The Upholder of Dharma

For some reason, most of the literature that's ended up in my lap in the last few months has been predominantly about the epic Mahabharata. And having grown up reading it, thinking about it, living it since I was a little girl- the number of new ways in which these interpretations forced me to look at the epic astounded me. The number of small intricacies that I had earlier skimmed over came together to give me new perspectives on the characters, their motivations, their value systems. And the most prominent among those that had escaped my scrutiny earlier was Yudhishthira- the eldest of the Pandavas; the 'upholder of Dharma'. Since the very beginning, I had slotted him away as being not much more than a wimp. The one who silently watched when his wife was being stripped of her dignity in the Hastinapur court, the one who saw the need to be the 'voice of reason' at all times in the name of 'Dharma', the one who possessed no real superhuman powers- unlike the God-like bowmanship of Arjuna, the brute strength of Bhima, the talent with animals of Nakula, the renouned clairvoyance of Sahadeva. To me, he was the ultimate party pooper. If it were not for him and his want to stick to the truth and duty at all times (and keep Bhima and Arjuna from doing what they really wished), I sincerely believed the Mahabharta would have been even more colourful than it was. Draupadi would have been avenged right there and then, Duryodhana would have been killed before he became such a tyrant and wrecked havoc, the Pandavas would have never gone into exile, and the great war wouldn't be necessary.

I realise now that the Mahabharata wouldn't have been the epic it was if it weren't for him. For, in being the upholder of Dharma in a world where Adharma was rampant, he held together the fabric of the story with the thread of truth. And in doing so, he did the most thankless and least heroic of all jobs. In sticking to his duty, he gave up on flamboyance and all the resultant glamour. He was happy to be sheet anchor- the side actor who goes unnoticed in the brilliance and glamour of the rest of the cast. But if it weren't for him, they each would have crumbled under the weight of their own brilliance. If it weren't for him, the epic would have been a cluster of utter chaos

As the rest of the world gasped and gaped as Sehwag took Sri Lanka to the cleaners on the second day at Brabourne, I found a reflection of Yudhishthira on the other side of the pitch. As Rahul Dravid took guard, a sense of serenity and peace prevailed. As he approached his duty, his Dharma- to keep one end up- with the single-mindedness only he is capable of, he lent some sanity to the madness that was unfurling at the other end. There it was again- the most thankless, least heroic job- being approached with assurance and an innate calm. Singles taken at the beginning of the overs, balls defended at the end-all with a mechanic precision and will that was almost other-worldly. Happy to be the invisible thread holding together the most brilliant of innings. Nobody noticed the seam. Nobody wondered what would happen if it came apart. Because for so long- time after time and almost without fail- it has held together the fabric of the Indian Cricket Team. So predictably, it is easy to take for granted. Much less be thanked, it is hardly ever noticed. But it- he- keeps going. Despite the flakiness of the selectors who can't decided between youth and experience, despite bad runs of form, despite the thanklessness of the job- for over a decade now- Rahul Dravid has kept going. Caring only about his call of duty all this while- he has been the upholder of Dharma on the cricketing pitch. And when he isn't there anymore, the battlefield is going to feel a lot less just. And no chariot will ride two inches above the ground anymore.

The Conjurer

My earliest memory of cricket is not the clearest. Maybe it had to do with the TV. Or maybe it had to do with me being all of eight. All I remember is a diminutive man- quite unremarkable really to any novice spectator- in the midst of a sandstorm. As that memory has evolved over these past eleven years, for some odd reason, the image etched in my mind has gone from the little man braving the storm to him actually whipping it up. Perhaps it has something to do with having watched him whip up storm after storm all these following years. Perhaps it's just my mind seeking poetic satisfaction. Either way, my clearest, and least hampered, aspect of the memory remains that feeling at the bottom of my stomach- that until this man did what he was doing- there was hope left in the world. The unreasonable belief that he could put no foot wrong. And then on, cricket has never been the same. Nor has my life. Call it love, if you may.

When I recently read that the man completed twenty years in international cricket, I was surprised by how unaffected I was. While the world harped about the greatness of the achievement, the genius that lay behind the longevity, I questioned myself over and over why this seemed like just another ordinary fact to skim over. It didn't even make it to my facebook status updates, for crying out loud! Wasn't it true that since that glorious day at Sharjah, I'd spent every day worshiping the man with the kind of devotion that would shame the most devout believers? Wasn't it true that every small landmark, every single quote was collected, recorded and repeated verbatim at will? Wasn't it true that every time he walked out to the crease my heart surged with hope and happiness- and every time he walked back, the same heart was smashed to smithereens? Wasn't it true that after watching one of his specials, I'd look like I'd slept with a hanger in my mouth for days? Wasn't it true that he single-handedly controlled my happiness for a decade? Why then, this apparent nonchalance?

I think I have the answer finally. In so many ways, to me, Sachin Tendulkar is forever. He is the game, and the game is him. To imagine a game- a world, really- where he isn't at the crease wielding his relentless willow, would feel strangely incompletely. And somehow just not right. So the challenge is not to imagine him playing for twenty, or thirty, or even forty years for that matter. It is not imagining him there that is.

I don't claim he's perfect. He's far from it. He hasn't the spectacular flamboyance of Bolt, or the prodigal genius of Phelps. At least not at all times. What he carries- though- is something special. He plays with heart, and a dedication that is other-worldly. He plays as though he was born to play cricket. And they don't make them like him anymore.

Someday, many many years down the line, when the world has transformed into an unrecognizable place, I will be boasting to my grand children about the single proudest thing in my life- that I lived in the times of Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar. The Conjurer of Storms.

Roger Federer. 'Nuf Said.

"Well, I think when I look at Roger, I mean, I'm a fan. I'm a fan of how he plays, what he's about… he's a class guy on and off the court. He's fun to watch. Just his athletic ability, what he's able to do on the run. I think he can and will break every tennis record out there."

- Pete Sampras

If you want to be a tennis player, then mould yourself on Roger Federer. I won three Wimbledon titles and I wish I could play like him.

-John McEnroe

"I'd like to be in his shoes for one day to know what it feels like to play that way."

- Mats Wilander

"I am so proud to have him around. It is very pity that I am not able to play with Pete Sampras, but it's OK, I can see Federer on the tour. I could tell my grandson someday that I have competed against the greatest player on the planet"

-Ivan Ljubicic

"I've never enjoyed watching someone playing tennis as much as Federer. I'm just in awe. Pete Sampras was wonderful but he relied so much on his serve, whereas Roger has it all, he's just so graceful, elegant and fluid-a symphony in tennis whites. Roger can produce tennis shots that should be declared illegal."

- Tracy Austin

"He's the most gifted player that I've ever seen in my life. I've seen a lot of people play. I've seen the (Rod) Lavers, I played against some of the great players—the Samprases, Beckers, Connors', Borgs, you name it. This guy could be the greatest of all time. That, to me, says it all."

-John McEnroe

"You really gave me a lesson on how to play tennis"

- Robin Soderling after the French Open finals

"If you were to ask me who was the best player I had seen and the best player I had played against he would win on both counts. He's so humble and down to earth."

-Tim Henman

"Roger Federer is the only guy I watch for his strokes. He is just beautiful. He can hit every single shot you could ever think of. John [McEnroe] and Ilie [Nastase] were very talented but you always knew there were some shots they couldn't hit. Not with Federer. I would go and watch him practice, he's so good."

-Ivan Lendl

"What he's done over the past five years has never, ever been done — and probably will never, ever happen again, Regardless if he won there or not, he goes down as the greatest ever. This just confirms it."

-Pete Sampras

"A lot of people say it’s better to be lucky than good. I’d rather be Roger than lucky."

-Andre Agassi

"You guys are brutal. Absolutely brutal. The guy has only made two Grand Slam finals this year. I would love his bad year. I would love it."

-Roddick in 2008

"He’s the most complete tennis player in the history of tennis, that’s for sure. With all due respects to (Andre) Agassi and (Pete) Sampras and the rest of the gang. But I never felt so uncomfortable against any of the players before."

-Marat Safin

"Roger's got too many shots, too much talent in one body. It's hardly fair that one person can do all this—his backhands, his forehands, volleys, serving, his court position. The way he moves around the court, you feel like he's barely touching the ground. That's the sign of a great champion."

-Rod Lever

"Roger is at the top, and he's the only person at the top, regardless of how much people want to make rivalry comparisons and this, that and the other. He's the best player in the game. There's no question in my mind."

-Andy Roddick

"You bring up tennis in this day and age and a lot of people roll their eyes, and they're not interested. But listen: if you're not paying attention to this guy, if you appreciate sports, you have to take a moment to appreciate this guy. It's like Tiger Woods. A lot of people are your meat-and-potatoes sports fans: I like football, I like basketball, I like baseball. If you don't appreciate golf, that's fine. You don't have to watch it, and you don't have to pay attention to it, but you have to appreciate the greatness of Tiger Woods. It's the same with tennis. You don't appreciate tennis? I'm not telling you that you have to. But, if you don't give Roger Federer his due, then you're just missing the boat. Roger Federer is the best player in any sport today, and it's not close. It's not close."...

- Mike Greenberg of ESPN Radio's Mike & Mike in the Morning

"[In the modern game], you're either a clay court specialist, a grass court specialist or a hard court specialist ... or you're Roger Federer."

-Jimmy Connors

The kudos tumble in...

There are so many articles out there that captured the moment. But this one made me tear up a little. And left me with very little else to say.

When even the Heavens wept...

...with sheer joy.

The Final Verdict?

Roger Federer, as he enters his fifth consecutive French Open final, faces his ultimate test of greatness tonight. It all hangs in the balance- lifelong shame vs. eternal glory, ridicule vs. respect, mediocrity vs. greatness, the lable of a choker vs. the lable of the Greatest Ever. It all comes down to tonight's match. If the media are to be believed, that is.

I think it is a load of bull.

To bring it all down to one moment, one match, one tournament- is ridiculing the envious legacy this man has built over the past five years. The crowds he has amazed. The opponents he has traumatised. It is such a typically petty thing to do- to bring it down to one case of will-he-won't-he, and judge the rest of his career on its basis. Makes it easier, you know. Why expend the effort in analysing the circumstances, quality of opponents and technical finess, when we could just pin it down to one question: 'Can he win the French?'? Afterall, someone's got to don the title of 'The Greatest Ever'- and if someone can't win one of the Grand Slams, must he even deserve to be in contention? There are so many more out there to pass judgements on- and if this one doesn't quite fulfill our prerequisits, why even bother? One less person to have to analyse with honesty and sincerity- oh the relief!

Nevermind the twenty consecutive Grand Slam semi-finals. Nevermind the fact that he's run into the Best Clay-courter of All time (another tag we ourselves have graciously bestowed, of course). Nevermind the number of and quality of opponents he has crushed over the years- the Safins, the Hewitts, the Roddicks- who all swear by his greatness. Nevermind all that. We are the judges and we decide. If he can't win the French, he ain't the greatest. Plain. And simple.

One small hitch though- life ain't that plain and simple. And neither is greatness. So when Roger Federer steps onto to Court Philippe Chatrier tonight, try to suspend all judgement and revel in the historic value of the moment. Become a part of the ride and allow yourself to get enthralled, instead of being the mute judgemental spectator. Don't be afraid of falling in love- with the man, his grace, his destiny. If you only allow yourself, you'll see why Roger Federer is the best thing that has happened to the game since tennis balls. And why no tags are sufficient. Regardless of the result tonight.