An Indian cricketing tradition that has been maintained
During Sourav Ganguly's recent protracted lean trot, there was never any talk among his playing colleagues or the team management that he should perhaps step down even for one match, let alone be replaced as captain
Partab Ramchand
29-Jun-2001
During Sourav Ganguly's recent protracted lean trot, there was never
any talk among his playing colleagues or the team management that he
should perhaps step down even for one match, let alone be replaced as
captain. The practice of the captain opting out of the team or being
dropped by the authorities due to lack of form has generally been
frowned upon in Indian cricket. In the formative years of Indian Test
cricket, there was the example of the Maharajkumar of Vizianagaram who
led the country in all three Tests in England in 1936 despite his
limitations as a player, emphasized by the fact that he scored just 33
runs at an average of 8.25.
From all available evidence there has been no change in the trend in
the post independence era too, even if the cricketers are eminently
more qualified as players than `Vizzy'. Take the case of Gulabrai
Ramchand. Well past his best as a player, he was appointed captain as
a desperate measure in 1959-60 against Australia, but for the first
two Tests only. The miraculous victory in the second Test at Kanpur
however saw him appointed for the rest of the series. But his non
performing role both with bat and ball meant that, as a player, he was
virtually a passenger in the side. A meagre tally of 111 runs from
nine innings and a haul of just one wicket at a cost of 200 runs for a
man recognized as one of the leading all rounders of his time made for
sorry reading. Fortunately, his dismal form did not have a
demoralising effect on the team members who did very well and the side
lost only by two matches to one instead of the 4-0 rout predicted at
the start of the contest against formidable opposition.
Two years later, Nari Contractor was in much the same position. He was
only in his second season at the helm and in six innings from four
Tests against England the left handed opening batsman was reduced to
just 91 runs. The first three Tests had been drawn while the fourth
had been won. There was no talk however of Contractor stepping down
and he stayed on as captain for the final Test which India won to
clinch a series against England for the first time. For good measure,
Contractor showed a timely return to form by scoring 86 in the first
innings.
During MAK Pataudi's long reign as captain, there were at least two
occasions when there was some talk that he would be replaced. The
first was in 1963-64 when he was not yet fully entrenched in the post.
One reason, his detractors pointed out, was the lean trot he was going
through around the domestic circuit. Unfortunately he carried this to
the Test series against England. In the first five innings he scraped
through just 30 runs. Some in authority in fact suggested that he have
an eye check up, as he recalls in his autobiography `Tiger's Tale' but
he would have none of it. His way of hitting back was to get an
unbeaten 203 in the fourth Test and from then on, he was the
undisputed monarch of Indian cricket.
That is, until 1969-70. In the twin rubbers against New Zealand and
Australia, a series of low scores meant that questions were raised as
to whether Pataudi's best days as captain were behind him,
particularly as there seemed to be a ready made successor in Ajit
Wadekar. However, through the poor form, Pataudi stayed on as captain.
It was only by the time of the next rubber against West Indies in 1971
that Wadekar succeeded him.
In the 80s, it was Sunil Gavaskar's turn to feel the heat twice. The
first occasion was against Australia in 1980-81 when he scored but 48
runs in five innings. Even if Gavaskar was then the undisputed monarch
of Indian cricket, there might have been talk of replacing him as
captain, if his deputy was not the more gentle and mild Gundappa
Viswanath. Gavaskar however came under severe pressure three years
later when against England at home he could score only 140 runs from
eight innings. He was not exactly at the height of his popularity then
and the fact that the series was rather unexpectedly lost made matters
worse for him. Again however, he remained at the helm through the
contest even though he never captained India in a Test match again.
But that, as they say, is another story.
At the end of the decade, another Indian captain had to bear the brunt
of criticism for failing repeatedly with the bat. K Srikkanth's team
did very well in Pakistan, drawing all four Tests against the odds but
the captain himself found runs as hard to come by as water in the
desert. He scored just 97 runs from seven innings at an average of
13.85 but such were his leadership qualities that there was never any
chance he would be asked to step down. At the end of the series
however Srikkanth was dumped as captain but his dismissal had nothing
to do with his failure with the bat.
During his long reign, Md Azharuddin also came under the microscopic
eye more than once. India were hardly winning anything under his
captaincy and when he failed in Australia in 1991-92 questions were
asked about his capabilities even though there was hardly any talk of
his deputy Ravi Shastri taking over the reins. Azharuddin stayed on as
captain and by the mid nineties was firmly entrenched in fact as the
country's most successful leader, statistically, if not tactically. By
1996 in England the halo had become dimmer and a poor run with the bat
in the three Tests - besides a loss in the series - saw him lose the
captaincy to his hand picked successor Sachin Tendulkar. But again it
was only at the end of the tour and not midway through the series that
Azharuddin was replaced and so the tradition through the decades, of
the captain not stepping down on his own or being replaced midway
through a contest, in spite of displaying variable form, has been
maintained.