And Poor Tendulkar Is Victimized.....!!!

Amongst the drivel which appears to be the staple fare in the MSM this particular article by Manu Joseph in the Open magazine—otherwise, mostly a decent publication—stands out for its awesome analysis, wonderful statistical evidence, and the psychological analysis of an entire gender. It is that good. Not.
In essence, the point Mr. Joseph appears to be making is that Tendulkar’s alleged unpopularity among Indian men—have you ever seen an Indian man cheering for Tendulkar—reflects his own inadequacies. That is, of the Indian men. Of which there are plenty. Both Indian men and their inadequacies. But I digress. Oh wait, Mr. Joseph also finds West Indian men inadequate.
Let’s look at it more closely.

The male analysis of Sachin Tendulkar is a two-decade long confession of Indian men. When they speak of him, usually through pilfered opinions, they reveal fragments of their own fears and private grouses. So when a guy says that Rahul Dravid is a more useful Test player than Sachin, he means to say, ‘I am an ordinary person and I want the ordinary to triumph over the flamboyant, I want hard work to be accorded the same respect as unattainable genius, otherwise what is the whole point of my existence.’ When he says Laxman is more beautiful to watch than Sachin, he is saying, ‘I want you to believe that I am classy, an opera among rock concerts.’ And when he says that Ganguly was a better one-day opener than Sachin, he is saying, ‘I am a Bengali.’

I will grant you the third point. If nothing else, just to merely rile up our dear Pondit. Note, though, anyone else except Bengali men being fans of Ganguly is not even a possibility.
But on Dravid and Laxman, I just love geniuses who contradict them selves in the same paragraph. So the Indian male appreciates Dravid because he reminds him that even “ordinary” folks like him can score 10000 runs in both the main formats of the game. (Talent, what talent!). And he loves Laxman because it reminds him that genius works too.
And he “hates” Tendulkar because?
Then Mr. Joseph moves on and talks about how Tendulkar is a much misunderstood man. And such. Like for instance:

How many times have you heard someone say, ‘he does not win matches’. Increasingly, people who do not have mental problems are abandoning this line of thought, even refusing to admit that they ever held such an opinion. But not very long ago, it was a popular view.

Perhaps, I have a mental problem–admittedly, not a far-fetched thought—but for a long time Tendulkar regularly failed in crunch situations. Unlike Lara, Ponting and especially Laxman who seems to play well only in tough situation, Tendulkar’s second innings Test record was patchy. Indeed, it is still poorer compared to the likes of Gavaskar and Ponting.
So the criticism was warranted. Now, Tendulkar has tried to correct it in the last couple of years where he has played defining innings when India needed him most: The Tri-series in Australia and the famous Chennai test come to mind. That is great. But that does not negate the fact that the criticism of Tendulkar’s performance in critical innings—for instance, the famous Sanjay Manjrekar “Elephant in the room” comment was well deserved.
Just like merely because Ganguly made a stunning come back to Test cricket does not negate the fact that he deserved to be dropped from the test team.

Also, his centuries, apparently, did not result in Indian victories. Considering that he did not waste balls when he was in the middle, could it be that there were other reasons for our defeat apart from his centuries? Also, it is alleged, he never lasted till the end. As if it was his wish to go have a shower before the match ended. Could it be that the mathematical probability of an opener lasting till the end is very small?

Errr…Tendulkar is an opener only in one format of the game.
Besides that, this is a classical strawman argument. The criticism was not that Tendulkar’s centuries did not lead to Indian victories but that he did not score centuries when India needed it most. Not quite the same thing. Indeed, when Tendulkar played magnificently and India still lost—for instance, the famous Chennai Test of 1999—the wrath of the entire nation was reserved for the other 10 guys. And quite rightly so.
Then there is some talk about how Sachin has blown away everyone else. Moving on,

There were periods in Lara’s astonishing career when Indian men gleefully pointed at him and said, ‘this guy is better than Sachin’

Note there are no qualifiers like “some”, “many” “a large number” hailed Lara as their personal God. (Did not you notice Tendulkar starving on the streets while Lara was endorsing all the Indian companies?) No, sire. The entire community of Indian men—all 500 million of them, filled with malice and hatred against Tendulkar—rated Lara higher.
That about makes perfect sense.  In fact, it makes even more sense when you sample the following line,

It is not surprising that the way Indian men talk about Sachin is exactly the way Caribbean men discuss Lara. “Lara has done nothing for us, nothing,” a man from Trinidad told me about three years ago. “Great batsman but a selfish fellow.”

I want to be born in Trinidad next. Come election time I will vote and the next leader of the country will be elected. One man=entire country

A few years ago, when cricket fans in Guyana were asked to decide who was better, 85 per cent voted for Tendulkar.

Right, and there is an internet poll which an Indian icon has not won since the internet was invented. Including this.
In case you think otherwise, Mr. Joseph is not done. Yet

After Fiat gifted him a Ferrari and he applied for a duty waiver of Rs 1.6 crore on it, there was a huge uproar. That was the first time he was slammed in the media. ‘How can he be so greedy’ was the cry of Indian men, all of whom spend a lot of effort evading taxes themselves. Rs 1.6 crore is a considerable sum even for Tendulkar. What was so morally bereft in trying to save that money? Are we morally compromised when we try to save a few thousand every year in tax exemption?

Note: The cry against Tendulkar’s duty waiver was exclusively by Indian males. Because there are no women journalists.
But let’s see. Maybe the controversy happened because the law was changed merely to accommodate Mr. Tendulkar’s duty waiver. Trying to save money via legal exemptions is not quite the same budgetary exemptions targeted to help one person.
But no sires, He is still not done. What follows deserves to be quoted in full because it is mind blowing. You know, Govinda kind of mind blowing. Or the kind witnessed in movies graced by Aranb’s favorite star.

But the worst argument against Tendulkar will always be the myth that he was a bad captain. The truth is: his presence in the dressing room is such that as long as he plays he will be the only captain, whether he is called that or not. All men who tried to defeat his presence hurt themselves. Ganguly was a tortured soul. When he arrived at an airport or at a press conference, if there was Tendulkar, Ganguly was never granted the dignity of being captain. It was Tendulkar people wanted to see, hear. Dhoni’s great fortune is that his mind is clear, he knows his place—Captain and No. 2.

Okay. Read and move on.
And poor Ganguly was tortured soul because no one ever asked him questions. Oh, poor soul. Good for Dhoni he knows his place!
And no of course, the discussion on whether Tendulkar was a great captain or not will not be settled by his record as captain. Which was poor to say the least. It does not mean it was his fault. It is not necessary that everyone is blessed with all the skills. It is perfectly possible for a great player not to be a great captain. And for someone like Ganguly who may not be a great batsman to be a great captain.
But Mr. Joseph has already told us that Tendulkar’s is the de facto captain of the Indian side. For ever.
No, wait. There is still more. But it is so poorly written that even someone like me who can write barely comprehensible English is forced to say—hey, I can write better! And make more sense. But then what do I know? I am a poor Indian male. In any case, I could not make head or tail of the conclusion. You are welcome to try, though.
The funniest thing of course is Tendulkar is the last person in this country who needs our sympathy. Not even Tendulkar him self would claim victimhood, and he never has. The man has been India’s biggest icon for close to two decades. For heaven’s sake, if anything, the Indian cricket fan is obsessed with Tendulkar to the extent where sometimes even victory and defeat matter less than Tendulkar’s performance. For God’s sake, he is pretty much all we care about in Indian cricket. (And a little more but this is the season of hyperbole!)
Only if Dravid—bless his soul—knew he has been a regular feature of Indian male fantasies over the last decade. You know, the same kind who have been jeering him and asking him to retire almost since the time he picked up the bat.
And then, Mr. Joseph concludes with this,

Tendulkar is a victim of not just mediocre analysis but also meaningless compliments.

What was that word again….irony….