The Hindu : Nation building and cricket

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Sep 20, 2002

Opinion

Opinion - Leader Page Articles

Nation building and cricket

By Gautam Sen

We as a nation still have to learn that cricket which is almost a religion and a passion in India can also be used for achieving national integration.

ON A glorious Sunday afternoon at the Oval Cricket Ground in London, Rahul Dravid was the cynosure of all eyes since he was on the threshold of demolishing Sunil Gavaskar's record of the highest test score of 221 by an Indian overseas. Dravid was at the bowlers end with his individual score at 217. At the batting end was the young Ajay Ratra whose straight drive beat bowler Michael Vaughan's attempt to stop. Despite Dravid's attempt to dissuade Ratra not to attempt the single, Ratra charged to the bowler's end. Dravid honoured the call knowing clearly that he did not have any chance to beat the throw by Giles to the wicketkeeper. The result — Gavaskar still remains the record holder. Dravid was run out but applauded by the entire English team on the ground and got a pat on the back from Giles himself as he started his march back to the pavilion while the entire Sunday crowd at the Oval rose in appreciation.

Did the media or the commentators understand the moral culture displayed by Dravid? What singles out Dravid from the rest? It is his strength of character and integrity in thinking about the welfare of his junior, Ratra, who had made the mistake and giving him a chance to survive at the wicket even at his own personal loss. Dravid was thinking about the team and the country he was playing for when he made the decision to run to the batting end. One wonders how many in the present Indian team or for that matter any other team around the world would have done what Dravid did.

What have the commentators and the media done in the aftermath. The commentators were Ravi Shastri and Navjot Singh Sidhu — both Indians. They got into the discussion on how Dravid's back was towards the batting end due to which he could not see Ratra running until too late. They concluded with remarks about the great sheet anchor role played by Dravid and based on statistics of his performance during the series dubbed him the most dependable batsman of the Indian team. More interesting was the Indian media. The front page of two prominent national dailies carried Dravid's photograph. One had the bare minimal coverage about him while the other recorded the horrible mix up which lead to Dravid being run out and the subsequent applause by the spectators and the English team.

The episode narrated about can be analysed at three levels having direct implications for nation building. First, the culture and integrity of Dravid as an individual, second, the post-Independence character of the Indian media and, third, the cultural as well as the civilisational ambience of the British people.

Dravid's integrity and the spirit of nationalism come out on the top. He constructed the Indian innings with a chanceless batting performance when both Ganguly and Tendulkar were expected to perform much better. Dravid's performance and bad weather aiding a draw cannot hide the obvious lack of team spirit displayed by the senior members. This is more or less substantiated by the action that the BCCI precipitated recently about the contracts to be signed by the players. This explains the lack of integrity and character on the part of those on whom we as a nation have reposed our trust to decide on the welfare and development of the national cricket team. Unfortunately, Dravid's performance at the Oval Test will be recorded as a statistic rather than as an exemplar. Nation building is a serious matter where the role of the exemplar is more important than the role of a media-hyped icon based on visible performance of commercial value only. We as a nation have to understand the difference at all levels of operations ranging from economic to social or political.

Second, is the role of the post-independence Indian press. Had Tendulkar carved out a century the newspapers would have filled up half the front page and cash awards would have been announced by the business houses and the State Governments or even the Central Government. Arrangements would have been on for public receptions lead perhaps by some political parties as well. The Indian press would have cashed in on the issue for commercial gains. This trend will continue unless remedial action is taken to internalise the value of cultural and integrity by our leaders at the national level.

Third, the cultural and the civilisational ambience of the British people. The English selectors chose a team led by a man selected for his professional competence and individual capacity to integrate the team into unified effort. The captain is a naturalised British citizen. The final test of the series was slated to be played before the most cosmopolitan English audience, i.e. in London. The strategic doctrine was based on the assessment that Indians are poor run chasers; lack the industry of concentration and marathon performance except in patches. Hence the construction of a non-turning wicket to be aided by the vagaries of English weather. They aimed to win the match and hence the series through their preparation and the understanding of the Indian team's psychology. Their worst case scenario was a draw and legitimate sharing of the series — which they ultimately achieved.

However, what went unnoticed was the recognition of Dravid as an exemplar and the unity of the Anglo Saxon cultural praxes when the English team on the ground at Oval and spectators present there in unison applauded what he achieved despite all their efforts to beat it. Dravid has earned a place in English cricket society and it cannot be taken away by any Indian in the near future. Even in the most appreciative Calcutta audiences, one has not observed such a confluence of the Indian team and the spectators. We as a nation still have to learn that cricket which is almost a religion and a passion in India can also be used for achieving national integration.

It speaks volumes when the English team created no controversy with their Cricket Board about their contract details while the Indian cricket board can for a few dollars more decide to field a second string team without any concern for the role that cricket can play in the cause of national integration and national identity. One wonders if any English cricket player would have accepted to lead a second string English team in an international arena. The BCCI has proved to be a vendor devoid of professional competence.

One cannot but help recalling what the President of India warned the nation about very recently while addressing the National Judicial Academy in Bhopal: "There cannot be any erosion of values, corrosion of quality or any cobwebs in the procedure". Cricket is no more a game for enjoying bright sunshine but has started acting as an ambassador of a nation's character in the international system. It has become a part of international relations among nation-states large or small, developed or developing, rich or poor. The national leadership must understand that cricket is too serious a matter to be treated only commercially and left in the hands of business managers. Cricket has become a unit of analysis in international relations amongst nation-states and hence its role in nation building.

(The writer is Professor of Strategic Studies, University of Pune.)

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

Stories in this Section

Critical issues unaddressed

Enforce the rule of law

Evicting 10 million tribals

Nation building and cricket