The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Ganguly, Sachin, Ponting: Roebuck's hat-trick

Roar Guru
17th January, 2010
1
2860 Reads

Before I begin my piece, let me first say that I am an avid reader of Peter Roebuck’s columns. It is stating the obvious to say that he is extremely readable. His writing is incisive, picturesque, riveting – and logical.

But there are times when he gets it terribly wrong. When, in the anxiety to “shoot from the hip”, he loses his balance and goes off target.

He shatters his normally astute sense of cricketing acumen by ‘writing champions off’.

His latest mis-hit is Ricky Ponting. In advising Ponting (before the Hobart Test) to “get off the hook”, he has made his third major mistake. Ponting must have known that it could only go right for him to hook his critics, from then on.

There are at least two times Roebuck has lambasted a cricketer – and both times the ‘impugned cricketer’ has not only ‘come back’ – but returned with a bang to the champion ways.

In December 2005 (in the Greg Chappell regime) Roebuck wrote a piece, “Face the Facts,” wherein he tore Sourav Ganguly apart. Citing that Ganguly should be “tossed overboard”, and condemning the Indian public for its “juvenile” and “illogical” reaction to the Southpaw’s ouster.

This cricket observer, who had more belief in Ganguly’s abilities than a critic from Down Under would have, rebutted Mr. Roebuck. This was my call:

“If ‘Age cannot wither’ a Sachin, Gilchrist, Lara or an Inzy (all safely in the reckoning for the 2007 World Cup) – can it deter a ‘fighting’ fit Sourav Ganguly?

Advertisement

“Ganguly’s return to international cricket, against tremendous odds, remains one of the greatest come-back sagas in cricketing history.”

In June 2006, Sachin Tendulkar, making a comeback to international cricket after surgery, joined the Lashings Cricket Club in England. And he promptly made a smashing hundred.

Mr. Roebuck, in turn, wrote a ‘lashing’ piece, “Tendulkar’s decision lamentable,” wherein he castigated Tendulkar for the “mistake” in joining “past players in their unending parade.”

Not one to take such unfair remarks lying down, and having great faith in Sachin’s judgment (time proved Sachin and me right!) this cricket follower at once replied, in protest against Peter Roebuck’s over-the-top criticism:

“Peter Roebuck’s attack on Sachin Tendulkar (‘Tendulkar’s decision lamentable’, The Hindu, Sat.,24 June, 2006) is a grievous error.

“Mr.Roebuck has lambasted Sachin for making the ‘lamentable’ decision and ‘mistake’, in playing for the ‘wretched concept’ Lashings Club in England. For ‘casting himself as over the hill’ … for ‘swanning around’ … in the quest for rehabilitation.

“Roebuck goes on to say: ‘Nevertheless it is a mistake. Tendulkar does not belong in this company. Far from advancing his rehabilitation, these appearances may set him back. By offering the temptations of the easy life, they may weaken his resolve. Nor should any attention be paid to his performances. His hundred was meaningless. Great warriors belong in the field, not in tents re-enacting their most famous victories.’

Advertisement

“Mr.Roebuck worries needlessly.

“No one in their right cricketing mind would set much store by Sachin’s hundred for the club … however lashing it may have been.

“‘Great warriors’ have different ways of preparing for the great battles ahead. Some have been known to sulk in their tents … not so with Sachin. Instead of tenting around in monsooning India, the Little Master is attempting to fight his way back into form and fitness… whatever the ‘field’.

“The shrewd campaigner that he is, this ‘contemporary champion’ knows best what is best for himself. Not Mr. Roebuck, nor anyone else.

“Time will tell what ‘company he keeps’!”

Soon after the Lashings stint, in Sept. 2006, Sachin scored a scintillating comeback century (his 40th one-day ton), remaining not out, against the West Indies.

The rest, as they say, is history!

Advertisement

To come back to Ricky Ponting, he is in the very good company of those whom Peter Roebuck ‘aimed at’ and badly misfired.

close