by Dr. David Wesley
Introduction: Dr. David Wesley, a cricket enthusiast and professor of English Literature writes about one of the most celebrated cricketer in the history of the sport - Sachin Tendulkar. An idol to some and a God to many, Tendulkar was something of a prodigy, a genius in his own league. There was a much anticipated moment in the Little Master's career when the world waited for him to score his 100th century. Wesley takes a different path in his article when he talks about the blinding effect the number 100 had had on viewers, critics, and pretty much everyone who followed the sport, leading to a loss of appreciation for his brilliantly played matches in between his 99th and 100th international century.
Amidst all the furore about Sachin Tendulkar's 'yet-another-opportunity-to-get-the-much-awaited-but-disappointing-hundredth-hundred' which did not materialize, not many noticed the genius in action in that innings of 94 out. What mattered to most were those 6 more runs he did not score. In the search for the magic three-figure mark which the great man had hitherto reached for 99 times, the work of an artist was taken for granted. A trademark Tendulkar-straight-drive early on in the morning session was received with boisterous approval by the crowd but it was more in anticipation of the milestone than in appreciation of the man's handiwork. That boundary which was a result of dexterity trained for two decades faded into dry calculations that merely took everyone four runs closer to the desired target. Few minutes later, an ethereal cover-drive by the master only added up another four runs in the advance towards the milestone blinding the connoisseur's eye.
On any other day, those two shots would have been hailed as master strokes. And there were some straight-batted, high-elbowed, still-headed defensive shots which, in any other situation, a Sunil Gavaskar would have gone on to speak about how youngsters should learn from the little master. But this was a different day. A day when he knew exactly what was in the bowler's mind and left the balls outside the off-stump with utter certainty and swayed away from the short stuff with a lot more ease. But it was also a day when 'shots for shots' sake' kind of spectatorship turned into 'shots for runs' sake'.
There was more focus on the runs and the number '100' than on the purity of his strokes. And it is an irony that his two flashy but technically impeccable 'upar-cuts' (upper-cut) should come in this pressure-filled, caution-demanding innings. But an after-thought of those 'upar-cuts' actually dilutes the irony. An 'upar-cut', though it seems to throw caution to the winds, is apparently a safer shot (when there is no third-man) which actually demands technical correctness from the batsman. Traditional batsmanship looks to meet the ball with a straight bat and the straighter the ball goes from the bat, that much better the shot is. However, an 'upar-cut' sends the ball straight behind the batsman's head without turning the bat horizontal. The traditional maxim of a straight bat is still maintained even when the ball is meant to go behind the batsman and the wicket-keeper. It needs as much technical purity as a straight or a cover-drive. And an 'upar-cut' can only happen when there is maximum improvisation of batting technique. It needs quick-feet, firm hands and sharp eyes along with a great deal of imagination.
The two perfect 'upar-cuts' that Tendulkar essayed are an indication that he is not done yet. If he requires quick feet, firm hands and sharp eyes to get his hundredth hundred, then they were very much there in grand display in that knock of 94. There is not only a hundredth hundred in the offing. There is more. His greatness lies in the fact that his genius is taken as matter-of-fact. It wasn't surprising to many that he batted the way he did. However, most were so certain of the hundredth hundred that it was surprising when he did not get it. But history tells us otherwise. He had got out 26 times in the 90s. And yesterday's 94 out was just the 27th. Should something be so surprising if it happens for 27 times? Or should there be any surprise if something that happened for 99 times should happen for one more time? Had he got those elusive six more runs to complete the century of centuries and put a face on people's dreams, it wouldn't have been late before we start clamouring for the 101st.
