Sachin Tendulkar's autobiography - Is he a liar?

[ManWithNoName]

Given the other thread was closed for no apparent reason, new thread to discuss this issue. Sachin claims that just before the World Cup, Greg Chappell asked him to replace Rahul Dravid as captain. Chappell said that never happened. Article by respected journo Malcolm Knox doesn't look good for Sachin.

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket...ewriting-cricket-history-20141107-11hxwl.html

Four years ago, while working with Chappell on his book Fierce Focus, I read his diary. It was exhaustively detailed. Chappell wrote it for himself, not for publication. He has not consented to my raising it now. But he has, it seems, been traduced, and ought to be defended.

The diary records only one visit paid by Chappell to Tendulkar's home. It took place nearly a year before the World Cup, on May 9, 2006, the day before Chappell and Dravid were to take the Indian team to the West Indies for a Test and one-day tour.

Each extract that comes out seems to look worse and worse for Sachin.

 

[The_Reaper]

There is enough talk from India against Chappell that I wouldn't be surprised it they were right.

Dravid just strikes me as the kind of person who would just refuse to air dirty laundry in public.

I think Tendulkar is lying about Harbhajan/Symonds but in this case I think he's telling the truth or something close to the truth

 

[Oaktree]

Malcolm Conn and Robert Craddock have never said a good word about Tendulkar.

I don't believe a word they say!

This article isn't from those guys, but I don't think Tendulkar is lying, similar to the above post. Tendulkar hasn't spoke publicly on most matters his entire career, I think his autobiography will be an interesting read.

 

[Teen Wolf]

Somebody who lives like a king and is worshipped as a god probably starts to believe their own bullshit after a while. It'd be hard not to. But that makes me a little apprehensive (fairly or unfairly) in straight-up accepting Tendulkar's version of events.

My guess is Sachin Tendulkar lives in Sachin World. Everybody has their own take on the truth--in his mind, things with Greg Chappell may have gone just the way he told it. Does that make him a liar? Not sure. But on the other hand, he could be honest and correct 100% of the time and I'd still be wary of buying what he says!

 

[dashing_man]

Srt will always be an Aussie dog

personally I think he has let himself down in most indian fans mind

 

[The Passenger]

Interesting extract in the paper today from Allan Border's book on the whole Harby-Symonds thing. It'll be online somewhere. I'm too hungover to look.

To be honest over the second half of his career Sachin has come across very narcissistic and two faced. A long way from the Sachin of the 90's who came across as genuinely humble, or maybe it was just a show the whole time.

In the good bloke stakes give me Rahul Dravid any day of the week.

 

[Black Diamond]

Greg Chappell has struggled with man management at various stages of his career. I could me completely mistaken here, but wasn't there a recommendation at some stage that he should not occupy a coaching position within CA? Something along those lines and I stand to be corrected.

On the whole I imagine Tendulkar is trying to tell each story from his career in a way that reflects well on him and his teammates. The evidence of the Harbhajan-Symonds incident basically speaks for itself and by blaming Chappell he absolves his teammates of responsibility for their poor performances under his leadership.

 

[King Elvis]

He's shown himself to be a blatant liar regarding the Singh stuff, so I'd be hesitant to believe anything he said along these lines, now.

 

[The_Reaper]

He's shown himself to be a blatant liar regarding the Singh stuff, so I'd be hesitant to believe anything he said along these lines, now.

He's shown himself to be a liar/liberal with the truth to protect his teammates.

But there is so much said (almost all negative) about Greg Chappell's coaching in India that there has to be something in it.

If Dravid is the only one who won't say something bad about you, that says more about Dravid than anything else

 

[Doodlesweaver]

Somebody who lives like a king and is worshipped as a god probably starts to believe their own bullshit after a while. It'd be hard not to. But that makes me a little apprehensive (fairly or unfairly) in straight-up accepting Tendulkar's version of events.

My guess is Sachin Tendulkar lives in Sachin World. Everybody has their own take on the truth--in his mind, things with Greg Chappell may have gone just the way he told it. Does that make him a liar? Not sure. But on the other hand, he could be honest and correct 100% of the time and I'd still be wary of buying what he says!

Yes, this is what I think. He comes across as naive, and I'm sure he believes what he's saying. Whether anyone else has to believe it, is another thing again.

 

[DT_fanatic]

OP obviously seems to have something against Sachin - didn't get an autograph?

BTW VVS has corroborated Sachin's version of Chappell's persona.

As far as the Monkeygate saga goes, I'm not sure what the big deal is? It's not like he's saying anything that is different to what he said when it happened. Did anyone seriously expect that version of events to change? Doesn't matter whether it's the truth or not - one side's word against the other...

 

[Marstermind]

His testimony in the Monkeygate case was straight out bullshit. But that doesn't make him a liar now. I think he believes his own version of the truth. Are you lying if you say something untrue but you believe it to be true? This guy has been idolised and revered, made mistakes and excused (he was once found guilty of ball tampering but let off due to pressure from the Indian board). He's probably forgotten what it's like to be humble or wrong or even have his word doubted.

 

[western royboy]

Greg Chappell has struggled with man management at various stages of his career. I could me completely mistaken here, but wasn't there a recommendation at some stage that he should not occupy a coaching position within CA? Something along those lines and I stand to be corrected.

On the whole I imagine Tendulkar is trying to tell each story from his career in a way that reflects well on him and his teammates. The evidence of the Harbhajan-Symonds incident basically speaks for itself and by blaming Chappell he absolves his teammates of responsibility for their poor performances under his leadership.

Ponting tried to have him banned from Training sessions when he was a selector because of the negative influence he had on players.

I am a huge fan of his initial technical works, but he has completely lost his marbles. Always two sides to a story, but Greg has an obsession with youth, which fails to acknowledge that the world has changed a bit and 30 is the new 20. If I have to pick a version of events - I am going with Sachin, Greg is living in a fantasy land.

 

[Tyberious Funk]

I think some people are confusing the issue.

Did Chappell create friction with the Indian players? Absolutely. Numerous past players have spoken out about him, and the general tone of their opinions is pretty consistent. Was Chappell a rubbish coach? Quite probably. Plenty of players, not just Indians, have questioned his coaching abilities. But did Chappell offer Tendulkar the captaincy, just before before the World Cup? The evidence on that is a bit more scratchy.

It seems to me that a lot of the Tendulkar fans are basically taking everything he says as the gospel truth, and clutching at circumstantial evidence to support their view. Yep, Chappell was a terrible coach and the Indians all hated him. But that doesn't automatically make him guilty of all the things he's been accused of.

 

[Black Diamond]

But the thing is, suggesting Tendulkar takes over the captaincy is consistent with Chappell's interesting approach to man management.

If Tendulkar had accused Chappell of assaulting another player then yes, we could probably dismiss that. But the captaincy thing is very Chappell-like.

Ponting tried to have him banned from Training sessions when he was a selector because of the negative influence he had on players.

I am a huge fan of his initial technical works, but he has completely lost his marbles. Always two sides to a story, but Greg has an obsession with youth, which fails to acknowledge that the world has changed a bit and 30 is the new 20. If I have to pick a version of events - I am going with Sachin, Greg is living in a fantasy land.

By technical works do you his approach to unstructured learning, five pathways etc? I read The Making of Champtions not long before he became coach of India and thought he would go pretty well. His ideas seemed to correlate with the Indian way of playing. Of course, I didn't know how dysfunctional he could be at the time. What's funny is that right at the end of the book there are a couple of paragraphs from Sourav Ganguly with improvements to his batting and captaincy, and India's performance in the '03-4 series credited to Chappell. No doubt that section would not feature in a revised edition.

 

[western royboy]

But the thing is, suggesting Tendulkar takes over the captaincy is consistent with Chappell's interesting approach to man management.

If Tendulkar had accused Chappell of assaulting another player then yes, we could probably dismiss that. But the captaincy thing is very Chappell-like.


By technical works do you his approach to unstructured learning, five pathways etc? I read The Making of Champtions not long before he became coach of India and thought he would go pretty well. His ideas seemed to correlate with the Indian way of playing. Of course, I didn't know how dysfunctional he could be at the time. What's funny is that right at the end of the book there are a couple of paragraphs from Sourav Ganguly with improvements to his batting and captaincy, and India's performance in the '03-4 series. No doubt that section would not feature in a revised edition.

To quote Shane Crawford "That's what I'm talkin' about"

In essence you have to almost divide up his pre India and post India work. Pre India he was spot on all though I note he had an unsuccessful stint as SA Coach or something along those lines. He has walked away from a lot of this and seems happy to pick up a CA pay cheque having sold out on his original concepts - which like the basics of cricket for the last 100 years - remain as valid today as they were then.

 

[aflcliche]

Miscommunication and / or memory problems. Thats all.

 

[Richard Pryor]

To be honest over the second half of his career Sachin has come across very narcissistic and two faced. A long way from the Sachin of the 90's who came across as genuinely humble, or maybe it was just a show the whole time.

From some stories I've read, wasn't Bradman a bit the same? Side effect of ascension to godhood?

 

[King Elvis]

I think Bradman was just an a-hole.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

I think Bradman was just an a-hole.

Don Bradman was a total bastard - grumpy, greedy, tight-arsed - who couldn't even score one run last time he played!

 

[aflcliche]

Don Bradman was a total bastard - grumpy, greedy, tight-arsed - who couldn't even score one run last time he played!

or average 100

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Interesting extract in the paper today from Allan Border's book on the whole Harby-Symonds thing. It'll be online somewhere. I'm too hungover to look.

To be honest over the second half of his career Sachin has come across very narcissistic and two faced. A long way from the Sachin of the 90's who came across as genuinely humble, or maybe it was just a show the whole time.

In the good bloke stakes give me Rahul Dravid any day of the week.

And good old Bishen Bedi

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

This really has nothing to do with the thread, but it involves an Indian batsman. One thing that has annoyed me for years is an interview with Ravi Shastri about the Tied Test in Madras. He claims the umpire threw the finger in the air so quickly, it was over before he had a chance to turn around and see the umpire's decision. He claims he never saw the umpire give the batsman out.

However, when you see footage of the incident, you clearly see Shastri turn around and look directly at the umpire who THEN raises the finger. Shastri's looking straight at him and yet claims he never saw it.

Relevance? Some people embellish their stories to make their point, maybe Tendulkar is one of them.

 

[western royboy]

This really has nothing to do with the thread, but it involves an Indian batsman. One thing that has annoyed me for years is an interview with Ravi Shastri about the Tied Test in Madras. He claims the umpire threw the finger in the air so quickly, it was over before he had a chance to turn around and see the umpire's decision. He claims he never saw the umpire give the batsman out.

However, when you see footage of the incident, you clearly see Shastri turn around and look directly at the umpire who THEN raises the finger. Shastri's looking straight at him and yet claims he never saw it.

Relevance? Some people embellish their stories to make their point, maybe Tendulkar is one of them.

As I recall the umpire led the appeal, when Ravi questioned him he said it was his chance to be involved in history or words to that effect.

 

[Black Diamond]