We Indians used to have a 'fab four' in Indian Cricket some 7 years ago. The moniker of Fab Four sometimes changed to 'fab five' for either Jumbo (Kumble) or Veeru would come up with a superlative performance and equal the aura of 'fab four'. But it never became 'superb six' for the reasons unknown though it exactly deserved that. Nevertheless, Kumble, a cricketer par excellence and an obvious contender for the fourth spot had there been any vacancy, called the day first on his remarkable career (in 2008) and thus our anxiety eased a little. But Sourav had already announced his official retirement before the commencement of Border-Gavaskar Trophy (2008), so at the end of this series, we had two vacancies to fill up. And since Sehwag was the only capable cricketer to fill that spot, we quickly signed him up. No doubt, he truly belonged.
Was Sehwag incomparable like the other occupants of Fab Four? Let's see. Sachin was God (Incomparable). Dravid, 'The Wall' (incomparable). Laxman, The Magician (Incomparable). Sourav Ganguly, well, his is a debatable case. For many, he was the most humane-like cricketer in this league of extraordinary gentlemen cricketers and his records, though quite many, are all achievable. But for me, a Gangulian, his personality, non-conformist approach and man-management skills were all legendary so unlike the above 'many' and like the 'other many', I consider him the natural choice for forth spot. But even then, Sourav was, all too often in his pomp, has been described as graceful as David Gower and David is certainly an 'incomparable' figure as far as the history of English and Word Cricket go. So what are the arguments in Sehwag Case (We need them in modern times to ascertain the status of a modern legend)? Well, I have gathered some evidence and though you don't need them at all to come to the obvious conclusion but still they will give you peace. They all come from foreign writers and we Indians love everything that's white as far as I know (Call it a colonial mentality or anything else but I have witnessed too many proofs). Let's hear them:
1) Jarrod Kimber, the most recognized and worship writer on ESPNCricinfo's panel, calls him 'a wild animal of batting who if let loose, can wreck havoc in opposition's bowling herd'. Jarrod christens him as a 'Zen Slogger' if one ever dares to call him one. He through his moving tribute (on Cricinfo) and you will too call it the most original paean of Sehwag's astonishing achievements if once read, further rates him 'unique' and 'incomparable'. He in the second paragraph though compares him to another 'incomparable' Aussie Great, Victor Trumper (whose mentions in Australian Cricket public domains always pissed off Sir Don Bradman, who else). You see, here we get the First Vote.
2) Jon Hotten, one of the most famous Cricket bloggers, did an article on David Warner and his rise into Test Cricket arena back in December 2014 on Cricinfo and it was etched in my memory ever since. Jon lets us know that Dave Warner was the pupil of Veeru in Delhi Daredevils gear and it was actually Sehwag who forecast his brilliant success in Test Cricket. Back then, Warner hadn't even played his first class match. Such was Veeru's foresight and today, anyone can say with certainty that Warner is his most natural successor though in an Aussie shirt. That lets Jon conclude another finding: Sehwag was not a player, he was a revolution and a breeder of revolutionaries such as Warner and De Villiars and thus call them, 'Sehwag's Children'. Two Votes.
3) Eddie Smith was a Cricketer of some repute in an English shirt as well as English county cricket. Now he has all grown to become one of the more knowledgeable analysts of our beautiful game. He analyses the batting of Sehwag and opines that even in the era of batting greats such as Lara, Ponting, Kallis, Sachin, Dravid, Inzamam and Chanderpaul, Sehwag managed to create a niche for himself so awe-inspiring that he became the first person to be categorized as 'Others' of World Cricket (Matthew Hayden became the second inductee, though much later after his retirement). He praises his incredible mental strength and calls it a 'pragmatic art'. He scoffs off Sehwag's detractors who call him a 'Slogger' and a 'Dasher' and instead call him a 'pragmatic artist'. He further recalls a story related to Sehwag with Stuart Clarke as an antagonist where Sturat Clarke discloses his bowling plans to Sehwag. Clark explained, "the area of the pitch we're supposed to land it on against Sehwag is about two millimetres by two millimetres!" A fraction full: expect to be driven for four. A fraction short: expect to be punched off the back foot for four. The Margin for error was ever so small for a bowler if he's bowling to Veeru. Third Vote.
4) Ian Chapell compared him to a batting 'Moses' who tore away oppositions' bowling line-ups with an ease as calming and reassuring as Moses' 'Parting of Red Sea' Act. Fourth Vote.
So we finally manage to prove our hypothesis right. Sehwag was an undisputed member of Fab Four, a sui generis and a natural phenomenon. He was incomparable and incorrigible. He followed his instincts all the way through and never for once, got out of his entertainer's cloak. A people's player he always was and if God ever manages to come up with a dream Indian Test 11, I bet Sehwag's will be the first name on His sheet followed by Sunny Gavaskar. Yes, that would do for a handsome opening partnership...................#ThankYouVeeru......#IAmDone......#NakedEmotions
Was Sehwag incomparable like the other occupants of Fab Four? Let's see. Sachin was God (Incomparable). Dravid, 'The Wall' (incomparable). Laxman, The Magician (Incomparable). Sourav Ganguly, well, his is a debatable case. For many, he was the most humane-like cricketer in this league of extraordinary gentlemen cricketers and his records, though quite many, are all achievable. But for me, a Gangulian, his personality, non-conformist approach and man-management skills were all legendary so unlike the above 'many' and like the 'other many', I consider him the natural choice for forth spot. But even then, Sourav was, all too often in his pomp, has been described as graceful as David Gower and David is certainly an 'incomparable' figure as far as the history of English and Word Cricket go. So what are the arguments in Sehwag Case (We need them in modern times to ascertain the status of a modern legend)? Well, I have gathered some evidence and though you don't need them at all to come to the obvious conclusion but still they will give you peace. They all come from foreign writers and we Indians love everything that's white as far as I know (Call it a colonial mentality or anything else but I have witnessed too many proofs). Let's hear them:
1) Jarrod Kimber, the most recognized and worship writer on ESPNCricinfo's panel, calls him 'a wild animal of batting who if let loose, can wreck havoc in opposition's bowling herd'. Jarrod christens him as a 'Zen Slogger' if one ever dares to call him one. He through his moving tribute (on Cricinfo) and you will too call it the most original paean of Sehwag's astonishing achievements if once read, further rates him 'unique' and 'incomparable'. He in the second paragraph though compares him to another 'incomparable' Aussie Great, Victor Trumper (whose mentions in Australian Cricket public domains always pissed off Sir Don Bradman, who else). You see, here we get the First Vote.
2) Jon Hotten, one of the most famous Cricket bloggers, did an article on David Warner and his rise into Test Cricket arena back in December 2014 on Cricinfo and it was etched in my memory ever since. Jon lets us know that Dave Warner was the pupil of Veeru in Delhi Daredevils gear and it was actually Sehwag who forecast his brilliant success in Test Cricket. Back then, Warner hadn't even played his first class match. Such was Veeru's foresight and today, anyone can say with certainty that Warner is his most natural successor though in an Aussie shirt. That lets Jon conclude another finding: Sehwag was not a player, he was a revolution and a breeder of revolutionaries such as Warner and De Villiars and thus call them, 'Sehwag's Children'. Two Votes.
3) Eddie Smith was a Cricketer of some repute in an English shirt as well as English county cricket. Now he has all grown to become one of the more knowledgeable analysts of our beautiful game. He analyses the batting of Sehwag and opines that even in the era of batting greats such as Lara, Ponting, Kallis, Sachin, Dravid, Inzamam and Chanderpaul, Sehwag managed to create a niche for himself so awe-inspiring that he became the first person to be categorized as 'Others' of World Cricket (Matthew Hayden became the second inductee, though much later after his retirement). He praises his incredible mental strength and calls it a 'pragmatic art'. He scoffs off Sehwag's detractors who call him a 'Slogger' and a 'Dasher' and instead call him a 'pragmatic artist'. He further recalls a story related to Sehwag with Stuart Clarke as an antagonist where Sturat Clarke discloses his bowling plans to Sehwag. Clark explained, "the area of the pitch we're supposed to land it on against Sehwag is about two millimetres by two millimetres!" A fraction full: expect to be driven for four. A fraction short: expect to be punched off the back foot for four. The Margin for error was ever so small for a bowler if he's bowling to Veeru. Third Vote.
4) Ian Chapell compared him to a batting 'Moses' who tore away oppositions' bowling line-ups with an ease as calming and reassuring as Moses' 'Parting of Red Sea' Act. Fourth Vote.
So we finally manage to prove our hypothesis right. Sehwag was an undisputed member of Fab Four, a sui generis and a natural phenomenon. He was incomparable and incorrigible. He followed his instincts all the way through and never for once, got out of his entertainer's cloak. A people's player he always was and if God ever manages to come up with a dream Indian Test 11, I bet Sehwag's will be the first name on His sheet followed by Sunny Gavaskar. Yes, that would do for a handsome opening partnership...................#ThankYouVeeru......#IAmDone......#NakedEmotions
Comments
Post a Comment