&w=3840&q=100)
Sachin Tendulkar ends Ben Stokes' handshake controversy debate with a powerful statement: 'It Wasn't India's Problem'
The gripping series between India and England left enthusiasts thoroughly entertained and with a lot to reflect on. While every contest of the 2-2 drawn series was a masterpiece and ticked the column of thrills and spills, it also brought out the competitive nature of both teams. The same was testified during the closing minutes of the 4th Test in Manchester when the two sides came into odds with each other over the continuity of the match.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
With 15 overs left and a stalemate was inevitable, England captain Ben Stokes did not see any point to stay on the field anymore and offered a handshake to the Indian batters in the middle- Ravindra Jadeja and Washington Sundar. As both batsmen were in their 80s, they denied the handshake and kept playing until they got to their deserved hundreds.
Sachin Tendulkar on the handshake controversy
The matter sparked debates among the knowers of the game, and polarising opinions were formed. In due course, legendary Indian batsman Sachin Tendulkar has paid heed to the subject and has dropped the mic in front of those who sided with Stokes in the whole controversy.
'Washington scored a hundred, and Jadeja scored a hundred. Why is it not in the right spirit? They were playing for a draw. Before that, they battled it out when England were having a go at them, and negotiated it all to bat brilliantly,' began Tendulkar as he reviewed the series in a video posted on Reddit.
'The series was alive, so why should they go ahead (and shake hands) and give rest to England bowlers and fielders? If England wanted to hand the ball to Harry Brook, it was Ben Stokes' choice. It wasn't India's problem. To me, it was fine. They were playing for a draw, not their hundreds. If they had gotten out when they came to bat, we could've lost. When they came out to bat, Harry Brook wasn't bowling, was he? So, why should England's bowlers be fresh for the 5th Test? Do you have an answer for that? No!' said Tendulkar.
Tendulkar further stated that he blindly trusts the team's approach, citing Washington Sundar's example when he played a blinder of a knock in the 5th Test, to state that the players know when exactly to ramp up and when to put the guard up.
'I am absolutely with the Indian team, be it Gambhir or Shubman or Jadeja or Washington, whoever decided. I'm 100 percent with them. In the last Test match, when it was time to accelerate, Sundar did that brilliantly, didn't he? Where it was needed to occupy the crease, he did that in the fourth Test. And when it was needed to press the accelerator hard, he did that in the fifth. So, well done,' said Tendulkar.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
30 minutes ago
- India Today
Gavaskar questions England: Were Tendulkar and Anderson invited to trophy ceremony?
Batting great Sunil Gavaskar has questioned the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) over the organisation of the presentation ceremony following the five-Test series between England and India. Gavaskar asked whether Sachin Tendulkar and James Anderson were not invited to the ceremony after the inaugural Anderson-Tendulkar Trophy ended in a drew parallels with how he was excluded from the presentation when Australia won the Border-Gavaskar Trophy earlier this year. The former India captain said it would have been fitting to have Tendulkar and Anderson, both of whom were in England at the time, present for the won the fifth and final Test at The Oval, outclassing England in a thrilling final day. England fell just six runs short after being set a target of 374. The hosts appeared on course for victory after centuries from Joe Root and Harry Brook in the final innings, but a dramatic collapse from 301 for 3 saw them bowled out for 367. Mohammed Siraj, with a five-wicket haul, and Prasidh Krishna rattled England on the morning of Day 5 when the visitors needed only 35 runs with four wickets in hand. "This was the first-ever series named after Sachin Tendulkar and Jimmy Anderson, two of cricket's greatest legends. One would have expected both to be present to hand the trophy to the two captains, especially since the series ended in a draw. To the best of one's knowledge, both were in England at the time. So, were they simply not invited?" Gavaskar wrote in his column for Sportstar."Or was this similar to what happened in Australia earlier this year, when only Allan Border was asked to present the Border-Gavaskar Trophy because Australia had won the series? Since this England series was drawn, perhaps neither was asked to attend the presentation."Notably, Gavaskar was among those who questioned the renaming of the trophy from the Pataudi Trophy to the Anderson-Tendulkar Trophy. The batting legend also opined that the trophy should be named Tendulkar-Anderson, rather than backlash, the ECB announced that the winning captain would receive the Pataudi Medal, thereby ensuring the cricketing family's name remained associated with the high-profile series.'NOBODY FROM PATAUDI FAMILY WAS THERE'The Pataudi Medal was shared between Ben Stokes and Shubman Gill after the series ended in a draw. Gavaskar stated that the medal should be awarded to the Player of the Series rather than the winning captain."Mostly around the world, administrators are brought in to ensure profits and are quite good at it, but they may not have much knowledge about the history of the sport they are presiding over. So, these little gestures are not in their scheme of things. Nobody from the Pataudi family was there either, for the Pataudi Medal, which was to be presented to the winning team's drawn series showed how foolish this idea was of trying to make amends to the Pataudis by retiring the trophy named after them. Every time the series is drawn, the medal can't be presented, can it? Wouldn't it be better, therefore, to award the medal to the Man of the Series rather than the winning team's captain? And what if the captain himself had an ordinary series and little impact on the result?"If there had been a result and the Pataudi Medal had to be given to the Man of the Series, it would have been a tough choice, for both skippers were simply outstanding," he Gill won the Player of the Series award for his outstanding batting contribution. The Punjab batsman, in his maiden series as captain, scored 754 runs in 10 innings, breaking numerous records. Opposition coach Brendon McCullum named Gill as India's most valuable Harry Brook, and not Ben Stokes, was named England's Player of the Series. Stokes led his team admirably and bowled with great heart, taking 21 wickets in four matches. England missed Stokes' services in the final Test as the captain sat out due to a shoulder injury.- EndsYou May Also Like
India Today
30 minutes ago
- India Today
Shubman Gill playing Duleep Trophy sends right message to India teammates: Gavaskar
Legendary Indian batter Sunil Gavaskar has praised Shubman Gill's decision to participate in the upcoming Duleep Trophy, saying it sends the right message to his teammates about the importance of playing domestic cricket when not on national commended Gill for opting to represent North Zone despite just coming off a gruelling five-match Test series in England, where India secured a 2-2 draw. The series was a personal triumph for Gill, who topped the run-scoring charts with over 750 runs, reinforcing his stature as one of India's most reliable batters in the longest Gill, captaining the North Zone team, is a massive shot in the arm for this tournament. By being available, the Indian skipper is sending the right signal to the other members of the team. It would have been understandable if, after a gruelling tour where five Test matches were crammed into a little over six weeks, he had opted to rest,' Gavaskar wrote in his column for Sportstar. The former India captain also pointed out that while Gill's participation is a positive, the decision to rest fast bowlers from the tournament was sensible. 'The fast bowlers not playing is good thinking, as it has been an unusually hot summer in England, thanks to global warming, and their energies must have been expended after the untiring spells they bowled throughout the series,' he OF THE ZONAL FORMATThis year's Duleep Trophy has reverted to its traditional zonal format, featuring four teams composed of players in, or vying for, a place in India's Test squad. The squads have been chosen by zonal committees, which include representatives from all states within each Zone, under Gill's leadership, will open their campaign in a play-off against East Zone. A win would set up a semi-final clash against either South Zone or West Gill, the tournament is not only a chance to maintain his rich vein of form but also an opportunity to underline his commitment to Indian cricket's domestic structure. His presence could inspire younger players and reinforce the pathway between domestic cricket and the national team.- EndsTune InMust Watch
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
30 minutes ago
- First Post
R Praggnanandhaa explains southern India's domination of chess: 'We have this starting advantage...'
R Praggnanandhaa, India's top-ranked player in the Classical format at No 4, added that while the South, especially the city of Chennai, remains a bastion of Indian chess, the sport is growing across the country with talent emerging from all parts. read more The southern part of India, especially the state of Tamil Nadu and the city of Chennai, remains something of a nursery for Indian chess as it continues to produce world-class talent generation after generation. From the legendary Viswanathan Anand, India's first Grandmaster and a five-time world champion, and Koneru Humpy, who took women's chess in India to another level, to the emergence of young stars such as reigning world champion D Gukesh as well as R Praggnanandhaa and Arjun Erigaisi, the south has quite the rich legacy when it comes to chess. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD According to Praggnanandhaa, Anand's influence and the presence of a strong chess culture are the two key reasons behind the south's domination of chess in India. 'One of the reasons is because of Anand sir. I came from Chennai and there is already an existing system where there are tournaments happening regularly, where there are a lot of trainers. And that's why we have this starting advantage so to say, that we get the opportunities there,' the 20-year-old Grandmaster said on the Figuring Out With Raj Shamani podcast. Praggnanandhaa says chess growing everywhere in India these days 'Pragg', who currently is the highest-rated Indian in the Classical format at No 4, added that while the South remains a bastion for Indian chess, the sport is 'growing everywhere in India', with young talent emerging from all parts of the nation including from the North. 'But right now I think it's growing everywhere in India. There are kids coming from all over India, and that's one of the reasons why India is growing because there's just so much competition within us, and then when you go and play abroad, you are just so much stronger,' added Praggnanandhaa, who celebrated his 20th birthday on Sunday. Gukesh had recently become only the second Indian after Anand to be crowned Classical world champion, also becoming the youngest to achieve the feat. Arjun too had emulated one of Anand's many incredible feats in chess, that of breaching the 2800-rating barrier. Praggnanandhaa, meanwhile, had pulled off the biggest victory of his career earlier this year when he defeated Gukesh in the tie-breaks to win the Tata Steel Chess tournament. As for Humpy, she had recently become only the second player in chess history to be crowned women's rapid world champion more than once. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD And it's not just individual feats; Chennai also happens to host the strongest Classical tournament, the Chennai Grand Masters, which currently is underway. And Velammal MHS School, Gukesh and Pragg's alma mater, had recently won gold at the FIDE World Schools Team Championship.
