Sunil Gavaskar
On the eve of his sixtieth birthday, Sunil Manohar Gavaskar is not contemplating regressing into past life. But he admits, nonetheless, that if he had to live life all over again, there are two things he would most certainly do differently. "I would throw my wicket away, not bat 60 overs for 36 runs like I did in the 1975 World Cup, and I would not get into a situation where a Test match could be conceded [as happened at Melbourne, Australia, in 1980-81], whatever the provocation," he said.
After a bout of badminton at the Bombay Gymkhana on Thursday, Sunny, as he is popularly known, settled down for an extensive interview with DNA over bhelpuri and a cup of tea:
How differently do you see this game at 60 from the time when you saw it at 20?
It is different in the sense that there is a much wider following than, say, in the 1960s, when I was a kid growing up. Then it was a majority male following, but now I think it's fairly mixed. You have got women of all ages interested in the game thanks to T20, mainly.
Would you have been happier playing today than when you played? With far more money, and fame...
Maybe not, for the simple reason that there was innocence about the game when I was a kid, which is perhaps not quite there now. So I think yes, I would prefer the innocence of the game that was there when I was a teenager.
Earlier, cricket was not just a sport. It was also about the great qualities of life it represented. Has there has been a fundamental shift in the way people approach the game today?
Not to a great extent. But, for instance, when people didn't do the right thing, the saying used was "that's not cricket". Now that does not hold as much water as it did then. Mainly because I think the game has become commercial and therefore some of the old values have gone out of it. But it's still a fantastic game. I think it is a far more attractive game to watch from a spectator's point of view.
Has the romance of cricket fallen victim to money?
Well, I guess it's now a win-at-all-costs system. The unpleasant things that happen in the game have come to the fore, so, therefore, I think in a sense the romance is gone. The appreciation of the game, whether it was by your own team or by the opposition, is not quite so much. You rarely see fielders go up to applaud somebody getting a half-century anymore. Players are aware that the TV cameras are on them. So they might have just one clap and that's it — almost as if, if you have more than two or three claps for the opposition, then it's a kind of weakness. I don't think that's a correct thing.
A problem arising out of the mega bucks is that there are a lot of young cricketers, 19 or 20, who are exposed to success that would usually come much later. How do you manage this?
That is why mentoring is so important. At the National Cricket Academy we must regularly invite seniors, not just from cricket but from all sports, to talk to youngsters about the perils of fame. Particularly how to handle the minuses of fame — people who have experienced the ups and downs in life can provide some guidance. Some guys might go over the top — after all, if you are young, you tend to live life in the fast lane and you will make mistakes and there is nothing wrong with that. You know you have the time to come back because age is on your side. But mentoring is essential.
India probably has the largest talent base because of our size and our obsession with cricket. Why do you think we have not been able to be the best team for any sustained period? Internal divisions, short on strength and stamina, not enough focus?
I think it's a combination — of practice, the quality of pitches, and of infrastructure. Not just Ranji Trophy players, but even at the junior level, the facilities must be top class. I sense there is a realisation that yes, we have the financial clout now, let's use it in a better way. And there is no point of being financially big if your on-field performance is not good. This realisation has emerged, which is why I think in the future India will be a lot more consistent than it has been in the past.
What makes excellence — is it talent, determination, ambition, passion, or a combination of all this?
Don't forget luck is an important factor as well, plus all that you have mentioned. You have also got to have discipline, and I don't just mean regular hours or practice. Discipline of a particular area of expertise is important. It doesn't come easily and that is why there are very few great players who have been able to discipline their game to the requirements of the situation. Those are the players who are recognised all over the world as matchwinners.
You have always protested against maverick or natural players getting greater recognition vis-à-vis the more steady ones. How do you rate Shane Warne, who might appear a maverick but is actually a very sound bowler?
Absolutely. That is the point. I think Warne is a maverick perhaps because of the way he has been perceived off the field. On the field, he is very disciplined. He has always observed the basics of bowling a good line. He hasn't taken 700 wickets in Test cricket and 300 wickets in ODIs just like that. Make no mistake: there is a lot of study and analysis that has gone into his becoming one of the greatest cricketers in history.
Has technique become redundant or superfluous? Look at Virender Sehwag and Adam Gilchrist and the kind of success they have enjoyed. Do you think this is the modern approach to cricket?
I have always believed that technique has never been a huge part of a sport. Temperament is your No 1 thing. You could have the best technique in the world, but if your temperament is bad, you will be nowhere. While if the temperament is good and you don't have great technique, you will be able to do well. You have the ability inside you which makes you hang in there, makes you go on. That's what separates the men from the boys. So does approach, attitude, and the upbringing towards the game. The difference in the style that you see from the 1950s, ’60s, or ’70s is the upbringing in those days was not to hit the ball in the air, not to take risks. Coaches today encourage youngsters to play aerial shots or unorthodox shots, try different things. That is what has made the game so attractive.
Comments