Sachin Tendulkar's autobiography: Will Greg Chappell have the last laugh?
All hell broke loose a couple of days back, when Sachin Tendulkar’s scathing criticism of former coach Greg Chappell in his autobiography, Playing It My Way (released yesterday), became breaking news across the country.
As captured in the preview shared with media, in addition to describing Chappell as a ‘ringmaster’, Sachin went on to drop a bomb by alleging that the Australian even tried to persuade him to take over captaincy of the Indian cricket team from Rahul Dravid, just months before the 2007 World Cup in the West Indies, so that, in Chappell’s words allegedly, ‘together, we could control Indian cricket for years'.
These, and further accusations have evoked a plethora of reactions, and created sharp divides among fans as well as cricketers, the repercussions of which may not bode well for the Indian cricket team.
Fans mixed in their reaction
Let us look at the first divide, between the opinions of lesser mortals like you and me, relatively harmless, and providing good fodder for raging debates. Opinions, and given the omnipresence of social media today, comments and tweets have flown left, right and center soon after the claims were made public.
While most fans have stood up to their ‘God’, lapping up and hailing every word, others have questioned the timing and necessity of the allegations. From being a marketing gimmick to exacting revenge on Rahul Dravid for stranding him on 194* in the Multan Test, 2004, counter-allegations have been intense as well as imaginative. Having not yet laid my hands on the book, I will also leap on to the opinion bandwagon without much evidence, though I doubt if answers to all of these will be available even after reading the autobiography.
On being a marketing gimmick by Sachin, my opinion would be yes, and no. Let me explain the affirmative part first. The content of the excerpts released to the media, as well as the timing, coming just two days ahead of the book launch, will definitely increase book sales by 15-20%, if not more.
While an autobiography of a living demi-God would not have a shortage of takers, the only road-block it could have encountered is the perception of lack of spice in the book’s content, if one goes by the relatively devoid-of-controversy career of the batting legend. This perfectly timed release definitely allays all fears in that context.
Now the more difficult explanation of the no following the yes - I find it difficult to accept that someone of Sachin’s stature would personally stoop to the level of performing publicity stunts to make a quick buck, but that doesn’t mean that the PR agency, in all probability tasked with marketing responsibilities associated with the release, wouldn’t do that.
If the Chappell saga constitutes a sizeable portion of the book, my defense of Sachin weakens, and the preview would indeed be justified, but if it ends up being a short section within the overall World Cup 2007 debacle, which is undoubtedly one of the most painful memories of the maestro’s life, then I will uphold my third-party sensationalism theory.
The Dravid revenge angle is strife with speculation – while it can be argued that the modern Little Master, who tackled the fastest of bowlers with a straight bat, might have preferred to go that route in this case as well, and channelize his feelings on the unexpected declaration in a direct manner, there is also the counter that Sachin would not like to launch an all-out assault on his brother-in-arms in several battles, and possibly the second-most loved cricketer in India, after himself.
Plenty of food for thought here, which hopefully the autobiography will have answers to.
Looming threat of a Ganguly-Dravid showdown
This brings me to the second and definitely more unfortunate divide, one among the players themselves. While most cricketers active during Chappell’s reign have sided with Sachin, a disturbing development is the early aloofness and then curtness exhibited by Dravid in the aftermath of the preview.
His initial statement, “I am sorry but I haven't read the excerpt. That was a private conversation between two people and I am not privy to that", in an interview with ESPNCricinfo, seemed to be a diplomatic attempt to avoid an awkward situation, being the gentleman he is, but a parting shot at being interested more in the master blaster’s batsmanship as opposed to the controversies in the book, seemed a tad too dismissive.
Dravid was not as diplomatic when it came to responding to Ganguly’s statement that The Wall had shared with him his inability to control the former coach. When asked to comment by a news channel, Dravid was brusque in denying it, and even added an uncharacteristically harsh ‘he can't put words in my mouth’, referring to Ganguly.
So far, the elegant southpaw has not responded, but if he does, of which there is every possibility given his past reactions in similar situations, it could lead to an escalating war of words between two of the greatest cricketers the country has ever produced.
If one or two more cricketing heavyweights lend their voices against Sachin’s allegations, the rift would get even more pronounced; not exactly an ideal scenario for a team just months away from its title defense of the greatest trophy in limited overs cricket.
Has Chappell fired an arrow from Sachin’s bow?
Getting back to the alleged antagonist in the story, Chappell has issued a customary statement which categorically denies the allegations against him. In attempting to capture an opinion from Down Under, I observed that while the Australian daily, The Age, titled this story as ‘Chappell gets defensive over Tendulkar's autobiography charge,’ the newspaper makes no effort to defend the Adelaidean, and just documents turn of events almost verbatim to that splashed across Indian dailies and websites.
This leaves us with the most poignant question of all – what purpose does the reprisal of the Chappell saga serve? If the intention is to lay bare before the world the former coach’s atrocities, Ganguly did that eons ago, and in terms of credibility, there was no reason to doubt him either. On the contrary, this does pose an uneasy question on the silence of the maestro all this while. Had he been more vocal when the southpaw was screaming from the rooftops about Chappell’s inadequacies, the South Australian may have faced a swifter eviction, and his alleged negative influence on the 2007 World Cup campaign avoided.
If the idea is to mete out belated punishment for tampering with a successful team, as national talent manager for Cricket Australia, Chappell’s professional aspirations are not likely to be affected. Even otherwise, the Adelaidean’s autocratic nature is no secret in cricketing echelons, and administrative bodies who rate his talent above this drawback will continue to engage with him.
The only visible impact thus far has been signs of infighting among some of the country’s most respected cricketers, and if it mushrooms, Sachin would have unwittingly aided Chappell in the one mission he left incomplete – creating a public rift among the Big Four, who still command huge fan-followings even after retirement. For the sake of the country where cricket hysteria borders on fanaticism, I hope such a possibility never materializes, or for all the best intentions behind this disclosure, Chappell may well have the last laugh.