Invitation to flamboyant English cricketer to speak at Pataudi lecture divides BCCI; ex-players says former Indian great ‘doesn’t deserve this spat’ and that BCCI not keen on hosting lecture.
New Delhi: Kevin Pietersen, unloved in South Africa after he chose to leave the country of his birth for England’s greener pastures, burnt his bridges in his adopted nation, but it seems he is more than welcome in the new home of world cricket.
Invited to deliver the sixth M.A.K. Pataudi Memorial Lecture in Bengaluru on 12 June, an annual event hosted by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), Pietersen finds himself in the middle of yet another fracas, and for once, it is not of his making.
Pietersen, arguably the most accomplished English batsman in recent times, is the prime character in a heated exchange of emails between those who run cricket in India. And the question at the centre of this controversy is whether he qualifies to deliver the lecture about an India great from another era.
The BCCI row
Amitabh Chaudhary, acting secretary of the BCCI, in his email to Saba Karim, general manager (cricket operations), wondered whether the lecture “was indeed the M.A.K. Pataudi Memorial Lecture or Sir Len Hutton Lecture or for that matter Sir Frank Woolley lecture.”
He goes on to explain the reasons. “I had suggested we also look for probable speakers amongst distinguished cricketers of yesteryears such as Nari Contractor, Chandu Borde, Erapalli Prasanna and Abbas Ali Baig.”
These cricketers, he wrote, have the distinction of playing alongside Tiger Pataudi and could provide the much-needed perspective on how cricket has evolved from those years of challenge.
While Chaudhary tilted towards former Indian cricketers who had first-hand experience of playing with or against Pataudi, Karim’s short list of four included three foreigners — Kumar Sangakkara, Nasser Hussain and Pietersen — and the only Indian on the list, Sourav Ganguly, was automatically ruled out by virtue of him being the president of the Cricket Association of Bengal.
“As I understand Tiger Memorial Lecture is not an elocution contest and reasonable communication skills are all that we should look for,” said Chaudhary, although the BCCI has never set our clear norms on the eligibility or suitability of potential speakers for this lecture. “It is meant to bring to the fore the evolution of the game, what it meant to play for the country in the old days, the hardships of the time, challenges of the future and the like.”
Karim, in his exchanges, also lists topics that might be of relevance:
- Peace and sustainability through cricket — relevant since Afghanistan is a wonderful story.
- Behaviour and conduct of international players in the modern age — players perspective
- Cricket as an Olympic sport — way forward.
It is unclear if Pietersen has agreed to speak on any of these subjects.
Sunil Gavaskar delivered the inaugural Pataudi lecture and has since been followed by Anil Kumble, V.V.S. Laxman, Rahul Dravid and Farokh Engineer.
‘Pataudi doesn’t deserve this spat’
Former India cricketer Bishan Singh Bedi, who has nothing but admiration for Pataudi, was typically forthright. “What do you want me to say? I feel a bit bad that having decided on the Pataudi lecture, the BCCI is seldom seen to be keen on hosting it. They started it with all the right intentions. I’ve attended nearly all the lectures. I get the feeling they are not too keen to host it,” Bedi told ThePrint.
“It is the BCCI’s prerogative to choose who they want, but it’s also our prerogative as followers of the game, as people who have played the game, to disagree with their choices. I’m not at all convinced.”
Bedi explained the reasons for his stance. “This is borrowed from the Spirit of Cricket lecture, organised by the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) in memory of Colin Cowdrey. I’d like to think this BCCI lecture would involve cricket ethics, the spirit of the game,” said Bedi. “You leave it to the guy to speak about it.”
Bedi was also uncomfortable with how the whole thing played out in the media.
“They have a CoA, acting officials, and all of this, there is a lot of hotchpotch. There’s never quite a dignified approach to these things. Pataudi is a giant of Indian cricket, not an also-ran,” said Bedi.
“He does not deserve this kind of spat between the acting secretary and the CoA associated with a lecture in his name. It’s most undesirable. There’s no need to spar over who will deliver the lecture. It has to be unanimous and graceful. It has to be done with the elegance, grace and humility that Pataudi stood for.”
A former India great who has played with Pataudi, but did not want to be named, said the association with Pietersen, an Englishman, probably had something to do with the fact that the former India captain played for Sussex and Oxford.
“I don’t know how much he knows about Pataudi… anyway, it’s the Board’s prerogative. They wanted a recent big name…but he won’t know much about the persona of Pataudi, no anecdotes, no nothing like that,” he said.
Anirudh Chaudhry, treasurer of the BCCI, clarified his position to ThePrint. “I think it is important for us to ensure that the gravitas connected with the M.A.K. Pataudi Memorial Lecture is respected. The process and planning could have been handled in a much better manner,” he said.
Chaudhary’s first choice was Ganguly, followed by Pietersen. This, he said, was if Sangakkara, the CoA’s pick, was unavailable.
Chaudhry explains the reasons for his choice, although he was not consulted in the matter. “I thought it would be very interesting to hear Sourav or KP speak about, ‘Behaviour and conduct of international players in the modern age – Players perspective’. Since I was never asked for suggestions on either the names or the topics, in light of the various directions qua me by the COA, where I have been restricted even in the expression of my views.”
Controversial Kevin
Pietersen, a flamboyant cricketer but a deeply polarising figure, is no stranger to controversy or brushes with authority. The 37-year-old, who debuted for Kwa-Zulu Natal as a teenager, left South Africa in a huff in protest against government policies that he felt were limiting his prospects.
His process of qualifying to play for England began with Nottinghamshire in 2000 where he clashed with Jason Gallian, the captain, more than once. Gallian famously threw Pietersen’s kitbag out of the first-floor balcony after one such run in.
Pietersen’s first serious controversy at the international level came when he was captain of England and could not see eye to eye with Peter Moores, the coach. In 2009, a year into his captaincy, Pietersen laid down an ultimatum to the England and Wales Cricket Board, saying that Moores had to go. The ECB reluctantly acquiesced, but in addition to removing Moores, Pietersen was stripped of the captaincy.
There was also the infamous Textgate controversy of 2012 when Pietersen sent messages to members of the opposition South African team running down Andrew Strauss, then England’s Test captain. Doing so in the middle of a series left Pietersen red-faced and he was dropped for the final Test and it did not help that he was spotted in a wine bar one evening, in the company of South African cricketers celebrating their victory.
The final straw came in 2014 when Pietersen, despite scoring runs in the Ashes, had a running battle behind the scenes with Andy Flower, the coach. While Flower resigned soon after, the ECB had had enough and drew a line under Pietersen’s international career.