Monday, August 6, 2001

The anti-incumbency factor pervades the Indian way of life. It is much dreaded by politicians in power. As part of the ruling elite, however, cricket captains are not immune from it, and if Sourav Ganguly has started looking over his shoulder after a couple of indifferent series, who can blame him?

But it's no good looking for shadows when Ganguly's fragile temperament is emerging as his biggest enemy. Two bans and several warnings in one year is not good news for any cricketer, and if you're the captain it's serious.

And it's certainly no use a modern cricketer blaming his problems on the all-seeing and unforgiving glare of the television camera, when he is a big beneficiary of the bounties of TV himself. He is entitled to a rueful smile at the irony of an habitual sinner like Tony Greig preaching the virtues of good behaviour, but Ganguly must realise that contemporary cricket is a different game governed by different rules.

Ganguly has a lot going for him as captain. The current team is the most inexperienced Indian side in decades and he has the right credentials to lead it. He has the trust and confidence of his young charges, who don't seem to resent the hint of dictatorship in his approach. Mohammad Azharuddin left his players alone on the grounds that if they were good enough to play a Test match, they ought to know what to do. Sachin Tendulkar didn't understand failure because he had never experienced it himself, which meant he had no time for those who knew what it was like. Ganguly, meanwhile, has shown himself to be an involved captain and the team has responded to him.

Ganguly is a talented cricketer with a keen appreciation of struggle and hardship. Having served his sentence – a four-year absence from the Indian side after failing on debut in 1991-92 – he knows the corrosive effects of abandonment. He knows how vital it is to nurture and brood talent and has been refreshingly unparochial in his backing of young players.

That said, he is doing himself no favours by throwing churlish tantrums on the cricket field. There is a thin line between gamesmanship and unbecoming behaviour, and Ganguly often treads dangerously close to it. Passion is a powerful force for sportsmen as long as it is harnessed positively. A few hot words, an angry glare, a defiant gesture all work to heighten both competitive friction and the adrenalin rush. But Ganguly has repeatedly allowed his passion to deteriorate into petulance which, apart from being self-detrimental, is an ugly sight.

His one-match suspension by Cammie Smith for showing dissent against an lbw decision was harsh. Having nicked the ball, Ganguly was entitled to a momentary show of disappointment. But he got away with much worse in the next match, when he gave Russel Arnold an earful after dismissing him. Needling a batsman at the crease is acceptable, but heaping scorn and abuse on him as he makes his way back to the pavilion is as distasteful as dancing on the corpse of a slain enemy.

The Indian cricket establishment is trigger-happy at the best of times, and Ganguly will be doing himself a favour if he doesn't provide them with ammunition.

Sambit Bal is India editor of Wisden Online

© Wisden CricInfo Ltd