Tendulkar Retires

India's proudest possession

Tendulkar has gone two decades being a blend of the sublime and the precise, incapable of ugliness or of being dull; and those are among the least of his achievements

Peter Roebuck

November 14, 2009

Comments: 167 | Text size: A | A

Sachin Tendulkar waits at the nets, Delhi, October 30, 2009
It's never been hard for Tendulkar to play cricket. The hard part will be stopping © Associated Press
Enlarge
Related Links
Players/Officials: Sachin Tendulkar
Teams: India

Sachin Tendulkar has been playing top-class cricket for 20 years and he's still producing blistering innings, still looking hungry, still demolishing attacks, still a prized wicket, still a proud competitor. He has not merely been around for two decades. From his first outing to his most recent effort, a stunning 175 in Hyderabad, he has been a great batsman. Longevity counts amongst his strengths. Twenty years! It's a heck of a long time, and it's gone in the blink of an eye.

The Berlin Wall was taken down a week before Sachin Tendulkar first wore the colours of his country, Nelson Mandela was behind bars, Allan Border was captaining Australia, and India was a patronised country known for its dust, poverty, timid batsmen and not much else. In those days Tendulkar was a tousle-haired cherub prepared to stand his ground against all comers, including Wasim Akram and the most menacing of the Australans, Merv Hughes. Now he is a tousle-haired elder still standing firm, still driving and cutting, still retaining some of the impudence of youth, but nowadays bearing also the sagacity of age.

It has been an incredible journey, a trip that figures alone cannot define. Not that the statistics lack weight. To the contrary they are astonishing, almost mind-boggling. Tendulkar has scored an avalanche of runs, thousands upon thousands of them in every form of the game. He has reached three figures 87 times in the colours of his country, and all the while has somehow retained his freshness, somehow avoided the mechanical, the repetitive and the predictable.

Perhaps that has been part of it, the ability to retain the precious gift of youth. Alongside Shane Warne, the Indian master has been the most satisfying cricketer of his generation.

Tendulkar's feats are prodigious. He has scored as many runs overseas as in his backyard, has flogged Brett Lee at his fastest and Shane Warne at his most obtuse, has flourished against swing and cut, prospered in damp and dry. Nor can his record be taken for granted. Batsmen exist primarily to score runs. It is a damnably difficult task made to look easy by a handful of expert practitioners. Others have promised and fallen back, undone by the demands, unable to meet the moment. Tendulkar has kept going, on his toes, seeking runs in his twinkling way.

In part he has lasted so long because there has been so little inner strain. It's hard to think of a player remotely comparable who has spent so little energy conquering himself. Throughout, Tendulkar has been able to concentrate on overcoming his opponents.

But it has not only been about runs. Along the way Tendulkar has provided an unsurpassed blend of the sublime and the precise. In him the technical and the natural sit side by side, friends not enemies, allies deep in conversation. Romantics talk about those early morning trips to Shivaji Park, and the child eager to erect the nets and anxious to bat till someone took his wicket. They want to believe that toil alone can produce that straight drive and a bat so broad that periodically it is measured. But it was not like that.

From the start the lad had an uncanny way of executing his strokes perfectly. His boyhood coaches insist that their role was to ensure that he remained unspoilt. There was no apprenticeship. Tendulkar was born to bat.

Over the decades it has been Tendulkar's rare combination of mastery and boldness that has delighted connoisseurs and crowds alike. More than any other batsman, even Brian Lara, Tendulkar's batting has provoked gasps of admiration. A single withering drive dispatched along the ground, eluding the bowler, placed unerringly between fieldsmen, can provoke wonder even amongst the oldest hands. A solitary square cut is enough to make a spectator's day.

Tendulkar might lose his wicket cheaply but he is incapable of playing an ugly stroke. His defence might have been designed by Christopher Wren. And alongside these muscular orthodoxies could be found ornate flicks through the on-side, glides off his bulky pads that sent tight deliveries dashing on unexpected journeys into the back and beyond. Viv Richards could terrorise an attack with pitiless brutality, Lara could dissect bowlers with surgical and magical strokes, Tendulkar can take an attack apart with towering simplicity.

 
 
In part Tendulkar has lasted so long because there has been so little inner strain. It's hard to think of a player remotely comparable who has spent so little energy conquering himself
 

Nor has Tendulkar ever stooped to dullness or cynicism. Throughout, his wits have remained sharp and originality has been given its due. He has, too, been remarkably constant. In those early appearances, he relished the little improvisations calculated to send bowlers to the madhouse: cheeky strokes that told of ability and nerve. For a time thereafter he put them into the cupboard, not because respectability beckoned or responsibility weighed him down but because they were not required. Shot selection, his very sense of the game, counts amongst his qualities.

On his most recent trip to Australia, though, he decided to restore audacity, cheekily undercutting lifters, directing the ball between fieldsmen, shots the bowlers regarded as beyond the pale. Even in middle age he remains unbroken. Hyderabad confirmed his durability.

And yet, even this, the runs, the majesty, the thrills, does not capture his achievement. Reflect upon his circumstances and then marvel at his feat. Here is a man obliged to put on disguises so that he can move around the streets, a fellow able to drive his cars only in the dead of night for fear or creating a commotion, a father forced to take his family to Iceland on holiday, a person whose entire adult life has been lived in the eye of a storm. Throughout he has been public property, India's proudest possession, a young man and yet also a source of joy for millions, a sportsman and yet, too, an expression of a vast and ever-changing nation. Somehow he has managed to keep the world in its rightful place. Somehow he has raised children who relish his company and tease him about his batting. Whenever he loses his wicket in the 90s, a not uncommon occurrence, his boy asks why he does not "hit a sixer".

Somehow he has emerged with an almost untarnished reputation. Inevitably mistakes have been made. Something about a car, something else about a cricket ball, and suggestions that he had stretched the facts to assist his pal Harbhajan Singh. But then he is no secular saint. It's enough that he is expected to bat better than anyone else. It's hardly fair to ask him to match Mother Teresa as well.

At times India has sprung too quickly to his defence, as if a point made against him was an insult to the nation, as if he were beyond censure. A poor lbw decision- and he has had his allocation- can all too easily be turned into a cause celebre. Happily Tendulkar has always retained his equanimity. He is a sportsman as well as a cricketer. By no means has it been the least of his contributions, and it explains his widespread popularity. Not even Placido Domingo has been given more standing ovations.

And there has been another quality that has sustained him, a trait whose importance cannot be overstated. Not long ago Keith Richards, lead guitarist with the Rolling Stones, was asked how the band had kept going for so long, spent so many decades on the road, made so many records, put up with so much attention. His reply was as simple as it as telling. "We love it," he explained, "we just love playing." And so it has always been with Tendulkar. It's never been hard for him to play cricket. The hard part will be stopping. But he will take into retirement a mighty record and the knowledge that he has given enormous pleasure to followers of the game wherever it is played.

Peter Roebuck is a former captain of Somerset and the author, most recently, of In It to Win It. This article was first published in Sportstar magazine

RSS Feeds: Peter Roebuck

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by JackJak on (November 16, 2009, 18:59 GMT)

If Sachin had played one day cricket in the middle order which he had done till 1994 then his average and number of centuries would have been half of what it was. He wasnt that great a batsman when he was playing in the middle order in one day cricket..its only after he started opening the runs began to come fast

Posted by JackJak on (November 16, 2009, 18:56 GMT)

I certainly am not an ignorant fan mr. kpisthebest..in fact you seriously seem totally ignorant to me..because your thoughts are so purely based on statistics what you are vomiting out. Dont you have a mind of your own or is it like the story of one rat following the other rats..herd mentality as in cattle also.

Posted by JackJak on (November 16, 2009, 18:46 GMT)

hey you are all repeating statistics which everyone knows ..please what we need is not statistics..What we need is people who can see through all this drama

Posted by JackJak on (November 16, 2009, 18:42 GMT)

hey unlike what you think i do know all about cricket more than you might ever know so dont ever assume that i dont know. If you had read what i had written you would know that i wrote gavaskar from the middle of his career towards the latter stages was a lot more focused on personal milestones. Why are milestones glorified so much only in India..because we have been taught to value these individual things more. Sehwag doesnt play for records but i was talking about tendulkar. Lara and Tendulkar will always be considered great but in the years to come there will always be something thought to be missing ..did the team actually win a lot? We have so many great names yet we cant win even a game in the champions trophy..when we became 20/20 champs in 2007 world beaters this and that the media went on..But when pakistan won it this time...its all become silent. Thats how crazy the hype is

Posted by Vansan on (November 16, 2009, 18:36 GMT)

@kpisthebest. Yes Tendulkar is great. He stands along with LARA, PONTING, RICHARDS, WARNE, MCGRATH, JACK HOBBS, WOOLLEY, HEADLEY, GARFIELD SOBERS, MURALI and others in elite cricketers. This is NOT just for you. also the media hyped indian fans who make him GOD, GANDHI so on :))......................NEXT......

@BLUENATION. It was not just MURALI, HARBHAJAN caught for throwing. 30yrs ago bent arm action is prohibited, now ICC permitted benting arms to certain degree. Johan Botha, indian rookie speedster KAMRAN KHAN, Jeramaine Lawson and many were caught too. Infact Indian spinner BEDI also said according to him, murali is chucker, KAPIL warned Harbhajan not to put doosra if he bents like a javalin thrower..Its all modernization, during RICHARDS era no Powerplays and ODIs werent played as much as it was in last 8yrs, now rules changed. accept it, MURALI has 800 wickets. 1 wicket is 25 runs as per cricketing statistics, so 20000 Test runs, MURALI is god and greatest. Do you agree :))

Posted by JackJak on (November 16, 2009, 18:28 GMT)

are we talking about sehwag or tendulkar now you people seem confused

Posted by Mina_Anand on (November 16, 2009, 17:35 GMT)

This is again, for JackJak: By the way, has JJ, heard of a batsman called Sehwag - who, when on 195, steps out for a six, and gets out ! Who gets to his first triple century - with a six ! And yes, scores the fastest 300, ever !!

Posted by Mina_Anand on (November 16, 2009, 17:32 GMT)

This is for JackJak: If he thinks Indian batsmen 'crawl to their hundreds' and 'play for records', then he obviously doesn't know the game of cricket. There are sometimes, scenarios, when a batsman has to play for the team, assess the situation - stay on at the crease. And much as he would like to get his hundred quickly, he has to rein in. But you can't please everyone. If Sachin and Gavaskar hit out and get out, in their nineties, people would say - how selfish, they should have stayed on - just want their hundreds and are not playing for the team ! (Incidentally, Sachin has recently, got out often enough, in his 90s !) Maybe JJ has not heard of a Gavaskar spearheading India to a successful world-record chase of over 400 runs in the fourth innings, in 1976, at the Queen's Park Oval, against a rampaging West Indies team? Maybe he has not seen the Desert Storm innings of a Sachin Tendulkar, to name a few, out of the many scintillating knocks. contd...

Posted by kpisthebest on (November 16, 2009, 17:32 GMT)

Jackjak,

So do you think Tendulkar didn't play for the team at Capetown, Old Trafford, Perth, Edgbaston, Madras, Colombo, Centurion, Bloemfontein, Sydney in the cbseries and many more?

Posted by kpisthebest on (November 16, 2009, 17:29 GMT)

Vansan,

So in what way is that related to Tendulkar being not a great?

I have shown that Tendulkar has won games.

I have shown that Tendulkar has stood firm amidst the ruins like at Perth and Edgbaston.

He is consistent.

So what else is needed for a player to be known as great. Don't go off the topic.

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Peter RoebuckClose
Peter Roebuck He may not have played Test cricket for England, but Peter Roebuck represented Somerset with distinction, making over 1000 runs nine times in 12 seasons, and captaining the county during a tempestuous period in the 1980s. Roebuck acquired recognition all over the cricket world for his distinctive, perceptive, independent writing. Widely travelled, he divided his time between Australia and South Africa. He died in November 2011
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days