Sachin Tendulkar and His 100th Century: A Case of the Pathetic State of Sports in India

The hype and expectation circling the still elusive 100th international century for Indian batsman Sachin Tendulkar, is a clear indication of the pathetic state of sports, in general, in India. Further evidence of the earlier statement may lie in the fact of promoting, to extremes, individual achievement in a team sport, pointing the way to a sort of shameless star worship we involve ourselves in.
Calls to award the "Bharat Ratna" - India's highest civilian honor - may have gained intensity following India' World Cup triumph. It must be said that it is easy to understand why politicians and social crusaders like Anna Hazare demand the recognition for Tendulkar; he is something of a living God for a number of young men and women in the country, who, incidentally, comprise immensely large vote banks for the politicians to play with.
A coveted award like the "Bharat Ratna" should really only be given to an individual whose achievements have benefitted the society at large, rather than an individual whose claim to fame is of a far more personal nature... the scoring of, say, 99 or 100 centuries.

Of course, it cannot be denied that Tendulkar is a fine batsman and his achievements do make the country proud. However, it must also be said that his career coincided with the years marking his country's entry into the whole idea of a global consumer culture and represented the success of the Indian middle class. His personal achievements, therefore, were billed as a triumph for India, as a whole.
Cricket is not a game of personal accomplishments; it is fundamentally a team sport. Tendulkar's failure to carry the team to victory when his presence was most needed and the ability to translate transient leads into triumphant results suggest that the act of labeling him a cricketing God is perhaps not quite right. One particular example of that inability was back in 1999, when India lost a test to Pakistan (in Chennai), despite Tendulkar scoring a century. Most recently, the inability of the player to come to his team's resuce during the disastrous tour of England, highlights, perhaps, his flaw. Unfortunately, however, we have a culture where the unashamed worship of heroes is a characteristic feature.


At the 2010 Commonwealth Games in Delhi, Indians should have realized that they had a number of talented athletes, across a number of sporting disciplines, including those capable of creating their own legacies. How many does the country remember today?


For example, India last won the hockey World Cup in 1975. Since then it has not placed in the top four of any edition; its best was an eight-place finish at the 2010 World Cup. The country's men's national soccer team is ranked 145 in the world; 50 in basketball and 37 in volleyball. At the 2008 Beijing Olympics, India won three medals - a gold in shooting and a bronze each in wrestling and boxing. In contrast, the hosts, China, won 100 medals (51 gold) and Brazil 15 (3 gold).


While the cricket World Cup win was impressive and deserves to be celebrated, India has to figure out ways to improve its performances in other sports. A major reason why the sport is so successful in the country is because it represents big business to the nation's corporate czars. In fact, India is, by some distance, one of the most popular and lucrative markets for the game.


The popularity of the sport and the nation's tendency to hero worship, especially among the younger generation, seems to be preventing the growth of other sporting activities.

Are Australia prepared for India?

At first glance, that is an insane question to ask, considering what India endured on their most recent foreign tour. But their preparation index - and their desire to learn a lesson - will be judged later.

Right now, this is Australia's big moment. Rewind the clock a little. In the last three summers, Australia lost to England and South Africa at home. They won against New Zealand (always a weaker opponent for them), West Indies (nowadays a weaker opponent for everyone) and Pakistan (it is widely believed they chose to 'play weak' in that series). India are generally considered a better Test outfit than any of these three aforementioned teams and their record Down Under on the last two tours is quite appreciable.

Consider their 4-0 spanking in the summer as an anomaly and the summation is that Michael Clarke should be a worried man indeed.

It can be argued that there are ifs and buts against that last statement. India's batting needs to click, its pivotal figures all need to stay fit, Zaheer Khan has to last all four Tests and they need to find proper support bowlers for him, while hoping that R Ashwin can continue to fill Harbhajan Singh's shoes.

Quite a few things can go wrong for any subcontinental team on a tour to Australia and they will. But there is also the odd chance that it all just comes together perfectly. India will be a very difficult proposition in that light. And this is about that slim, but definite possibility.

One has to begin with their recent tour of South Africa and by any standard, if your team is struggling at 21 for 9 in one of only four Test innings, then the trip isn't really a success. That they came back from the dead to win in Johannesburg is down to the mental strength these Aussies possess.

They can back themselves against the heaviest of odds, in any situation. And 47 all out was a hurtful score indeed, bad enough to awaken even minnows. With a new selection committee coming in ahead of their summer, the task is clear cut - build again.

And they have to start with the two Tests against New Zealand. The process has sort of begun already with Mickey Arthur appointed as new coach. It is a well-thought-out selection. Arthur has been working in their domestic circuit with Western Australia. He took South Africa to good heights during his long term with them and has been given an equally long term here, until 2015.

Normally coaches aren't given such a lengthy contract first up. Plus, under the new system, both the captain and the coach have selection powers. Both these factors only suggest that Australia are keen to see where a proper rebuilding process takes them. And of course they have already set eyes on the next ODI World Cup to be played at home, but that is for much later.

Right now, a new Australian team has to begin with getting rid of those who have outlived their utility. This pointer rests much on Ricky Ponting and to be honest, one isn't a proper judge of where he stands in his career. He is a true legend of the game and has to take a call on his own, yet the need to consult the selectors and his captain is fast arising. Never has he seemed so susceptible while lunging forward - his trademark front foot movement - and the ease with which he fell LBW against the Proteas is a mark of the same.

If Ponting goes, the last bond with that superhuman team of Steve Waugh will be cut. Mike Hussey came much later, so he isn't really a total part of those 'invincibles'. Perhaps it will also allow Clarke some breathing space, something young captains don't really get when you have an ageing old-timer on your back. It isn't really expected that Ponting won't play against India, but beyond that this should be given proper consideration, depending upon form.

In the current scenario, a whole lot of players need to be unearthed and their problems are much similar to India's. A proper spinner, a couple of fit and healthy fast bowlers who can replace Mitchell Johnson and the easily injured Ryan Harris, along with an opener or two to take the load off Shane Watson. And they need to replace Brad Haddin too, for his horrible shot in the second innings at Cape Town alone merits severe punishment, let alone dropping.

Before long, India will be on their way. It is indeed time for Cricket Australia and their wards to get cracking.

Contributed By: Siddharth Jha

Dear Yuvraj… stay hungry, not foolish

Often when Yuvraj Singh’s place in the Test side is questioned, and it is often, his supporters will turn around and say: “When he is in form, he looks so good.”

But then again, tell us, which batsman looks bad when he is good form? Well, maybe Shivnarine Chanderpaul. But no one else comes to mind.  

As soon as Yuvraj Singh was clean bowled in second innings of the first Test against West Indies at Kotla with India needing just one run to win the match, he sunk to his knees. His head was bowed and he looked at the ground – seemingly frozen in the spot.

On the larger scale, this wicket did nothing. India still won the match. West Indies still lost. But on an individual scale, the loose, almost casual defensive shot could come back to haunt Yuvraj very soon. Add the fact that in terms of poor shot selection, it almost matched his disastrous shot in the first innings and the left-hander has a problem.

There are times when he’s been unfortunate but at some point, you have to make your own luck. He’s done it enough times in ODIs to know what needs to done. And he should also realise that the only reason he has made comeback after comeback after comeback into the Test team is because someone in the selection committee believes in his talent. But if talent leads you to play a casual shot in a Test match, then India can do without it.

Virat Kohli, Rohit Sharma, Suresh Raina and Cheteshwar Pujara… to mention just a few, are all waiting for a chance. They are hungry. They are young and they want in. And after eight years, Yuvraj should recognise that excelling and survival are two very different things. Right now, though, he is in danger of doing neither.

Contributed By: Siddharth Jha