BOOK
REVIEW More
than just a game Twenty-Two Yards to Freedom: A
Social History of Indian Cricket
by Boria Majumdar
Reviewed by Sreeram Chaulia
The megalithic proportions cricket has
assumed in India is astounding in terms
of its value in national consciousness.
No other sport, art or entertainment
arouses as much Indian passion and
obsession as cricket. In this compelling
account, Oxford historian Boria Majumdar
captures the euphoria and the politics
that have imbricated the game ever since
British sailors and soldiers carried it
to Indian shores circa 1780. Through a
meticulous examination of events on and
off the cricket field, Majumdar throws
open fresh vistas on India's colonial
and post-colonial tryst with what has
been far more than a mere game.
This book rejects the view that sports
and politics do not mix and probes the
relationship between leisure and
national identity. Cricket is "a
derivative sport, creatively and
imaginatively adapted to suit Indian
socio-cultural needs, to fulfill
political imperatives and satisfy
economic aspirations". (p 1)
Introduced in the late 18th century, it
caught the imagination of Indians for
varied reasons. It met urges for social
mobility by uplifting the
underprivileged in a caste-ridden
society. To others, it was a non-violent
way of challenging the British - "a
desire to meet the Englishman on equal
terms on the ground and vanquish
him". (p 5)
Playing politics
The first battle of native plebeian
resistance against European masters
occurred in 1868 over the right to
cricket-playing space in Bombay (now
Mumbai). Though key Indian cricketers in
history were not nationalists, the
masses perceived them as Indians who
competed on equal terms with the British
and impressed the West with their feats.
Episodes of cricketing history depicted
in English-language sources as imperial
successes of the "civilizing
mission" were seen in vernacular
Indian writings as nationalist triumphs.
Maharajas of colonial India patronized
cricket as a way to challenge the
British, as a social ladder, and as peer
pressure. Teams could be sponsored by a
maharaja to overcome a financial crisis
or to establish regional supremacy. The
Patiala royal house promoted the game so
as to "equal the British". The
Gwalior kings used cricket to break
class barriers in their principality.
The maharaja of Natore became a major
cricket patron to challenge his
arch-rival, the maharaja of Cooch Behar.
Since the latter's team boasted of
European coaches and players, the former
formed a rival all-Indian side in 1900.
An ardent nationalist, Natore
appropriated English ideals of fair play
and sporting spirit for his team.
The sensational enmity between the kings
of Patiala and Vizianagram augured a
struggle for supremacy during India's
1932 tour of England. Both princes vied
for captaincy of the national squad.
Vizianagram, the losing bidder,
withdrew, saying he was
"broken-hearted" but sowed
dissentions. His hatchet men in the team
wrecked Patiala's leadership from
within. In 1934, Patiala proposed to
name the national championship after
Ranjitsinghji, the legendary Indian
cricketer. Vizianagram countered that it
be called after Viceroy Willingdon. In
1936, Lala Amarnath was sent back from
the tour of England because of the
machinations of Vizianagram, then the
captain. It was the headline of that
era.
Ranjitsinghji harnessed his cricketing
prowess to further political ambitions
of succeeding to the throne of Nawanagar.
His world-famous cricketing skills
endeared him to the British, who
accepted his claim to the succession in
1907 although it was illegal. Later, he
peddled cricketing fame to secure the
status of a princely state for Nawanagar,
a midget in size and importance on the
princely chessboard.
Cricket was the prize of a fierce
regional contest between Bombay and
Bengal in the 1930s. The maharaja of
Santosh argued against Bombay's
domination by alleging that Bengali
cricketers were unfairly omitted from
the Indian team. Bengali journalists
launched fierce attacks on Bombay that
were supported by the United Provinces,
another marginalized region.
Social leveler
Until the 1880s, cricket in India was an
upper-caste preserve. The Parsis of
Bombay, comprador capitalists, were the
first to adopt cricket in the late
1830s. Early Hindu cricket was also of
an elite nature. Cricket's social base
widened from 1884, when patriarchs
around the country recruited low-class
sportsmen as professionals. Dalit star
Palwankar Baloo broke new ground toward
egalitarian society. In an India mired
in caste prejudices, Baloo won great
social acclaim as a player and inspired
B R Ambedkar, the framer of free India's
constitution. Baloo contested elections
in 1934 and 1937 in Bombay, venerated by
high and low alike.
British denigration of Bengali
middle-class professionals (babus)
led them to shun discriminatory social
practices and pick the best native
talent in sport. In Gujarat and central
India too, players from modest
backgrounds were roped into teams.
School and college cricket in the
colonial era was representative of
society, aiming to eliminate
distinctions of caste and creed.
Teachers encouraged students,
irrespective of pedigree, to play
sports. "Proficiency in cricket
helped students get jobs which their
academic record would have denied
them." (p 96)
The clock was turned back after
independence, when a caste elite took
over Indian cricket. Patronage changed
hands from princes to corporate houses,
which determined cricketers' recruitment
and remuneration on the basis of
academic qualifications. Sports got
concentrated in metropolitan areas and
players not in the top bracket fell on
hard times. Wicketkeeper Dattaram
Hindlekar, who represented India, passed
away untimely in 1949 for want of money
for hospital treatment.
The Board of Control for Cricket in
India (BCCI) escalated ticket prices and
guarantee-money demands from venues
hosting international matches, further
sliding the game into a preserve of the
affluent. Spectator violence in grounds
recurred due to overcrowding in the
cheaper stands that were progressively
reduced in size. Hooliganism is the
handiwork of wealthy jingoistic youth
who monopolize live audiences at cricket
stadiums today.
After India's 1983 World Cup triumph,
BCCI reverted to a conscious
talent-nurturing policy and paved the
way for a meritocracy to re-emerge.
Thanks to the sale of telecast rights to
foreign broadcasters, a coup that
transformed Indian sports in 1995, BCCI
raised financial incentives in domestic
cricket and aided ailing yesteryear
players. Cricket as an aristocratic
domain is today an anachronism.
The Bengal tradition
Large-scale cricket began in Bengal in
1880, "rooted in the urge to negate
the charge of effeminacy leveled against
the Bengali male". (p 136) The
British believed cricket to be a way of
implanting manliness, stamina and vigor
into effete Indians, a view echoed by
Bengali sports patrons desirous of a new
identity and individuality. A Bengali
coaching manual of 1899 reads, "The
respect accorded to a good cricket
player by the Sahibs finds no
parallel." (p 156) At the
Presidency College, defeating the
all-European Calcutta Cricket Club was
the central attraction of the annual
sports calendar. The popularity that
fixtures between Indian and English
schools generated indicates power
equations between colonizer and
colonized.
Bengal declined in cricket vis-a-vis
Bombay after 1930. A proposal for a
permanent cricket stadium in Calcutta
(now Kolkata) was scuttled for years
because the colonial military was
unwilling to release land that would
impair security arrangements for the
city. The British feared that
nationalist-minded Bengalis might rally
around cricket for self-assertion if it
was encouraged beyond limits. Religious
turmoil forced the Hindu middle classes
to shun cricket patronage in the 1940s,
plummeting native interest in the game.
The Bombay saga
Cricket in Bombay started amid
competitive communalism in society.
Parsis, Hindus and Muslims formed
exclusive clubs and teams, goaded by the
superiority complex and separatism of
the British. The Bombay Pentangular
tournament's enormous popularity stamped
the communal organization of cricket.
The city's work ethic and commercialism
also spawned professionalism in cricket.
Leading players endorsed consumer
durables for money in the late 1930s.
The commodious Brabourne Stadium, opened
in 1937, was partly financed by gate
receipts from the Pentangular.
The Pentangular was abolished in 1946
after prolonged intrigues of vested
interests. Though couched in secular
nationalistic rhetoric, the anti-Pentangular
agitation was driven by commercial and
power political rivalries. The BCCI and
other regional cricket associations
resented Bombay's hegemony of the game
and envied the Pentangular's money
spinning. Princes were wary of
professional players of Bombay who could
defy patrons. Though cricketers
themselves vocally backed the
Pentangular (Vijay Merchant was
suspended by BCCI for supporting it),
the opponents persuaded the British to
bury the tournament.
The ungentlemanly game
Cricket as a gentleman's game is a
persisting myth. In India, it has
witnessed umpteen instances of bickering
and nastiness. C K Nayudu, a commoner,
challenged princely control of cricket.
Embroiled in insults and humiliation in
the 1930s, he remained the people's
hero. Lala Amarnath, the captain of
India in 1948, had an infamous battle
with BCCI president A S De Mello.
Journalists preferred the polish and
social status of De Mello to the
rusticity of Amarnath. However, Amarnath
had the last laugh by bundling out De
Mello from the board with the assistance
of the Bengal lobby in 1951. Selection
of cricket umpires was mired in
controversy until 1960, when meritorious
appointments replaced nepotism and
partiality of cricket associations.
The personality clash between Sunil
Gavaskar and Kapil Dev in 1983-84 rocked
the nation. In 1989, the BCCI debarred
six top cricketers for one year as
punishment for appearing in exhibition
matches. The ban was revoked after a
Supreme Court intercession.
"Surging commercialization was
loosening older structures of
dominance." (p 310) The
match-fixing horror of 2000-01 rocked
public confidence in cricket, with the
captain and vice captain implicated for
"doing" games (underperforming
and manipulating results for
bookmakers). Majumdar reminds that in
1935, Amarnath was offered Rs10,000 to
throw away a final in which he was
playing. In 1948, a player was suspended
for "selling a match" in
Bombay.
In 2001, English referee Mike Denness
overly penalized six Indian players,
raising specters of racism. The BCCI's
confrontation with the International
Cricket Council (ICC) over this
reflected the changing balance of power
in world cricket. It revealed India's
ascendancy in the sport, buttressed by
Jagmohan Dalmiya's dramatic election as
ICC president in 1997. Cricket's great
power shift was demonstrated again in
the 2002 row over Indian players'
endorsements in ICC events.
Cricket is central to Indian national
life today, an elixir that renders
backwardness and poverty forgettable.
Nothing short of clear victory satisfies
fanatic cricket fans. "Playing
cricket is no less difficult than
governing the country." (p 363)
Cricket authorities and the Indian
government have had their share of
tussles. The 1993-95 dispute over
telecasting rights attained
international political importance when
South African President Nelson Mandela
attempted to reach the Indian prime
minister. It demonstrated India's
weakness as an attractive destination
for foreign investment as well as
"the connections between cricket,
society and polity". (p 405)
Majumdar's praiseworthy work attests to
the importance of non-sporting motives
and issues in sport. In India, all was
and is fair in love, war and cricket.
Recounting unforgettable vignettes with
sharp analysis, this book will set new
standards.
Twenty-Two Yards to Freedom: A Social
History of Indian Cricket by Boria
Majumdar. Penguin Books India, New
Delhi, December 2004. ISBN: 067005794-0.
Price: US$13.25; 483 pages.
(Copyright 2005 Asia Times Online Ltd.
All rights reserved. Please contact us
for information on sales,
syndication and republishing.)
