I have a great regard for Ian Chappell as a batsman (he is highly under rated) as captain (he is one of the best one has seen) and as commentator (he is always good) but he has this tendency to use very strong words and to put more emphasis on the point he is making than is needed. This results in his putting his foot in his mouth once in a while (not a great surprise for an Aussie). In this respect he is like Bishen Bedi except that Bedi does in in every sentence
I feel when Chappell wrote that article, Sachin was surely still not out of his worst patch. Many had suggested that he should quit (nonsense in my humble opinion) and many others that he should be dropped from the Indian team which was almost justified I think. It is silly to think a player out of form, howsoever great, should not be dropped, or rested if you please. A spell away from the crease, some time in the early 2000's, would have done Sachin a spot of good and he would have come back to form earlier and would have looked better as he has always done when laid down by injuries.
Chappell, however, was wrong on two counts.
Firstly to suggest that Sachin should quit the game. Many have written why he should not or why it was not proper for any one to suggest it. The selectors can drop a player. The public (and the experts) can say he deserves to be dropped but its no one's call to ask a player to retire. Thats absolute nonsense. It is the player's call - one hundred percent. He may make a right choice in timing, he may make a bad one but you cant make the decision for him.
People talk of whether Sachin was good enough to be in the Indian team at that time. This is important and important for selection purpose. Thats all. The retirement decidion depends upon whether the player, himself, feels he is good enough and if not whether he thinks he can come back to be good enough. Again the decision is his. He can at best be dropped.
There seems to be this issue nowadays with all great and really good players. We seem unable to see them beyond their peaks. This is wrong. Hobbs played first class cricket into his mid fifties and, in fact, scored more than a hundred first class centuries after his 40th birthday.
WG Grace played his best cricket in his 20's. His record from 1880 onward is much worse and is what pulls down his overall average but he was good enough to play for the first class sides he played for. He was just not as good as he was in his 20's.
One can go on and on with such examples.
Chappell was write in suggesting that Sachin was nowhere near his best but he was out of place suggesting SRT should quit the game. His hinting at selfish personal motives does not deserve a comment.
The second point on which Chappell erred was to suggest deride Sachin's double hundred in Australia in 204. That bit needs to be quoted...
His double century at the SCG in January 2004 was a classic case of a great player really struggling. He came to the crease out of form and despite amassing all those runs and batting for in excess of ten hours he was no closer to recapturing his best touch than he was when he started out. It was a tribute to his determination but it was a sad sight to see; there are enough average players around that you don't won't to see a class one reduced to that level.
Yes he was struggling as he came into that game and he decided he was going to get out of his rut. He told himself (rightly or wrongly who knew then) that he was going to cut out his cover drives completely. and he did.
HERE is Sachin's wagon wheel for the innings.
Thirty-three boundaries in all but only one of them in front of the wicket on the off side. None between point and covers. His innings scored at a strike rate of 55 plus - no less than his career strike rate. Everyone who saw that innings will remember that innings. Yes it wasn't Tendulkar at the peak of his form. we don't need Chappell to tell us that. It was Tendulkar in the WORST form of his life, playing against the best side, by far, on the whole planet and he scored 248 runs. This was triumph of a master over terrible form, intense =pressure from public, media and critics and, most importantly, self-doubt which must have crept in. Yet he scored those runs. Not prodding and boring us to death. Not hammering the minnows of the world to get a dubious 'good-feel' about himself but conquering his demons AND the best team in the world in their backyard. What could be more admirable?
And what about the discipline of the man. After reaching his hundred, after reaching his 150 and then 200, did he try to play the cover drive that he had played hundreds of times all over the world. NO. Had he forgotten how to play it? Are you out of your mind? He just decided he wont do it and didn't. Isn't this the mental strength that Australians profess to admire so much?
I watched every single second of that innings and although I am not one of those nationalistic fanatics, my heart swelled with pride when i saw this fellow Bombayite, this fellow Indian, this fellow cricketer (if I may immodestly say so) play the most significant innings of his life. No Mr Chappell you got it all wrong this time. It was not a sad sight to see. Not for Indians not for cricketers and not for sportsmen around the world. Anyone with his head(and heart) in the right place would salute the effort of this sportsman.
And what of the Australian attack?
Here was Sachin helping India pile up a 700 plus score the highest ever by India against Australia (at that time the highest against any country in 72 years of test cricket), wasn't Australia trying to stop him? Get him out maybe or at least cut out the flow of runs. After all he wasn't scoring many runs on that side. Other than the solitary boundary, Sachin had just 19 runs between point and straight behind the bowler on the off side !! Wow and yet the best side in the world, led by the best captain of the day, on one of the largest grounds in the world, could not stop him? You mean they did not try?
Of course they did. Yet the little master manipulated the bowling from every where on the wicket to the on side, scoring 97 runs behind square leg and 89 in front of it ! Does that not require extraordinary skills? Do you not have it in you to appreciate those extraordinary skills Mr Chappell?
Of course not. It is much more important to use strong, even if misplaced, language and references to make a point you have already decided you want to make.
In that case, anything goes I suppose.
Had he stopped at that obvious thing that Tendulkar had been generally out of form he' d been okay. But he went a step further and "predicted" Tendulkar to be "done" and "his inclusion would be only in his selfish niterests and not that of the team". That is where he erredand rightly copping he brickbats.
