Comment

Rahul Dravid is a graceful cricketer. And I don’t mean just the way he plays, though there is that. (In fact, for me, he is the most stylishright-handed batsman of this era after Mark Waugh). But Dravid is graceful in other ways: in the wayhe carries himself on and off the field,in the way he conducts himself with the media and the cricket’s topbrass, in the way he behaves with cricket fans and the milling hangers-onwho are part and parcel of the cricket scene in India. In short, Rahul Dravid is that rare thing in today’s international cricket, agentleman cricketer.

So it was a bit of a shock to hear Mr Nice suddenly not being so nice. This was in response to the leaked report of the cricket team’smanager on the tour of South Africa, the one in which the manager (we will keep the poor man’s name out of this for the moment) reported the casual, even arrogant, attitude of Virender Sehwag. “Has this person playedany international cricket?” Dravid asked the media angrily. “Iwill respond to his report only after I have looked at cricket history and seen what contribution he has made there.” These aren’t his exactwords, but amilder version of his outburst.

What surprises me is not just the hot-tempered language but its strange logic. If he were to apply this train of thought everywhere all cricket commentators and writers would have to be Test cricketers. (Some are, but many haven’t been: Neville Cardus, John Arlott, Harsha Bhogle, toname the most obvious). Airlines would then be run only by pilots,the railways by engine drivers. Film critics would only be former actors ordirectors and what business would an architect like Ratan Tata have ingoing into so many industries?

The logic, if we can call it that, is obviously flawed, but you canunderstand it and the Indian captain’s unusual display of temper if wesee it in the context of the constant pressure he is subjected to. In our country these pressures come, not from being in the centre of the action, but from outside, from the media. Its incessant glare never leavescricketers, particularly the coach and the captain. We have seen Greg Chappell crack under the strain, and now we see Dravid.

But in this particular case, it’s not just the media’s pressure on the captain. The something else that’s affecting him is hisunswerving loyalty to Virender Sehwag. Now it’s good that a captainstands by his men, but beyond a point, uncritical loyalty can turn into ablind spot. You’ve seen it before in more important fields likeJawaharlal Nehru’s blind spot for VK Krishna Menon and Indira Gandhi’s for son Sanjay. In cricket we recently had Sourav Ganguly’s antipathy for left-arm spinners.

It’s stating the glaringly obvious that blind spots are good only forthe individual protected by this loyalty; it’s bad in every otherway. In the cases mentioned above, Nehru severely handicapped thenation’s defence preparedness and alsoalientated the West;Indira Gandhiset family planning back by years, while Ganguly sent a whole tribe ofcricketers into the wilderness.

What will Rahul Dravid’s blind spot do? He has got a completely out-of-form batsman into the World Cup team. Worse, he has seeminglyendorsed Sehwag’s casual attitude and stubborn refusal to learn. Thatcan’t be very good for team discipline.

That’s not all. Dravid’s insistence on keeping Sehwag in the team has shut the door on one of India’s best batsman, VVS Laxman.He has once again, been passed over for theWorld Cup. (Can you believe that last time around, Dinesh Mongia waspreferred to him?) Laxman is no worse a fielder than many others in the team(Anil Kumble, Sourav Ganguly and Munaf Patel to give the three mostobvious examples). His running between wickets isn’t express, but surelythat’s an area that Greg Chappel could have improved? As for batting,there aren’t too many cricketers in India with Laxman’s class, and hisability to score quickly through cover drives and square cuts.

Some may say that Dinesh Karthick, in spite of his brave effort withthe bat, could have been left out, but he is the reserve wicket-keeper weneed. That really left the
choice between Laxman and Sehwag for onemiddle-order slot and the skipper’s loyalty won.

It is possible, of course, that Sehwag will prove me wrong and become the player of the World Cup. I will then humbly and gladly eat my words. If not? A blind spot will have prevailed once again, to no one’s advantage.