NEWS
MATCH REPORTS
DIARY
OTHER SPORTS
SLIDE SHOW
PEOPLE
ARCHIVES

The jokers and the joke

It is not cricket." This is the phrase which is used for politicians when they exploit their position for unfair and dishonest purposes. In a similar way, the words, 'playing politics' connote gain without regard to what is just or right.

The Indian cricket team is not only playing politics but messing up matches in a manner that it can be said: "It isn't cricket." Considerations other than those connected with the game have been dictating all of them -- players, managers, coaches, selectors, members of the Board of Control for Cricket in India and their patrons - over the years. This time they have been exposed in Australia much more than ever before because they picked up a rag-tag band of players gave them the name of Indian team and sent them out. Intrigues, backbiting and personal prejudices seem to have beleaguered the team from day one. The stage has now been reached where the country feels let down.

In my journalistic career of more than 40 years, I have never written on cricket. But since millions of Indian viewers have been humiliated, I thought I should devote my column this time to the cricket team. I have talked to many former cricketers of repute and members of selection committees. I find to my horror that there is no accountability.

For the team's dismal performance, none is held responsible. The post-mortem is always cursory and introspection seldom serious. None from the Board or managers has ever been asked to quit. Kapil Dev, the team coach, has talked about everything except his willingness to quit. Neither has the selection committee chairman, Chandu Borde. More than half a dozen defeats in a row and that too through the carelessness and imbecility of players should have woken up some people in some quarters. But no.

The Ministry of Human Resources Development is the umbrella organisation for sports. But Murli Manohar Joshi, heading it, is more interested in saffronising Indian culture than saving sports. Now sports are in the hands of bureaucrats, charlatans and amateurs. By this time, Joshi should have appointed a commission to find out why a country of one billion is almost at the bottom of practically every game in the world. Hockey, once the country's pride and our neighbour's envy, has been ruined. We are nowhere in football, a game that is played the world over. And cricket is the latest shame.

Take cricket. There should be an inquiry to find out why India, which won the World Cup 1983, is now in the bottom half of the rating list. And why some players, who did not even deserve to be in a state team, were sent to Australia.

When the selection committee caps a player, it confers on him a rare honour. (Sourav Ganguly showed that when he kissed the emblem on his helmet after making a century against Pakistan). He becomes India's representative and he is expected to uphold its honour. He can do it only if he has the requisite talent. How can cricketers who do not know even the basics of the game qualify? It is obvious that the selection committee does not go by merit.

The cricket map of the country has five zones: North, South, East, West and Central. The Board's affiliated zonal units return members to sit on the selection panel. They do not have to be even cricketers. Like all elections, there is a liberal flow of money, pull and pressure to get berth on the committee, because it is an honour of sorts.

Since the committee members are beholden to their units, they see to it that they serve the interests of their zone. All types of players are pushed and re-pushed into the team even when their performance is below average. The overall consideration is the representation of the zone, not the right player. Mohinder Amarnath, a former Test batsman, once called the selection committee members a "bunch of jokers". He had to pay the price. He was permanently dropped when he was in peak form.

Personal bias is coming into play in the selection. Someone is left out, not because he is not good, but because someone at the top does not like him. We have the example of Mohammad Azharuddin. (Even the Australian captain Steve Waugh has pointed out this omission.) When the selection committee wanted to rectify the mistake of dropping him, Kapil Dev & Co reportedly threatened to resign if Azhar was sent. Is personal pique more important than the country's honour?

I recall that when Kapil and I were riding the bus to Lahore under the leadership of Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, we discussed how Sachin Tendulkar had been given run-out a day earlier in a game between India and Pakistan in Calcutta. Tendulkar could not make it to the crease because a Pakistani player accidentally came in the way. Kapil said that Pakistan captain Wasim Akram should have called Tendulkar back to undo the wrong. "The responsibility is moral," Kapil said. In a different context, Kapil faces the same dilemma. The moral responsibility for India's debacle is Kapil Dev's. He should have at least offered to resign. Tendulkar too should resign from captaincy because it is not his cup of tea. He becomes too tense and too tentative. He performs better when he is not burdened with the responsibility of captaincy.

Talking about prejudice, I am told that Nayan Mongia, the country's No. 1 wicket-keeper, who was sent to join the team, was not allowed to play because of Kapil's dislike for him. Other players of the team reportedly kept away from him lest they should displease Kapil Dev by mixing with Mongia. While in Australia, Mongia celebrated his birthday in his room, practically alone. The main problem with Indian cricketers is that they have lost sensitivity. In the dressing room, they talk about the contracts they have signed with advertisement firms, not why they have lost and how they should improve. That they have smeared the good name of the country does not cross their mind. This distinguishes them from the other teams.

And why Ajay Jadeja was not sent is the cricket board's failing. It wanted Kapil Dev and Tendulkar to accept either all the three, Azhar, Mongia and Jadeja, or go without Jadeja as well. How did it help the country? I am at a loss to understand. I have three suggestions to make. One, the cricket board should limit, if not ban, the players' appearance on advertisements. Kapil himself is a big ad-star. The second suggestion is that a player should get only half the fee for playing if they lose the game. And last but not least, the Board should be constituted properly. Only knowledgeable former Test cricketers should be on the board. Zonal considerations should not come into play when the national team is selected.

The real problem is that the Indian public is so hooked on cricket that it does not stop watching the players in spite of their bad performance. People go on hoping that the team will perform better next time. But next time seldom comes. The Indian team may win a game or two, as it did against Pakistan, but they are lucky victories. The basic thing is that most of the players do not have the talent. Nor are they prepared to accept the fact that they lack it. I do not agree with the selection committee the India does not have the talent. Living in a world of its own, the committee is not looking for it.