Opinion Play it like Sachin

Sachin Tendulkar

Kapil Dev’s comments on Sachin Tendulkar’s batting are not exactly new. He has hinted at it in the past and if one disregards the incongruity of the timing, his comments aren’t as awkward or fanciful as they seem. “He [Tendulkar] got stuck with Bombay cricket. He didn’t apply himself to ruthless international cricket. I think he should have spent more time with Vivian Richards than some of the Bombay guys who played just neat and straight cricket,” Dev said. Where Dev is wrong, however, is that it’s almost impossible to separate Mumbai from Tendulkar. Indeed, without Mumbai, there would be no Tendulkar.

It’s a feature of the almost-maniacal self-control that accompanies the Bombay school of batsmanship that players associated with it rarely indulge themselves. It was said early in his career that Tendulkar was a mix of Sunil Gavaskar and Richards but at some point, he left the Richards persona behind and went the Gavaskar way. There are no two personalities clashing for primacy in a Richards, Brian Lara or Ricky Ponting, though. They almost romantically tried till the end to refine their attacking instinct, but Tendulkar switched between his twin personas — Gavaskar and Richards, defence and attack. If a bowler opted for a negative line, like England’s Ashley Giles did to Tendulkar, you can bet that a Lara, Richards or Sehwag would try to take him on. Tendulkar never indulged in such showmanship; he just tried to wear the bowler down.

Advertisement

Post 2008, Tendulkar’s batting became a scientific art of eliminating risk and an exercise in making batting appear routine. This is a tribute, not criticism. He took a capricious art like batting and turned it into a risk-free activity. And it’s where he started to drift away from Lara. He might have lost a few fans, but he gained more runs and years. Lara flirted with flair till the end (“Did I entertain you?” were his memorable post-retirement words). But Tendulkar chose to walk the other path, that of abstinence.