Smriti Irani, Sycophancy and the Politics of Vengeance

There's a Kambli in you, too

Teary on camera, 2011

You have heard about cricketer Vinod Kambli crying on a television channel. You have heard the experts. The “I was there…” chant has begun. What is the objection to Kambli’s statement that the 1996 World Cup semi-final match against Sri Lanka was possibly fixed and that is the reason we lost?

Teary on the field, 1996

Here are the arguments by those who know:

• Why did he wait for 15 years?

We wait for years to discover our heritage and wreak havoc on people in the name of culture. 15 years is not much.

• Why is he saying that his career was finished when he played 31 one-day matches after that?

Did he reach the form, what was his role in test cricket? Wasn’t he the guy who started with Sachin Tendulkar and showed the same – some even say more – promise?

• Why is he creating a drama and crying before the cameras?

Kapil Dev cried; Hanse Cronje cried; Dhoni cried; Yuvraj cried – that latter two for sheer joy after the last World Cup victory. Kambli had cried on the field at that time as well. Why did no one say anything about it?

• How can he say he was made a scapegoat – by whom?

Precisely. The manner in which all those in the team then are now rallying behind Mohammed Azharuddin, who was banned for life for match-fixing, (the ban was removed in 2006) just shows that they knew whose tail they could twist. He quoted the then team manager Ajit Wadekar, and Wadekar is himself now saying that Kambli’s accusations are not true. (Azhar is now screaming about Kambli. Does he know what they have been saying in the studios about him during this discussion? That his word does not count.)

The dressing room has seen a lot of action in the past, so it is not like this cannot happen. If all those experts are saying, oh, it is possible, but he cannot make these claims without evidence, I’d tell them to go run between the wickets. If they can suspect, and say it on national television, then so can Kambli.

It is pretty disgusting to listen to them declare that had the accusation come from someone like Manjrekar or Tendulkar perhaps one would take note. Really? What happens to those ‘waking up after 15 years’ comments? Manjrekar said it may have been a wrong decision but it was an honest one. Now they are all saying that it was a team decision to field. Is there a vote by the team when the coin is tossed on the field?

And where is Sachin Tendulkar? Watching from the wings? No statement from him. Perhaps he is just waiting for that 100th century.

The problem is that Kambli has been the castaway always, and I believe that where regional biases are so strong can someone stand a chance with a high-caste attitude? In the early days an Eknath Solkar (a gardener’s son) could get away with a little pity; in the days of commercialisation someone like Kambli has the stakes heavily against him.

He came from what is referred to as the backward class, lived in a chawl with his parents and six siblings, studied upto matriculation, and became a prodigy on the field. He scored almost 800 runs in his first seven tests. He was clearly on the make. His double century came much before Sachin Tendulkar’s, but the latter is the respectable face of Indian cricket. Kambli was the eternal rebel, seemingly with no roots and therefore no possibility of flowering into anything of consequence.

A lot has been said about the Sachin-Vinod friendship; many have even attributed Kambli’s inclusion in matches due to this factor. It is commendable that they could share such a relationship at all in a cut-throat world. But while Sachin has always been seen as a magnanimous gentleman and a loyal friend, Kambli had to live under this shadow of generosity, even when it dried up. (He made the mistake of mentioning this too on a reality show – the naïve fool.)

He and Javed Miandad (in his time) were like clowns in the circus. They knew that people were there to watch the acrobats and the animals display their skills, while their job was to be funny and flamboyant. This often made them social and professional outcasts. Taking risks had, therefore, become a ‘nothing to lose’ gamble.

Tendulkar stood for stability; we could rely on him and show him off. Kambli was the boy who needed to be given a chance. And he mucked it up by being the bad boy. We could also feel superior for encouraging a wayward person get back on the right track. He was cricket’s own combination of tragedy king and jerk.

The local imperialists as well as the patriots are aghast. When he said, “Main apne desh ke saath kabhi gaddari nahin kar sakta (I cannot ever betray my country),” I can well imagine the shudders going through so many replays. It does not make him a great patriot or the others less so. But it further exposes how this sport’s major contribution these days is not about the nation but the spoils of such wars – it could be in terms of endorsements or making it to the record books.

Why, Sunil Gavaskar and Ravi Shastri are on the payroll of the governing body of cricket and yet claim to be objective experts during matches. The controversy has been sidelined. After all, they are not drama queens.

Kambli is. It is in his system. That is the way he played his game, the way he talks and the way he makes a scene. Some of it has been no doubt to get attention. But how can anyone ridicule him for appearing on reality TV shows? All these starchy fellows who make up the panels of news studios are also being exhibitionistic. Last night, the anchor of Times Now, Arnab Goswami, got them to stop and watch a portion of the interview with his running commentary: “See, he is crying, he is hurt, emotions are rolling down his cheeks!” Is this not drama when you replay the drama and get your jollies out of it? If this is a non-issue, why is everyone so hot and bothered and grabbing their airtime? And Navjoy Singh Siddhu should keep shut – he has been a judge on a comedy show, and he does not even have to get on one to be a comic.

Yes, Kambli woke up too late. Yes, he wants to be on TV (was he invited or did he solicit it?). So? In 1996, there were not too many avenues for him to open up. If the media is sitting in judgement, or making the most of this situation, then do not blame him. This is what television is about now, and everyone is playing to the gallery.

Vinod Kambli is this Indian psyche, a sort of street urchin playing in the rain and dreaming of making it big, and landing up in the studios even if it means showing the shit.

- - -

Here it is:

Quacks of quakes

Correspondent on Headlines Today:

"It looks like the people were not prepared for it."

The 'it' is the earthquake that shook the Delhi/NCR region over an hour ago.

It says the magnitude was 6.6. TV news anchors kept saying how large it was. Experts were woken up from their sleep. This was barely ten minutes after the tremors. How would they give accurate details?

Then, they were asked what people should do.

Here:

If you are living on a high floor don't go down...Come out in the open...Go under the furniture.

How can you come out in the open if you are not to take the stairs (lifts are out)? And if the building is shaky, why will the furniture not shake?

Most people would not have felt it if they were asleep. The others would have experienced it and sat still. But, if you switched on the TV then you would be told about aftershocks and how you were part of the Breaking News.

As for the lady who made the prophetic statement that the people were not prepared, all I can say is that perhaps they can have a panel discussion on how to expect such calamities. They can also go on a hunger strike for it.

Meanwhile, latest unreleased reports state that Nature has claimed responsibility for the quake. Nature's links with terrorist organisations are not yet known and a high-level inquiry will probe into any such alliance.

J+J=Ho-ho

Jaswant Singh’s Jinnah (JJ) saga is pathetic simply because he is being equated with some of the greatest leaders of pre-partition times, irrespective of how invalid their positions may seem now. Today’s papers have given pages and pages to a book which everyone believes is saying nothing new. Then why are they carrying excerpts?

And what is so different that they are saying? Here are some media quotes of today the 20th; then there are mine of 17th and 18th!

It surprises me that a section of the Pakistani media is jumping around with joy.

They say:

"It is the writer's personal viewpoint and has nothing to do with party matters. Such acts show the BJP's severe hatred towards Pakistan. The BJP never wants good ties with the neighboring country," say Pakistan-based experts.

The only times there have been good ties or attempts at some bus, train services have been when the NDA was in power, whatever be the motives.

I told you so:

Pakistan will want to deal with these lost sons, not the Aruns. These are old-timers with history written on their faces. And Jaswant Singh would fit in right with the elite Lahore crowd, his safari suit notwithstanding.

He says:

I am being treated like Ravana…I am sad…they told me on the phone…

I told you so:

The RSS makes Jaswant a martyr…Don’t feel sorry for him. Saint Jaswant Singh will be okay.

He says:

I will do what I have always done —work for my constituency in parliament. At the end of the day, it’s honour that’s most important.

I told you so:

Jaswant Singh, good Rajput that he is, will surely bring out a sword to defend his honour. He will talk like those maharajahs of old who served in Mughal armies and project himself as a balanced person who can see an honourable enemy.

So, these experts, many still groping with the Lahore Declaration, are going, “hrmph, aargh….lookie, those people have not even read it.”

Yeah. Not read it. Don’t intend to. But the Jaswant Singh PR machinery is active and kicking. It isn’t unusual for the clarificatory details to be passed on and then for the reviewers to quote it and post those clarifications as their own hard work. If one accepts and applauds the ability to speed-read such a book, then too finding out that he has not been such a bad boy isn’t all that tough. There is something called the Index at the end of books. You must look for the relevant words, go to the pages where he has not said anything nasty about the nice guys of un-independent India and, hey, you have it there. Then you flash it around.

Great. Take a bow and stay there.