If Sangakkara can't, who can?
Kumar Sangakkara made 75 in the fourth ODI against England at Trent Bridge on Wednesday, but if this was distinguished work, befitting one of the most respected figures in the cricket world, writes James Lawton in the Independent , it surely paled
Akhila Ranganna
25-Feb-2013
Kumar Sangakkara made 75 in the fourth ODI against England at Trent Bridge on Wednesday, but if this was distinguished work, befitting one of the most respected figures in the cricket world, writes James Lawton in the Independent, it surely paled beside the impact of his performance in the Lord's Long Room less than 48 hours earlier. Then he was given a standing ovation for a speech filled with courage and a biting insight into some of the reasons why cricket is seen so often to betray itself.
Sangakkara played cricket because of his passion for the game and for his understanding of how important it was to the morale of his people. It was more important than money and ego – and certainly it dwarfed, in his mind, any gaining of political influence. It meant that when he performed so steadfastly in what seemed certain to be a lost cause yesterday his work seemed to give off the kind of glow not normally associated with an admirable, if, in his terms, routine performance
Sangakkara has every right to make observations about the iniquities of Sri Lankan cricket, not just the right of free speech, but a right conferred upon him by 422 internationals over 11 years, more than 18,000 runs, two years of captaincy, a record of success both for himself and his team, a vast knowledge of his subject and a tireless commitment to the cause, writes David Hopps in the Guardian. If he has no right to speak, who does, Hopps asks.
So often we naively want our sporting heroes to impress us in a wider sense and so often they disappoint. Beyond their sporting genius, they have no revelations to make. Administrators quite like it that way. It is the Sangakkaras of the world, sportsmen who have achieved despite the machinations around them, and who dare to imagine something better, who possess a vision to question lesser men.
Sangakkara described Arjuna Ranatunga, as a "much-awaited messiah" in his speech, but while Arjuna defied such the system, Sangakkara cannot, even having well informed of the evils of it. That’s really what his MCC speech lacked writes Revata S Silva in the Island.
An editorial in the Indian Express states that at a time when many cricketing nations have been reticent to comment on the merits of the ICC’s recent suggestion to keep politicians out of the boards, Sangakkara has opened the debate. It is something that other nations could follow on.
Akhila Ranganna is assistant editor (Audio) at ESPNcricinfo