Well, clearly none of the former cricketing "greats" want Mohammad Azharuddin to remain Captain. Even as I write, there is no doubt a poll being cooked up somewhere in the Indian sub-continent. That poll will, inevitably, embellish the cover of a leading national magazine. Azhar will lose that census. An article or two will then follow. Inferences will be made. The aforementioned former cricketing "greats" will be passed the cup to spit into. The essay will disclose the popular, expert opinion is that Mohammad Azharuddin's insides should be exposed and trampled upon. Following that his head should be mounted on a stick and strutted through every major city. Ten minutes hence, the article will conclude, Sachin Tendulkar should be handed the bloody crown.

I was reading a few "thought provoking" articles on the subject and one th ing was clear: India has some bloody vile sports scribes. Expert comments ranged from, "Sack Azhar" to "Pass the Baton to Tendulkar". Bloody ingenious. Bloody, bloody rational.

"No people skills," summed an oily individual, scratching his shiny pate with a pencil. "He just lets things drift," he concluded from his little cubby hole near the pavilion at Lords, scribbling into a little rag.

"Mind not on job," observed another shrewd bird. "Dropping catches, batting badly, he's lost it yaa. Tsk, tsk. Just lost it."

Observe: (First Class Tour Averages; Tests, One-Dayers not included; Pakist
an figures as on 21 July 1996)

                        Overs   Wickets  Avg  Strikerate
Wasim Akram             91      18      18.45     30.32
Mushtaq Ahmed          101      21      15.38     28.86
Shahid Nazir            40.4     9      15.57     25.50
Atta-ur-Rehman          56       9      24.88     37.33
Waqar Younis            43       7      29.98     52.16

Now Observe:
Venkatesh Prasad       252      25      29.36     60.60
Narendra Hirwani       115      12      31.25     57.75
Javagal Srinath        233      20      31.40     70.05
Anil Kumble            281      13      56.84    129.69

Notice anything bizarre?

Azhar's indifferent batting form is hardly the primary reason for India's slump. His tactical acumen, personnel-management, and his personal efforts are not on trial. But they will be made the focus--by a bunch bent on seeing the Hyderabadi's back. It is so easy to sit back and say the Indian Capta in should have done this or done that, when it is obvious he didn't have much to play with. If your best fast bowler emerges with a strike rate of 60. 60--against the counties at that--there is very little a skipper can do.

"He should talk to the people who are performing poorly," is the popular chant doing the rounds. I hate to burst the bubble, but verbal motivation is no substitute for sheer talent, and it is in the aforementioned department that every one of India's "pace ace" falls short. Woefully short. Bowling averages are not accurate indicators of ability. The strike rate is. The most acclaimed--Kumble, Srinath, Prasad, and Hirwani finished with an abysmal strike rate. Which meant that in order for his bowlers to get the most, the skipper had to let them bowl on and on and on. Their inability to bowl sides out swiftly has been Azhar's dilemma--and India's. For years, every Indian cricket fanatic has at one point or the other wondered if Pakistan can produce an endless assortment of fast bowlers, why can't India? Well, it is time that anomaly is fixed. Because the manner in which the Sri Lankans have surfaced, the Indian cricket team is in danger of finishing third best from the sub-continent. All the signs are there.

Unless Azhar is given a few good, strong lads with fire in their bellies--fiends that can make the opposition hop, skip, and jump, quit blaming him for overseas disasters--and domestic ones. Instead of focusing on the real problem, the vociferous ones pin it squarely on the leader. Not surprisingly, all they can come up with is "Remove Azhar." Sure. That's going to cure India's ills.

There is a sinister shade of bias that tinges most match reports: "Prasad and Srinath bowled magnificently without luck." How often have we heard that one? One glance at the bowling figures of each and there is absolutely no evidence of any such genius. There is no reason for ineptitude to be covered up. If one bowls really well, he gets wickets. Simple as that. Perhaps he might be luckless in a match or two, but when that misfortune continues, the bowler has a serious problem and has no business playing at the highest level. Prasad will find that sooner than later. So will Kumble. Away with the man who calls himself a leg-spinner; bring in one who actually turns the ball and doesn't have to rely on a minefield to produce results. The manner in which both Prasad and Kumble were carved up in the '96 World Cup should have been reason enough for Azhar to drop them; just like he did Manoj Prabhakar. Unfortunately, for Azhar, the part of the world he hails from does more than just look askance when the captain makes a bold decision.

Nevertheless, bold decisions are precisely what Azhar has to take. He has to take a firm tone with the Board that he be involved completely in team selection. Dilip Vengsarkar wrote recently that Kapil Dev and Madan Lal be consulted when it comes to selecting medium pacers. Forget it. Those gents, particularly Dev, screwed a lot of youngsters out of an India cap. They cannot be trusted. There are a lot of good bowlers out there. There have to be. It is a country with a population of nine hundred million, for God's sake. It is a question of installing a system that nets in talent at the earliest stage--high school. That is where great fast bowlers are created. Boards all over the country should take the initiative to compensate talented youngsters with college tuition and other perks. Above all, nothing really inspires a fast bowler as consummately as a fast track. Unleash the freaks who vandalized the Wankhede pitch on the sorry strips of mud we relish throughout the nation. Dig deep into the pockets that house the profits from the '96 'Cup and pay an Aussie or two for his expertise on pitch construction. Send the maalis who "tend" the biggest grounds someplace from where they could emerge proper "groundsmen". What a sorry sight to see India's "finest" wicket crumble in a session and down eleven of India's "finest" in the process. I'm thinking of the Lanka semi-final of course, which to many is nothing more than a game in which, "Azhar should have batted first. Azhar should have batted first yaa."

While I am dispensing my wisdom with some abandon here, let me cover all the bases. Let's talk about the batting. Dilip is also of the opinion that Gavaskar and Vishwanath be roped in to pinpoint quality batsmen. I'll leave Vishy alone because he has always shown himself to be a class act and I have no problems with him. Ahh--but Mr. Gavaskar--as complete a vacillating, pint-size pipsqueak as ever broke bread, has ground his name to mud through his ability to support blokes one moment and wash his hands of them the next. Anything he has to offer in terms of constructive help should be viewed every which way before consideration. Besides, in Sunil's estimate, the West Zone, if not Tendulkar should rule India. As long as those placid batting tracks litter the nation's horizon, India will spit out fair-wicket demons faster than the eye can conceive. Rectify the pitches and the balance will be restored--as will the pride of a nation that watches the "Burrewala Bombshell" fall one foppish Englishman after the other with a sigh. Back to the Vengsarkar yarn and the former captain continues, "Azhar's time is up." I want to ask him, "Dilip Bhai, what is this ajeeb timer you and Sunny and every one in the West Zone carry that keeps telling you, "Time's up. Azhar ka time up?" Vengsarkar, I would be failing in my duties if I don't point out, is somewhat of an authority on captaincy and its life-span. He was, if you throw the mind back, Captain for a wee bit. Until he broke an arm and went ahead, wrote a thing or two when he should have kept mum, and they snatched the rummy title from him. It appears then, he hasn't learnt any lessons for he is brandishing the pen again, and trying desperately-- through the efforts of a ghost writer no doubt, to stick that pen in Azhar's back. So what, by way of a solution does Vengy have for India's "leadership crisis"?

"D-uh. Tendulkar."

Of course.

Now, I admit Azhar is deficient--his greatest deficiency is that he is a wonderful human being--someone who would rather nurse an ulcer than say, "Hey--you, the one who is bowling like an idiot--get the hell out and don't co me back until you learn a thing or two." Perhaps too kind for his own good? But then, his weaknesses, both as a Captain and as a player are part of his charisma that so many of us identify with. In a sport barren of heartwarming personalities, the India Captain has, time and again, if not through his successes, then through his failures, reminded us that even the most elite are not immune to their share of lumps. From humble beginnings to the pinnacle of glory--hasn't he inflamed in us the notion that, even in the most repugnant of circumstances a man can pull through?

Azharuddin might not be synonymous, at present, with a great Captain, the fact remains he is. Only a great human being can be a great Captain. Imran Khan was not a great Captain; he was a successful Captain. As a human being, the Khan blew. He was hated by every one for his callousness, his utter disregard for his team mates, and cursed for all the careers he ruined. Now the Pathan has trained his gun on Mohammad Azharuddin, claiming Tendulkar is ready and should and will take over. Who does Imran think he is influencing? The selectors? Of Indian cricket? If Imran and the rest of the non-playing, bitter, ex-cricketers' opinions form the core of the next Indian team, then there is no hope for Indian cricket. The selectors had been inspired in their appointment of Azhar as Captain; they were brilliant when they let him continue after the initial disasters. Quickly, they and the rest of India reaped the benefits. And almost overnight Azhar had become something of a wizard. So how does one remove the most successful Captain in Indian cricket history? Should one say, looking from the sidelines, that the skipper h as lost his desire, his hunger for runs? Does one, succumbing to the media's incessant sloshing, claim his personal tussles have filtered onto the field? Should one throw the hat in frustration merely because a Test and a couple of Internationals have been lost? Or does one admire the man for showing the commitment he has despite his personal and health problems? How about a head count of the number of inexperienced players he was leading? What about the near-win in the Second Test? His batting in the One-Dayers? What about the lack of form and commitment of Anil Kumble? How big was that a factor? Had Kumble done what Mushtaq is currently, would the outcome have been any different? What about the pace duo of Srinath and Prasad? Surely things would have been different had they emulated Wasim and Waqar.

Tendulkar's promotion at this point makes no sense for a number of reasons --his inexperience at the top level serves well as a primary excuse. It showed during the Third test when he was in charge after Azhar left the field. Many point to the Semi-Finals win in the Hero Cup against South Africa (1993) and point to Tendulkar claiming it was the little master's doing. Unfortunately, the complete story behind that final over has been so dramatized by silly correspondents, it now reads like a suspense thriller. Azhar downplayed the event as a "team decision". That is the beauty of the man. He is not after personal glory; he wants his team to achieve glory. In the Semi-Finals of the World Cup, he was blasted for slipping the Lankans in after winning the toss. "Azharuddin," an anonymous former cricketer said, "has made the biggest mistake of his life." The Indian skipper was notably shaken after the defeat, preferring to stay in the background during the awards ceremony. His explanation later: "It was a team decision to field first." Why do people find that hard to believe? Any one who has captained even a school side knows the decision to bat or field is entirely, and there are no two ways about it, a team decision. A Captain who makes a choice without consulting his mates and the manager will not be very popular. Every cricketer knows that. So why are Sunil Gavaskar, Kapil Dev, Ravi Shastri, and the rest heaping on the India Captain?

"Jealous," remarked Azhar in a rare display of emotion. A bit brusque perhaps, but that appears to be the core of the problem. Seems many out there are merely being envious--a typical Indian gesture, given the circs.--of his success, of his reputation, and, of where he could, if allowed to, take the team. Even before the World Cup began, Gavaskar piped Azhar should quit after the Cup. How preposterous. Why should Azhar have quit? So he doesn't set any more records as a Captain? Or is Gavaskar merely backing Tendulkar? Wasn't he backing Azhar a few years ago? Why the change? The answer is simple: Sunil M. Gavaskar, a successful batsman and Captain, is not a great human being. He is fickle, shallow, and an ideal comrade for the rest like him- -Kapil, Ravi, and Imran. "Why do former cricketers do this?" Azhar wonders. Azhar knows. They are jealous.

The key to Indian Cricket's success lies in building a team around Azhar and Tendulkar. Tendulkar is a fantastic player and a great team man. He has learnt many lessons-- on and off the field. The politics might trouble him. Given the Indian team's composition, a change in leadership, it appears, should not make much of a difference. Although Sachin is batting extremely well, he should be allowed to do what he does best without burdening him with the Captaincy. He will forever be looking over his shoulder, dreading what has happened to Azharuddin and the blokes before him. Tendulkar's time will come. His reign as Captain is almost as certain as the sun rising on the morrow. Despite the gloom that surrounds Indian cricket there is a silver lining because for the first time in its history, Indian cricket has taken the right measures. The bad seeds have been weeded out. Manoj Prabhakar, that great look-at-me-I'm-Lillee-Marshall-Ambrose-Akram-Younis-all-rolled-in -one pretender, should have left right after the 1992 World Cup. Mr. Prabhakar and Mr. Dev were ultimately responsible for India not pushing further than they did in that tournament. Their shabby bowling against the Windies, Kiwis and the Springboks sealed India's fate. Only Azhar and Tendulkar with seven half centuries between them did anything of notice in the 'Cup. The record books are a testimony. That Prabhakar remained as long as he did, despite dumping on his skipper time and again, is a wonder. Then again, maybe not: Azhar is known for healing differences.

Like Manoj, Kapil Dev had an embarassingly flaccid lease on the India cap. During the last three years of his international career, Kapil was merely an off-spinner with a twenty step run-up. Azhar carried him in the side so he could gasp his way into the record books.

Vinod Kambli, mercifully, has also been dealt with. There are some who believe Kambli's atrocities should have been overlooked for the cause of Indian cricket. I beg to differ. Indian cricket and its cause is far too noble for the likes of Mr. Kambli. Azhar has downplayed the Kambli episode too; perhaps he should not have. Kambli's disciplining, various managers agree, was long awaited. Navjoth Singh Sidhu, "the quiet Sikh" is anything but. His return to India, citing humiliation by his skipper , has been seen as the last straw by the anti-Azhar camp. At the time of going to press, a committee has been rummaged together, and Azhar is in for a nasty jar--the Sidhu Probe Staff is presided over by S.M Gavaskar. So it appears Gavaskar now has ample opportunity to collar the conversation and turn it in the direction of his pet project:"Tendulkar for Captain". Oh well.

Azhar has handled the Sidhu affair nicely, going out of his way to establish his innocence. But, in the minds of many, more answers are pending. In due course, those answers will come. Whether they will satisfy the masses is another story.

For the present, Azhar is maintaining a dignified silence, permitting the media its share for he realizes it will in one way or the other. The Indian team wasn't disgraced in England by any stretch of the imagination. They were somewhat humbled. But every team, at one point or the other is. Mohammad Azharuddin has done remarkably well with what he was handed. Indeed there have been times when he had cause to be enraged. Especially during the 1996 World Cup. When the job needed some really big guns the India Captain had to make do with pea-shooters--the same pea-shooters who accompanied him to the Isles.

A final note to the scribes who, from their cosy vantage points outside the playing arena, write of an "empire crumbling" and " an ailing king": Indian cricket has never been an "empire". It was made to look like one through Azhar's grandeur and his majestic demeanor. He is not an "ailing king" but merely one who is battle-scarred and perhaps a little weary of the foolishness that surrounds him. The Indian cricket team is composed of eleven people; traducing one man for the ineptness of the rest makes no sense.

"I'm harmless," he once said. "I'm not arrogant and I haven't changed," he remarked another time, following it with, "You cannot survive at the highest level for twelve years without being good." His haste and need to justify, troubling as it is, is a also a blunt reminder that when their lads have an off day at work, India's cricket followers, are a rather incompassionate lot.

Copyright©1996, "On Drive", Mesmer Productions. All rights reserved.