Tiger by the tale

defeat by England — had returned home to hostile fans baying for their blood. The prime target was captain Ajit Wadekar, whose fortunes had seen a sharp reversal. Three years earlier, he was made captain in place of Tiger Pataudi. Piqued, Pataudi had opted out of the 1971 tours of the West Indies and England, in which India registered its first ever series victories on foreign soil. Pataudi had then returned to play under Wadekar in the 1973 home series against England and after a rousing batting display early in the series, fared so poorly in the last Test that his fans had hoped he would retire gracefully soon after. He didn’t.

Instead, the 1974 debacle gave him a new lease of life. The selectors, eager to replace Wadekar who announced his retirement after that tour, fell back on experience rather than opting for a new captain to take on Clive Lloyd’s West Indies team. After an exchange that has become part of Indian cricket lore — Pataudi is reported to have made it clear that the selectors should consider him for his captaincy rather than his batting, and also insisted on being appointed captain for all five Tests — India had a new skipper. Or rather, an old one taking guard in his second innings at the helm.

Even ardent Pataudi admirers were understandably wary. But if any former Test cricketer had called it "a step backward," he would have had to eat his words. For, although we lost the series 2-3, it represented an important rite of passage for several young Indian players facing a mighty side for the first time. At the very least, it was a most interesting contest, with Indian making a near-miraculous comeback after being two down to square the series before ultimately falling in the decider. It had all the makings of a medieval war, complete with a handsome prince leading the perky underdogs.

Individual comparisons are indeed irrelevant. After all, Wadekar and Tendulkar have little in common except that both hail from the cricket nurseries of Bombay. In fact, Wadekar — unlike Tendulkar — almost always had good luck and rain on his side. Again, there is little to equate Azhar with Pataudi, except for stylish batsmanship, agile fielding and modelling assignments with actress-wives. The latter admittedly had a much better grasp on strategy and was a more astute judge and motivator of men.

In the past, Pataudi’s comments — particularly as editor of a sports magazine — were shining examples of penetrating insight and wise counsel. Some were critical and hard-hitting, much like those smacking cover drives that thrilled millions. But more importantly they made sense because they came from a man who had fought the battle from the trenches. This time round, they are unacceptable for the same reason. He doubtless knows the pressures of comeback captaincy and should realize that the last thing Azhar needs is carping putdowners from his seniors.

Pataudi captained with the flair of a gambler. He often went out on a limb and won matches from seemingly impossible situations, like he did against the Windies in 1974-75. The new year may well hold a few surprises for the Indian cricket fan, although Azhar’s alleged connections with the betting game so far have had little impact on his style of captaincy.