Skip to main content

A cricketing chapter closes

Its been nearly a month now since Tendulkar announced his retirement from one-day internationals but I don't think its fully sunk in for me that I won't ever see him walk out to open the batting again in the India blues. Even though my first foray into following cricket was the fifty over world cup in 1987, I soon got hooked onto Test match cricket and have never really felt as passionately for the limited overs format since. Since the 1990s, one-day cricket (except World Cups) for me has always been more about following my favourite cricketers and how they perform and Tendulkar has always been in the top three in that list.

The numbers of course are awe-inspiring but what's more staggering is the consistency with which he kept churning them out over such a long period. To average nearly 45 over 463 matches boggles the mind to a degree I wouldn't have imagined possible. 463 matches. In terms of days of cricket, that equates to over 90 Test matches. The next closest (Jayasuriya) played only 18 ODIs fewer than Tendulkar but 84 fewer Test matches. And his closest rival in terms of hundreds (Ponting) made 19 fewer (30 vs. Tendulkar's 49). Amongst all 35 players who have scored 10 or more hundreds in ODIs, only two (Hashim Amla and Virat Kohli) take fewer innings to score a hundred (6 and 7.1 respectively vs. 9.2 for Tendulkar). And both of them are yet to play even a hundred games each so odds on that they will be behind Tendulkar soon.

But its not just the numbers that make it memorable. At the end of the day what will stay in mind for me is all of those magical innings that he played over 20+ years. The collaring of Abdul Qadir in '89, the rise to opener in '94, the World Cup in '96, Sharjah in '98, the 186* vs NZ in '99, the World Cup (again) in '03, the CB series finals in '08, the 175 vs Aus in '09, the double hundred against SA in '10, the list is endless. And the one magical non-innings moment will be his teammates chairing him after his biggest dream (India winning the world cup) finally came true at his fifth attempt. He was the last survivor amongst my five favourite "cricketers-I've-watched-the-most" (Waugh, Ambrose, Warne, and Akram being the others). The day is not far when he'll play his last Test match and when that day comes, my love of the game will probably not diminish but some corner of my cricketing mind will find that a certain door has shut forever.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Et tu?

As a single sport website, I think Cricinfo has brought about a revolution and the fact that they were bought by ESPN is testament to how highly valued they've become. Their editing and approach to articles/opinion has been refreshing to say the least and even though they seem to have had a lot of editorial staff movement they've usually maintained very high standards. Off late though, both in their headline styles as well as in actual content, there seems to be an occasional slippage of standards and an inching towards the modern media sensationalism which is a bit of a pity. This piece  by Siddharth Monga is a classic example. Granted that the last two press conferences by Dhoni and Sehwag  indicated clearly that the captain and his deputy did not agree on this aspect of selection but "discord", "dissent", "public sniping" feels rather presumptuous and heavy handed. Yes, it is a team sport but there is no reason why everyone on the team needs ...

The Ashes part deux: series preview

While I admire the honest, outspoken style that Ian Chappell has in his commentary and writing I don't find myself agreeing with his views very often. This latest piece on ESPNcricinfo is an exception though. In what is a faintly ridiculous set of back to back Ashes series (to accommodate an ODI World Cup of all things), the build-up to the second round has been laughable almost. Anyone who hasn't followed the game for a few years might be forgiven if they thought that the Australian domination from the 1990s and early 2000s has continued and that they will win in a canter again. For a team that's lost seven of their last nine matches (and it should have been eight really), that's quite a good turnaround on paper (and digitally). The reality though is that unless they show a drastic improvement (especially in terms of scoring runs) and England have a bit of a shocker, its going to be well nigh impossible for Australia to win back the urn. Despite putting Buffoon Bo...

Quick singles: Why the double standards?

I'm no fan of David Warner's but for once, I'm firmly and squarely on his side . Sportspersons are probably treated the most unfairly by public opinion (and often the media) whenever they are involved in pay disputes. "Oh, look these millionaires are complaining about not getting paid enough" seems to be the gist of the general reactions. I find this attitude inexplicable at best and grossly hypocritical if I'm feeling less charitable. Like the rest of us, all athletes have the right to fight for what they think they should be paid. That is the fundamental part. In addition (and unlike many of the rest of us), most sportspersons operate in the knowledge that they only have a short period available as a performer, and therefore only a short period to maximise earnings. Most people that I know would behave exactly the same as Warner and his colleagues are doing. So why all the hue and cry?