Personally I had a pretty good series and batted well for a hundred at the MCG in the Boxing Day Test. However, it counted for nothing because I was not able to change the fortunes of the team. A hundred in a losing cause is something of a bitter pill. Even in the second innings I scored 52 and while it was a personal milestone, it was not enough to save the game.
After the 3–0 defeat in the Test series we lost the ODI tri-series with Pakistan and Australia, failing even to make the final. The tour had gone from bad to worse and I was deeply frustrated. On my way back to India I was going through serious mental turmoil. I was finding it difficult to unwind. In the past I had been able to leave the disappointments of cricket behind and switch off. Not this time. Even when I was with my kids, my mind was still on the series. I was unable to figure out what I was doing wrong. I was failing to get the team to play to their potential and it was all starting to get to me.
As a batsman, I was accountable for my own mistakes and could do what was required to sort out my flaws and get back to form. As a captain it was not. As skipper, I was responsible for the actions of my team-mates, but I couldn’t control everything they did. For example, sometimes I carefully put a plan in place but it was simply not implemented, which I found hard to cope with.
The ODI against Pakistan in Brisbane on 10 January 2000 is a case in point. It was a low-scoring game and we had made 195 batting first in our fifty overs. Pakistan, docked an over for a slow over rate, were reduced to 71–6 at one point in their innings. Clearly, we should have closed out the match from that position. Eventually, however, Pakistan won the match off the last ball, with Saqlain Mushtaq and Waqar Younis taking the team over the line with an unbeaten 43-run stand for the ninth wicket.
The defeat particularly hurt me because I had predicted what the Pakistani batsmen were planning in the final stages of the innings. While fielding at mid off, I had repeatedly spoken to my fast bowlers and had specifically asked them not to bowl a slower ball without informing me. Despite my repeated warnings, one of them bowled a slower ball without the proper field in place and the Pakistan batsman promptly dispatched it to the boundary. Such incidents caused me immense frustration and I was finding it increasingly difficult to get them out of my mind.
Over to Sourav
Even before the start of the Australia series, I had spoken to the selectors about appointing Sourav Ganguly as my deputy. I had always felt he had the ability to lead the team in my absence. If I got injured in Australia or had to leave the field temporarily, I wanted Sourav to be in charge of the side.
Within weeks of coming back from Australia I had communicated to BCCI president AC Muthiah and the selection committee that I did not want to continue as captain. It was in the best interests of the team to pass the baton to Sourav and focus on my batting. At the same time, we did not want to spring the Indian captaincy on him and leave him unsettled. He needed a little time to come to terms with the pressures and it was my responsibility to ensure that the transition was smooth. So I informed the selectors that I was happy to lead the side in the two home Tests against South Africa in February 2000. It was agreed that Sourav would take over after the Test series and before the start of the five-match ODI series.
I had discussed my decision with my family in Lonavla, where we had gone for a break. They were all in agreement that the frustration of not achieving what I wanted with the team was affecting me badly and that I was pushing myself too hard. Anjali knew how I was feeling and I also spoke to Ajit at length about what I was going through.
Never again
After giving up the captaincy at the start of 2000, I never captained India again. That is not to say I wasn’t given the choice of captaining the team later in my career. I was actually offered the job quite a few times but was never tempted. One occasion was soon after Rahul Dravid stepped down after the tour of England in September 2007.
The final time I was offered the job was at the end of Anil’s captaincy in late 2008. We were in the middle of a home series against Australia and Anil’s retirement had left a huge void. This time I recommended MS Dhoni. Earlier I had recommended him as captain for the Twenty20 World Cup, and Test captaincy was a natural progression.
Dhoni had already captained the team with distinction in the Twenty20 format and had also done well in the fifty-over format. He was one of the few players who played all formats of the game and read the game well at critical times. Having discussed things with him when fielding in the slip cordon, I knew he was a good choice for the job and had little hesitation in putting his name forward. He had age on his side and would be able to guide Indian cricket into the future.
All of the people I recommended or played under after giving up the captaincy – Sourav Ganguly, Rahul Dravid, Anil Kumble or MS Dhoni – I had a good relationship with, and when I felt it necessary I would give them my opinion and then leave it to them to take the final call. As a senior player in the side, I felt it was my job to give the captain options, as he had way too much on his plate and it was sometimes easy to miss things. I loved being involved and they all seemed to welcome my contributions. The final decision was always the captain’s, but I felt it was important for me to let them know what I thought was best for the team.
Every captain I played under had his respective strengths. Sourav was an excellent strategist and had a very good understanding of the game. He was an aggressive captain and wasn’t afraid to experiment in difficult situations. It was under Sourav that we started winning overseas Test matches consistently.
Anil Kumble was an excellent communicator and clearly explained to the players what he wanted from each of them. He was aggressive and trusted his instincts. Sourav and Anil were both great players and equally capable leaders.
Rahul, on the other hand, was more conventional. He was more methodical and his mental toughness was an added strength. He was committed to the job but stayed away from experimenting too much. Dhoni, in contrast, was impulsive and loved to back his instincts. He has a really good grasp of the game and is not afraid to try something different. He is never flustered and handles pressure well. Under these men India won some big series and tournaments and I enjoyed playing with them all.
Among the captains I played against, I consider Nasser Hussain the best. He was an excellent strategist and even if some of his tactics occasionally bordered on the negative – using the left-arm spinner Ashley Giles to bowl to me outside my leg stump from over the wicket, for example – he was a very good thinker about the game and was proactive. Nasser would not place a fielder in a particular position after a shot was played. Rather, he had the ability to anticipate the shot and would place a fielder well in advance, making a real difference to his team.
Among the Australians, I rate Michael Clarke as the best captain I played against. While I was too young to judge Allan Border in 1992, the other Australian captains in Mark Taylor, Steve Waugh and Ricky Ponting benefited from having some of the greatest players of our generation in their teams. With so many match-winners, the role of the captain is automatically reduced. Clarke’s case, however, was different. He had to rebuild the Australian team from scratch and to do so in such a short time speaks volumes for his ability as leader.
Graeme Smith of South Africa is yet another player I have great regard for as skipper. Taking over the reins of the side at the age of twenty-two in the most tumultuous of conditions, Smith did brilliantly to propel South Africa to the top of the world Test rankings.
Looking back at my own captaincy career, I feel I could have achieved better results during my first stint as captain had there been more cooperation. I never felt totally comfortable with the relationship with the selectors. This was reflected in the teams I was given, which were not always the ones I would have chosen. In my first stint as captain of India, it seemed that each series was a personal test and losing one series badly meant my position was immediately in question. Such pressure did
not always send out the best signal and it was as if I was constantly being evaluated. Every captain sets out to win but it’s not always possible to do so in international sport. The opposition were also playing to win and at times they simply played better cricket than we did. That was the case in Australia in December 1999.
There is no point lamenting what could have been. It was time to look beyond the captaincy and contribute to the team in the best way possible. I am glad I was able to do so for a good thirteen years after giving up the captaincy in February 2000.
The difficulty of being a Tendulkar
There is a common misconception that cricketers’ families have an easy time of it. On the contrary, in my absence Anjali had to do most of the parenting, and bringing up two young kids almost on her own was anything but easy. For the children too it was hard at times. They were not always able to do the things normal kids enjoy and, with their father away for long periods, they missed out on fatherly affection and care.
When Arjun was just nine months old, for example, I was going to Germany to visit the Adidas factory and asked Anjali if she would like to come along. I was going for only five days and Anjali hadn’t left home for nine months – after Arjun’s birth. We left Sara and Arjun with her parents in India. It was on the third night away that calamity struck. We had finished work in the Adidas factory and had retreated to a small village for the evening when Anjali got a call from Dr Ajit Gajendragadkar, who asked us to come back as soon as possible. We were informed that Anjali’s mother had suffered a brain haemorrhage (from which she later recovered) and was in the hospital unconscious, while Arjun was seriously sick at home.
It was night-time in Germany and the earliest we could leave for India was the following morning. All through the journey the next day we kept worrying about who was taking care of nine-month-old Arjun. When we finally got home, the first sight of Arjun reduced us both to tears. He had lost weight and had a pained expression in his eyes. While there was a glint of happiness in seeing us both back at home, his expression was predominantly one of hurt, as if to ask why we had to leave him and go away. Since then, Anjali has never left the kids alone at home to travel abroad with me.
Another example occurred soon after we had been knocked out of the World Cup in the Caribbean in March 2007. We had played poorly in the tournament and it was a low for the country. My family were aware that the repercussions of the first-round exit might reach the kids. As a precautionary measure, Anjali tried to explain to Arjun, who was seven years old at the time, that if someone made a snide comment about his dad at school, he should ignore it; he should just say that it was disappointing and we would surely do better the next time. When a friend of his accosted him at school and said that India had lost because his dad had got out for zero, our advice went out of his head and Arjun punched the boy and told him not to say anything bad about his father again.
While Sara is interested in studying science, Arjun, who started with football, now wants to play cricket. I am perfectly happy with them doing whatever they want to do. In the last few years Sara has changed perceptibly and has started taking far more responsibility. Anjali has allowed her the freedom to shape her timetable and she is showing signs of maturity. She went to Oxford in the summer of 2012 for her summer school and is happy pursuing her dream of becoming a doctor. I’d be delighted to see her do so and have always felt that the best thing for parents is to allow kids to chase their own dreams. That’s what I did and it’s what I want my daughter to do as well.
Arjun, on the other hand, is deeply passionate about cricket. Mind you, he and I hardly ever spoke about the game till he turned seven. I would chat with him about everything else but never talk cricket at home. This was an attempt to keep my professional world separate; I found it often helped to keep the two spheres distinct from each other. So much so that my wife and children have hardly ever come to the stadium to watch me play. Anjali has been to the stadium just a handful of times in her life. The first time she saw me bat was at Edgbaston in 1996 when I scored a hundred. She was with her father at the time. The second time was in Melbourne in 2004, when I was out for a first-ball duck. Thereafter, she didn’t come to the stadium again till my 199th Test match at Eden Gardens in November 2013. Instead, she had a special seat at home for watching matches on TV and refused to speak to anyone or take phone calls when I was batting. That was her way of being with me the whole time.
Arjun has come to my games frequently, however, and has travelled with me to England, Australia and South Africa. Arjun got seriously attracted to cricket after watching India win the inaugural world Twenty20 in September 2007. We watched the matches together at home and he was hugely inspired to see the Indian triumph in South Africa.
Many have asked me if I feel added pressure at Arjun trying to become a cricketer. I really don’t. I am happy that he is trying to do something he enjoys, for that in itself will make him really happy. Also there is nothing negative about playing a sport. While it is never possible to guarantee performance, one can guarantee the effort put in and there’s no doubt that he is putting his best foot forward. I am not concerned with how far he goes with his game, but am happy that he is doing his best to excel in what he loves. I firmly believe that you take to playing cricket only if you are madly in love with it. And that’s what has happened with Arjun over the last few years. There’s no doubt there will be pressure on him every time he plays. But he has chosen what he wants to do and will have to deal with that pressure as best he can.
* * *
India in New Zealand 1998–99
1st Test. Dunedin. 18–22 December 1998
Match abandoned without a ball bowled
2nd Test. Wellington. 26–30 December 1998
India 208 (M Azharuddin 103, SR Tendulkar 47; SB Doull 7–65) and 356 (SR Tendulkar 113, SC Ganguly 48, M Azharuddin 48; DJ Nash 3–20, SB Doull 2–49)
New Zealand 352 (DJ Nash 89*, DL Vettori 57, NJ Astle 56; A Kumble 4–83 SR Tendulkar 2–7) and 215–6 (CD McMillan 74*, CL Cairns 61; J Srinath 3–82, A Kumble 2–70)
New Zealand won by 4 wickets
3rd Test. Hamilton. 2–6 January 1999
New Zealand 366 (CD McMillan 92, RG Twose 87, MJ Horne 63; J Srinath 5–95) and 464–8 dec (CL Cairns 126, CD McMillan 84, DJ Nash 63, AC Parore 50; SR Tendulkar 2–30)
India 416 (R Dravid 190, J Srinath 76, SR Tendulkar 67; CL Cairns 4–107, SB Doull 3–64) and 249–2 (R Dravid 103*, SC Ganguly 101*; CL Cairns 2–30)
Match drawn
New Zealand won the series 1–0
Pakistan in India 1999
1st Test. Chennai. 28–31 January 1999
Pakistan 238 (M Khan 60, Y Youhana 53; A Kumble 6–70, J Srinath 3–63, SR Tendulkar 1–10) and 286 (S Afridi 141, Inzamam-ul-Haq 51; BKV Prasad 6–33, SR Tendulkar 2–35)
India 254 (SC Ganguly 54, R Dravid 53, SR Tendulkar 0; S Mushtaq 5–94, S Afridi 3–31) and 258 (SR Tendulkar 136, NR Mongia 52; S Mushtaq 5–93, W Akram 3–80)
Pakistan won by 12 runs
2nd Test. Delhi. 4–7 February 1999
India 252 (M Azharuddin 67, S Ramesh 60, SR Tendulkar 6; S Mushtaq 5–94) and 339 (S Ramesh 96, SC Ganguly 62*, SR Tendulkar 29; S Mushtaq 5–122, W Akram 3–43)
Pakistan 172 (S Afridi 32, S Malik 31; A Kumble 4–75, H Singh 3–30) and 207 (S Anwar 69, S Afridi 41; A Kumble 10–74)
India won by 212 runs
Series drawn 1–1
Asian Test Championship 1999
1st Match. India v Pakistan. Kolkata. 16–20 February 1999
Pakistan 185 (M Khan 70; J Srinath 5–46, BKV Prasad 2–27, SR Tendulkar 1–8) and 316 (S Anwar 188, Y Youhana 56; J Srinath 8–86)
India 223 (S Ramesh 79, SR Tendulkar 0; S Akhtar 4–71, W Akram 3–65) and 232 (VVS Laxman 67, S Ramesh 40, SR Tendulkar 9; S Akhtar 4–47, S Mushtaq 3–69)
Pakistan won by 46 runs
2nd Mat
ch. Sri Lanka v India. Colombo (SSC). 24–28 February 1999
India 518–7 dec (S Ramesh 143, R Dravid 107, M Azharuddin 87, SC Ganguly 56, SR Tendulkar 53) and 306–5 (SR Tendulkar 124*, SC Ganguly 78; KEA Upashantha 2–41, PA de Silva 2–59)
Sri Lanka 485 (DPMD Jayawardene 242, A Ranatunga 66; A Kumble 4–134, H Singh 3–127)
Match drawn
Pakistan beat Sri Lanka in the final
India in the 1999 World Cup
2nd match. India v South Africa at Hove. 15 May 1999
India 253–5 (50/50 ov); South Africa 254–6 (47.2/50 ov)
South Africa won by 4 wickets (with 16 balls remaining)
8th match. India v Zimbabwe at Leicester. 19 May 1999
Zimbabwe 252–9 (50/50 ov); India 249 (45/46 ov)
Zimbabwe won by 3 runs
15th match. India v Kenya at Bristol. 23 May 1999
India 329–2 (50/50 ov); Kenya 235–7 (50/50 ov)
India won by 94 runs
21st match. India v Sri Lanka at Taunton. 26 May 1999
India 373–6 (50/50 ov); Sri Lanka 216 (42.3/50 ov)
Playing It My Way: My Autobiography Page 19