© CricInfo

"If the countless columns and chapters published about Bradman were placed end to end, they would stretch, on a still day, from the pavilion end to the pyramids and would reach beyond the bounds of credibility," wrote Ray Robinson in his classic Between Wickets. Substitute Sachin Tendulkar's name for Bradman's, and the sentence would still read as a truism in modern cricket.

When Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar is in majestic form, reams of prose are written about him. When he does not make runs, even more reams are written, perhaps more gleefully than in the earlier case. Why is he not making big scores? What is wrong with his technique? Is his temperament suspect? Is he feeling the strain? Is the pressure of carrying the side getting to him at last? Is there something physically wrong with him? Have the bowlers finally sorted him out?

Columnists are quick to dissect and bisect Tendulkar's batting style. His footwork and hand-eye co-ordination are analysed to the minutest degree, and overnight experts come up with ideas and suggestions as to what he should or should not do, what approach he should adopt, what his attitude should be, and how he should tackle the bowlers.

These self-appointed experts can be an unbalanced lot. A lack of understanding is almost their prerogative. When he does not deserve particularly high praise for one of his knocks, Tendulkar is lifted to the level of a demigod. When he should be shown some sympathy, his detractors can be extremely uncharitable, attributing all sorts of reasons ­ some of them even personal ­ for his failure to raise his batting average or figure prominently in the team's victories.

It is to Tendulkar's credit that he remains calm and unruffled. Sunil Gavaskar recently said that he did not read the newspapers for much of his playing career. One would like to think that Tendulkar has followed in his mentor's footsteps, for it might be impossible even for someone as phlegmatic as him not to be affected by some of the comments and headlines in newspapers and websites of late.

Admittedly there is some cause for alarm when someone like Tendulkar, who combines the three essential qualities of talent, technique and temperament in abundance, fails to live up to his lofty reputation. Naturally there is some despondency when his Test career average - not too long ago hovering close to 60 - plummets to 56. Of course there will be questions raised when he gets out to shots that are unwise.

But let's not get carried away. "Going through a bad patch," as the cricketing cliché goes, is something that has affected the world's greatest players, right from WG Grace to Vivian Richards. The immortal Victor Trumper once got three ducks in a row ­ only to get 166 in the next Test. Dennis Compton averaged 7.57 in the Ashes series in 1950-51, but a few months later he scored 112 against South Africa. Our very own Sunil Gavaskar had wretched runs in Australia in 1980-81 and against England four years later. Each time his cricketing obituary had been written, and on both occasions, Gavaskar bounced back.

Is Tendulkar feeling the pressure? Perhaps. Have the bowlers sorted him out? Maybe. As one who has watched many of his innings, all I can say ­ without going into any lengthy analyses - is that there is a strange hesitancy in his strokeplay. It is not as spontaneous as it has been for long. From a dazzling stroke-playing batsman, he appears to have taken over the role of an accumulator.

That change in approach may be pardonable for someone like Ken Barrington, who arrived on the scene in 1955 as a gay stroke- maker and returned four years later as an accumulator. Barrington was a thoroughbred professional. He played for his bread and butter and, as he himself said, was not particularly gifted. He had to come up through hard work, dedication and determination - qualities that stood England in very good stead for a decade and saw Barrington end his Test career with an average of 58.67.

Tendulkar, on the other hand, is prodigiously gifted. He is a natural stroke-player, even a dazzling one. He has the capabilities to demolish any attack and to have the bowling at his mercy. Shane Warne was devastated, more than once, by Tendulkar, to the extent that the Australian, one of the great spin bowlers of all time, admitted that the thought of the little Indian at the crease gave him nightmares.

Perhaps the pressure is finally telling on Tendulkar; perhaps the sometimes unfairly high expectations of his countrymen have finally dented his confidence; perhaps his entry during crisis situations time and again has made him diffident in going for his strokes; perhaps bowlers and opposing captains have finally sorted him out; perhaps it is because he is getting on in years. After all, it must not be forgotten that he is in his 30th year and has been playing for almost 13 years.

I am not saying that I subscribe to all or any of these views that are among those generally making the rounds. All I am saying is that it is ultimately a case of mind over matter. Tendulkar is still a great batsman, still the number one player in the world - let there be no doubts on that score. He has it him to demolish the best of the bowlers and make nonsense of the opposing captain's elaborate strategy and tactics. I would not even agree with the view that age could be catching up with him. I would only urge him to be inspired by the example of Vivian Richards - the pre-eminent batsman in the world before Tendulkar ­ and one of the West Indian master's knocks I never get tired of talking or hearing about.

The scene was the Ferozeshah Kotla in New Delhi, and Richards, then 35, had also been around for 13 years. The West Indies required 276 runs for victory, always a formidable target on a pitch favouring spin. Richards entered early on the fourth morning at 91 for three, and it soon became 111 for four. India were now the favourites. After all, the bowling line-up started with Kapil Dev and Chetan Sharma and continued with Ravi Shastri, Arshad Ayub and Maninder Singh. Everything now depended on Richards.

© CricInfo

In a glorious display of hitting, he put the bowling to the sword and threw the tight field placements into disarray. Racing to 109 not out off just 102 balls with 13 fours and a six, the West Indian captain won the match almost off his own bat, living up to his reputation as the leading player of his day. The manner in which he counter-attacked in a tense situation was something that only Richards was capable of, and long before the end, which came with West Indies winning by five wickets, the Indians had virtually given up.

That is the kind of batting in which Tendulkar should freely indulge. Some indication of this approach was seen in his 92 off 113 balls at Trent Bridge. There was a fierce determination in his eyes, and yet some of the strokes he played were his own. The time is now ripe for him to decimate the bowlers and put detailed strategic plans to rout. He should not be bothered unduly by seemingly tactical bowling changes and field placements and should go boldly for his strokes. After all, is he not the best batsman in the world?

© CricInfo