India Syndicate 2.0

ODIs played by India no longer have any actual value - there are so many of them these days. However, they are good indications of certain other things. One poignant moment was when Mohd Ashraful dropped his second catch in as many overs against the Indians while falling on his bottom. There was something in it that lent itself as a metaphor. When Ashraful first came on the scene, he was seen as the next big  thing from the sub-continent - kind of how Umran Akmal is seen these days. He also produced a couple of stellar knocks to re-inforce that perception - a ton against the Aussies in a historic win in England, for example. He was supposed to rival the likes of Sachin and Aravinda.

But somewhere, something happened and Ashraful was forgotten. He was given the captaincy in the subcontinent tradition of the best batsman in the team getting the captaincy irrespective of whether or not that batsman has the required abilities to be a captain (note how I said “best batsman” and not “best bowler”, or “best all-rounder”. We are talking about the sub-continent, you see !). His runs were no longer making the news as much as his lack of runs did. His leadership was virtually non-existent and his halo had been more or less been swallowed by the darkness of mid-career gloom.

In some ways Ashraful’s career is a reflection of how many talented youngsters fall by the sidelines as they try to come to grips with their own talents. I think there is special talent required to handle talent itself. As dubious as that last sentence sounds, it holds a light to the likes of Sachin and Ponting who have been able to take a lot of cricketing talent and do something exceptional with it. The reason I pick these two is because they are so complete as cricketers. Ponting is a gem of a fielder in addition to being one of the all time greats with the bat. To add, he has shown that he can lead - controversies and Ashes defeats not-withstanding. Wicket-keeping is the only thing that Sachin has not tried his hand at.

The way these two approach the game is to look at each scenario, each game, each knock as a problem and try to figure out how to solve it. I read somewhere that Federer approaches each point as a problem and tries to figure out how to solve it. I believe there is something of the “here-and-now” to this approach that blurs out the larger worries about career, form, and self-doubt that most mortals struggle against. There is something of staying-with-the-moment, fighting-this-problem-here in this approach.

Great talent, more so great potential, can be destructive. Sometimes it is good not to have so much talent if you do not have the mental strength to cope with it. Possessing talent is not a boon in itself…the actual boon is the struggle that comes with it - the struggle to ensure that you use your talent and not the other way round.

I believe it takes that something special to take a young Ashraful and create a champion…that something else.