|
|
|
|
BOOK
REVIEW
More than just a
game
Twenty-Two Yards to Freedom: A
Social History of Indian Cricket by
Boria Majumdar
Reviewed by Sreeram
Chaulia
The megalithic proportions cricket
has assumed in India is astounding in terms of its
value in national consciousness. No other sport,
art or entertainment arouses as much Indian
passion and obsession as cricket. In this
compelling account, Oxford historian Boria
Majumdar captures the euphoria and the politics
that have imbricated the game ever since British
sailors and soldiers carried it to Indian shores
circa 1780. Through a meticulous examination of
events on and off the cricket field,  Majumdar throws open
fresh vistas on India's colonial and post-colonial
tryst with what has been far more than a mere
game.
This book rejects the view that
sports and politics do not mix and probes the
relationship between leisure and national
identity. Cricket is "a derivative sport,
creatively and imaginatively adapted to suit
Indian socio-cultural needs, to fulfill political
imperatives and satisfy economic aspirations". (p
1) Introduced in the late 18th century, it caught
the imagination of Indians for varied reasons. It
met urges for social mobility by uplifting the
underprivileged in a caste-ridden society. To
others, it was a non-violent way of challenging
the British - "a desire to meet the Englishman on
equal terms on the ground and vanquish him". (p 5)
Playing politics
The first
battle of native plebeian resistance against
European masters occurred in 1868 over the right
to cricket-playing space in Bombay (now Mumbai).
Though key Indian cricketers in history were not
nationalists, the masses perceived them as Indians
who competed on equal terms with the British and
impressed the West with their feats. Episodes of
cricketing history depicted in English-language
sources as imperial successes of the "civilizing
mission" were seen in vernacular Indian writings
as nationalist triumphs.
Maharajas of
colonial India patronized cricket as a way to
challenge the British, as a social ladder, and as
peer pressure. Teams could be sponsored by a
maharaja to overcome a financial crisis or to
establish regional supremacy. The Patiala royal
house promoted the game so as to "equal the
British". The Gwalior kings used cricket to break
class barriers in their principality. The maharaja
of Natore became a major cricket patron to
challenge his arch-rival, the maharaja of Cooch
Behar. Since the latter's team boasted of European
coaches and players, the former formed a rival
all-Indian side in 1900. An ardent nationalist,
Natore appropriated English ideals of fair play
and sporting spirit for his team.
The
sensational enmity between the kings of Patiala
and Vizianagram augured a struggle for supremacy
during India's 1932 tour of England. Both princes
vied for captaincy of the national squad.
Vizianagram, the losing bidder, withdrew, saying
he was "broken-hearted" but sowed dissentions. His
hatchet men in the team wrecked Patiala's
leadership from within. In 1934, Patiala proposed
to name the national championship after
Ranjitsinghji, the legendary Indian cricketer.
Vizianagram countered that it be called after
Viceroy Willingdon. In 1936, Lala Amarnath was
sent back from the tour of England because of the
machinations of Vizianagram, then the captain. It
was the headline of that era.
Ranjitsinghji harnessed his cricketing
prowess to further political ambitions of
succeeding to the throne of Nawanagar. His
world-famous cricketing skills endeared him to the
British, who accepted his claim to the succession
in 1907 although it was illegal. Later, he peddled
cricketing fame to secure the status of a princely
state for Nawanagar, a midget in size and
importance on the princely chessboard.
Cricket was the prize of a fierce regional
contest between Bombay and Bengal in the 1930s.
The maharaja of Santosh argued against Bombay's
domination by alleging that Bengali cricketers
were unfairly omitted from the Indian team.
Bengali journalists launched fierce attacks on
Bombay that were supported by the United
Provinces, another marginalized region.
Social leveler
Until the 1880s,
cricket in India was an upper-caste preserve. The
Parsis of Bombay, comprador capitalists, were the
first to adopt cricket in the late 1830s. Early
Hindu cricket was also of an elite nature.
Cricket's social base widened from 1884, when
patriarchs around the country recruited low-class
sportsmen as professionals. Dalit star Palwankar
Baloo broke new ground toward egalitarian society.
In an India mired in caste prejudices, Baloo won
great social acclaim as a player and inspired B R
Ambedkar, the framer of free India's constitution.
Baloo contested elections in 1934 and 1937 in
Bombay, venerated by high and low alike.
British denigration of Bengali
middle-class professionals (babus) led them
to shun discriminatory social practices and pick
the best native talent in sport. In Gujarat and
central India too, players from modest backgrounds
were roped into teams. School and college cricket
in the colonial era was representative of society,
aiming to eliminate distinctions of caste and
creed. Teachers encouraged students, irrespective
of pedigree, to play sports. "Proficiency in
cricket helped students get jobs which their
academic record would have denied them." (p 96)
The clock was turned back after
independence, when a caste elite took over Indian
cricket. Patronage changed hands from princes to
corporate houses, which determined cricketers'
recruitment and remuneration on the basis of
academic qualifications. Sports got concentrated
in metropolitan areas and players not in the top
bracket fell on hard times. Wicketkeeper Dattaram
Hindlekar, who represented India, passed away
untimely in 1949 for want of money for hospital
treatment.
The Board of Control for
Cricket in India (BCCI) escalated ticket prices
and guarantee-money demands from venues hosting
international matches, further sliding the game
into a preserve of the affluent. Spectator
violence in grounds recurred due to overcrowding
in the cheaper stands that were progressively
reduced in size. Hooliganism is the handiwork of
wealthy jingoistic youth who monopolize live
audiences at cricket stadiums today.
After
India's 1983 World Cup triumph, BCCI reverted to a
conscious talent-nurturing policy and paved the
way for a meritocracy to re-emerge. Thanks to the
sale of telecast rights to foreign broadcasters, a
coup that transformed Indian sports in 1995, BCCI
raised financial incentives in domestic cricket
and aided ailing yesteryear players. Cricket as an
aristocratic domain is today an anachronism.
The Bengal tradition
Large-scale
cricket began in Bengal in 1880, "rooted in the
urge to negate the charge of effeminacy leveled
against the Bengali male". (p 136) The British
believed cricket to be a way of implanting
manliness, stamina and vigor into effete Indians,
a view echoed by Bengali sports patrons desirous
of a new identity and individuality. A Bengali
coaching manual of 1899 reads, "The respect
accorded to a good cricket player by the Sahibs
finds no parallel." (p 156) At the Presidency
College, defeating the all-European Calcutta
Cricket Club was the central attraction of the
annual sports calendar. The popularity that
fixtures between Indian and English schools
generated indicates power equations between
colonizer and colonized.
Bengal declined
in cricket vis-a-vis Bombay after 1930. A proposal
for a permanent cricket stadium in Calcutta (now
Kolkata) was scuttled for years because the
colonial military was unwilling to release land
that would impair security arrangements for the
city. The British feared that nationalist-minded
Bengalis might rally around cricket for
self-assertion if it was encouraged beyond limits.
Religious turmoil forced the Hindu middle classes
to shun cricket patronage in the 1940s, plummeting
native interest in the game.
The Bombay
saga
Cricket in Bombay started amid
competitive communalism in society. Parsis, Hindus
and Muslims formed exclusive clubs and teams,
goaded by the superiority complex and separatism
of the British. The Bombay Pentangular
tournament's enormous popularity stamped the
communal organization of cricket. The city's work
ethic and commercialism also spawned
professionalism in cricket. Leading players
endorsed consumer durables for money in the late
1930s. The commodious Brabourne Stadium, opened in
1937, was partly financed by gate receipts from
the Pentangular.
The Pentangular was
abolished in 1946 after prolonged intrigues of
vested interests. Though couched in secular
nationalistic rhetoric, the anti-Pentangular
agitation was driven by commercial and power
political rivalries. The BCCI and other regional
cricket associations resented Bombay's hegemony of
the game and envied the Pentangular's money
spinning. Princes were wary of professional
players of Bombay who could defy patrons. Though
cricketers themselves vocally backed the
Pentangular (Vijay Merchant was suspended by BCCI
for supporting it), the opponents persuaded the
British to bury the tournament.
The
ungentlemanly game
Cricket as a gentleman's
game is a persisting myth. In India, it has
witnessed umpteen instances of bickering and
nastiness. C K Nayudu, a commoner, challenged
princely control of cricket. Embroiled in insults
and humiliation in the 1930s, he remained the
people's hero. Lala Amarnath, the captain of India
in 1948, had an infamous battle with BCCI
president A S De Mello. Journalists preferred the
polish and social status of De Mello to the
rusticity of Amarnath. However, Amarnath had the
last laugh by bundling out De Mello from the board
with the assistance of the Bengal lobby in 1951.
Selection of cricket umpires was mired in
controversy until 1960, when meritorious
appointments replaced nepotism and partiality of
cricket associations.
The personality
clash between Sunil Gavaskar and Kapil Dev in
1983-84 rocked the nation. In 1989, the BCCI
debarred six top cricketers for one year as
punishment for appearing in exhibition matches.
The ban was revoked after a Supreme Court
intercession. "Surging commercialization was
loosening older structures of dominance." (p 310)
The match-fixing horror of 2000-01 rocked public
confidence in cricket, with the captain and vice
captain implicated for "doing" games
(underperforming and manipulating results for
bookmakers). Majumdar reminds that in 1935,
Amarnath was offered Rs10,000 to throw away a
final in which he was playing. In 1948, a player
was suspended for "selling a match" in Bombay.
In 2001, English referee Mike Denness
overly penalized six Indian players, raising
specters of racism. The BCCI's confrontation with
the International Cricket Council (ICC) over this
reflected the changing balance of power in world
cricket. It revealed India's ascendancy in the
sport, buttressed by Jagmohan Dalmiya's dramatic
election as ICC president in 1997. Cricket's great
power shift was demonstrated again in the 2002 row
over Indian players' endorsements in ICC events.
Cricket is central to Indian national life
today, an elixir that renders backwardness and
poverty forgettable. Nothing short of clear
victory satisfies fanatic cricket fans. "Playing
cricket is no less difficult than governing the
country." (p 363) Cricket authorities and the
Indian government have had their share of tussles.
The 1993-95 dispute over telecasting rights
attained international political importance when
South African President Nelson Mandela attempted
to reach the Indian prime minister. It
demonstrated India's weakness as an attractive
destination for foreign investment as well as "the
connections between cricket, society and polity".
(p 405)
Majumdar's praiseworthy work
attests to the importance of non-sporting motives
and issues in sport. In India, all was and is fair
in love, war and cricket. Recounting unforgettable
vignettes with sharp analysis, this book will set
new standards.
Twenty-Two Yards to
Freedom: A Social History of Indian Cricket by
Boria Majumdar. Penguin Books India, New Delhi,
December 2004. ISBN: 067005794-0. Price: US$13.25;
483 pages.
(Copyright 2005 Asia Times
Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us
for information on sales, syndication and republishing.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
All material on this
website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written
permission.
© Copyright 1999 - 2005 Asia Times
Online Ltd.
|
|
Head
Office: Rm 202, Hau Fook Mansion, No. 8 Hau Fook St., Kowloon, Hong
Kong
Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
|
Asian Sex Gazette South Asian Sex News
|
|
|
