It is comparison time again, and, by popular demand, I take up an
evaluation of Sourav Ganguly's performance as Indian captain, measured
against the standards set by my old Hyderabad seniors. One is ML
Jaisimha, arguably the most cerebral captain not to have led India.
The other is MAK Pataudi, most charismatic of India's captains, whose
admirers outnumbered his detractors in the long run, but not before he
was administered a no-confidence vote by the chairman of selectors. To
his credit, the former Nawab came back in style and nearly toppled the
mighty West Indies from their perch of superpower-dom.
Some basic differences are obvious. Jaisimha was celebrated as a
brilliant strategist and cricket guru, but he never experienced the
pressure of leading India in Tests. Pataudi became captain under
exceptional circumstances at the age of 21 and was spared being put
under the microscope for quite a while, his youth and pedigree both
shielding him from excessive criticism.
Equally important, by his own admission, he received much caring
support from the senior cricketers he led. Besides, until he forged a
match-winning spin combination and gradually instilled enough selfbelief in his players for them to enter the arena with confidence,
India was not expected to win anyway. True, the process had begun
under Nari Contractor's leadership, especially in the morale-boosting
victories over Ted Dexter's England, but Pataudi it was who taught the
Indians to enjoy their cricket without overlooking the need to possess
the competitive edge.
It is open to speculation whether `Tiger' Pataudi learnt some of the
tricks of his trade from Jaisimha, his close friend and Ranji Trophy
teammate. Similarities in approach were obvious, especially in their
use of spinners in an attacking mode with the close-in fielding cordon
that they perfected. Where they differed was in their attitude to
medium-pace bowlers. While Jaisimha was a strong advocate of the role
of seam bowlers in slowing down the game as a defensive ploy, and
sometimes as wicket-takers as well, Pataudi was impatient with India's
crop of new-ball bowlers, often bringing the spinners on in the first
few minutes of a Test match.
Tactically speaking, the Prince of Kolkata has quite some way to go
before he can be mentioned in the same breath as the two nawabs of
Hyderabad cricket, but that would not be entirely fair to him at this
stage of his career. If you consider Pataudi's early record as captain
in win-loss terms, it was nothing much to write home about, for all
the good his inspirational style did for team morale. It was in
raising fielding standards to acceptable levels in the outfield and
close to the bat that he made a huge contribution. He also led the
side from the front, with his courageous batsmanship against fast
bowling.
Ganguly has achieved some notoriety by sticking his neck out while
demanding the inclusion of some players. It is a reflection of the
media glare of our times that every armchair selector in the country
knows the captain's preferences. In Tiger's days, the intrusion was
not so all-pervasive, and the captain got his way most of the time.
Rarely did anyone complain that India did not field her best eleven
under his stewardship. Nor was his own place ever under siege due to
poor form, even during his final hurrah against Clive Lloyd's men.
Tiger Pataudi once told a TV interviewer that, though he always kept
his emotions under check on the field of play, he saw merit in the
greater spontaneity of today's cricketers. The consequences of his
recent on-field aggression suggest that poor Ganguly would be better
off imitating the Pataudi model of decorum!