On the eve of a Test match in the last home series against England, Virat Kohli said at a press conference, “For me, demonetisation is the greatest move I’ve seen in the history of Indian politics by far, hands down. I’ve been so impressed by it. It’s unbelievable.”
What was unbelievable was that an Indian captain should make such a statement; a player who, in only his 20s, thought something was the greatest ever. But it was an opinion, Kohli was entitled to it, and one could be indulgent as one might be with a child who thought his mother’s two-wheeler was the greatest vehicle in the history of the world.
This was a startling departure from the earlier generation. Sachin Tendulkar was notorious for not expressing an opinion in public on even the important issues of the game. It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. Mark Twain said that. A modern version might be: It is better not to tweet an opinion and let people think you are not communal than to tweet and remove all doubt.
This version is occasioned by Virender Sehwag’s crass comment on the killing of the tribal in Kerala. 16 people (of various religions) may have been responsible for the murder, but Sehwag chose to tweet only three names – all Muslims. The former Indian opening batsman should have known better. If he is looking for a political career, and thinks that the path to success is through the weeds of divisiveness and communalism, he did better than even the professional trolls.
He offered a half-apology later, saying the tweet was not “communal at all”, and removed it. That was the decent thing to do. By then it had done the rounds, and been retweeted thousands of times. It might sound churlish to criticise a statement that was removed, but there is a larger issue here.
Either Sehwag knew what he was doing, and deserves to be pulled up, or he didn’t and needs to be educated (this rule must apply to all sportsmen).
Let us take the latter explanation first. Once you acquire the image of a funny man with “witty tweets” you become a play actor of your own image. The alleged wit may be of the B-grade Bollywood variety (“Instead of nagging about your partner, try bragging about your partner” is a good example), but when 16 million people follow you, there ought to be filters.
With that level of following it is not just the marketing managers who chase you for casual product placement. Political spin doctors are on your trail too. The word both use is “influencer”, and Sehwag is an influencer. With such power comes responsibility, however. And that is the lesson here.
Assuming the tweet was the result of malicious aforethought is an area no cricket lover or fan of Sehwag would like to venture into. Sehwag might be looking for a role in politics. Nothing wrong with that. Maybe he is testing the waters.
But the selective blame game – much favoured by party spokespersons – is dangerous. The essential difference between Kohli’s statement quoted above and Sehwag’s is that while the former is an opinion (you may or may not agree with it), the latter twisted facts to make a political point. This, at a time when a version of Gresham’s Law applies to the dissemination of news – fake news tends to drive out the genuine.
I don’t know how many of his followers were taken in by Sehwag’s tweet. I asked a few people what they thought of it, and the response ranged from “Ah, this is Viru, you know how he is” to “Sehwag has the right to express his opinion.” The former is being indulgent, the latter is a misrepresentation. This was not an opinion – to which he is entitled – but a convenient dressing up of incomplete information.
Our politicians and their friendly trolls do it all the time, our television anchors live by such tactics so why should we take an ex-cricketer to task? Frankly, we expect it of our politicians, we are not surprised by our anchors with agendas. But sporting heroes ought to be more sensitive. There is no BCCI code of conduct for the activities of players and commentators outside their respective boxes.
The International Cricket Council has an Anti-Racism Code, endorsed by the BCCI, but it has no Anti-Communalism or Anti-Bigotry Code. Perhaps that is something the BCCI can introduce for its players, commentators and player support personnel. Sehwag has simultaneously raised a concern and suggested a solution. If racism needs to be rooted out, so too does communalism. Cricket stands for many things: sportsmanship, fair play, even-handedness, fairness. Not all these qualities are evident at all times, but sport has to aspire to higher ideals or it becomes meaningless.
Cricket cannot be a vessel for bigotry; cricketers must understand this. Sehwag has brought this delicate issue into public consciousness.
