sombre post-mortems of nit-picking analysts of the game any more?

That's because nothing succeeds like success. Well done, India. You guys have done us all proud. There should not be any doubt in anyone's mind now, as to where the Mecca of World Cricket really is.