Why we dont deserve Sreesanth!
July 29th 2011 14:34
No, the seed for this article was not formed after Sreesanth's fantastic bowling performance in the ongoing 2nd Test against England! But definitely the need to put pen to paper (or, in this case, finger to keyboard) grew after that.
Santhakumaran Sreesanth was and continues to be India's problem child, the quintessential prima donna. Whatever he does becomes controversial. And where he obliges the news hounds and behaves eccentrically the drums start to roll and it almost ends up being a media-lynching. A random word here, an appearance in a nightclub there, everything adds up to his reputation. Further maligning it.
To add to all this, everybody connected to Indian cricket, from the current Test captain to former captains and players; practically everybody is uniformly critical of Sreesanth. Of his propensity for overt reaction. Of his infectious enthusiasm which transforms into fiery passion on field. Of his heady celebrations and eccentric reactions. Even of his creativity with the ball when they accuse him of trying too much too soon.
As a matter of fact I was pleasantly surprised to see Sreesanth picked ahead of Munaf for this Test match. Surely the former's credentials as a better swinger of the cricket ball stood in his stead. He did not get to use the new ball here - which seemed a bit counter-intuitive actually. While Praveen Kumar certainly needs and deserves the new ball after his performances, Ishant's style of bowling meant that he could do what he does so well even as the first change bowler. Perhaps the Indian captain did not have enough confidence in Sreesanth - something that has become apparent even in a couple of past public interviews with the captain.
Sreesanth, I find, is crucified for wearing his heart on the sleeve. He is criticized for going over the top. For being too aggressive. But hold on - were we not the same people who roundly criticized Srinath and Venkatesh Prasad for not being aggressive towards the batsmen? Were we not the same people who would get irritated at Srinath's abrupt U-turn at the top of his follow through without even a second look at the batsman? Did we not go out of our way and declare that we needed an aggressive fast bowler? Somebody who could get into the opposition batsmen's skin - a 'la a Dion Nash, a Mcgrath or even an Andre Nel? Did we not bemoan generations after generations of fast bowlers who dont provide the same challenge, the same confrontation that our batsman got from the other side? Why then are we now criticizing Sreesanth?
Allusions pointing out that Sreesanth's aggression on the field is a mere affectation and not part of his natural character are frankly ridiculous. Andre Nel is probably a perfect gentleman off the field. A fast bowler does not need to be wordy and aggressive off the field. It is a job out there. And the bowler is donning a role - just as the captain does. A captain is required to maintain decorum. A role which many people grow into. Ask Ricky Ponting. Captaincy, many maintain, mellowed him out. Why then can Sreesanth not be confrontational on the field towards the batsman (within permissible limits, of course) while still being soft-spoken and genteel off the field?
Sreesanth and other people of his ilk deserve our patience and support. More than that they also need the support of our cricket establishment including the players and the captain. That is what Mcgrath got. That is what Nel got. That is what Dion Nash got. That is the least that aggressive and talented sportspeople deserve! On the other hand if we continue to put pressure on young and still-maturing Sreesanth, we, as a cricket following public, might just end up proving exactly why we don't deserve an aggressive fast bowler.
| 18 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog