Sunil Gavaskar is making headlines and earning criticism for his comments once again, after catching the ire for arguments he has made in the public eye. The latest bout comes after Gavaskar spoke out against Sunrisers Leeds, the Sunrisers franchise in the Hundred, signing Pakistan spinner Abrar Ahmed in this month’s auction.
Gavaskar wasn’t the only person to criticise this move made by the Indian ownership of the franchise, but is certainly the most high profile – and this has found him in a war of words again. Here is all that you need to know.
Why is Sunrisers Leeds in controversy?
This is the first season of Sunrisers taking over the franchise that was formerly the Northern Superchargers, becoming one of the four Indian ownership groups in the Hundred. In the lead up to this month’s auction, there were reports which surfaced that Indian-owned teams would not go for Pakistan palyers as a form of protest.
Therefore, when Sunrisers Leeds procured the services of Abrar Ahmed, all hell broke loose. Sunrisers were hammered and even threatened with boycotts, gaining lots of hatred and criticism online, even seeing their X account suspended.
Fans weren’t happy with the direction the team went in, and it became the location of another chapter of the long-ranging debates between India and Pakistan.
What had Gavaskar said?
Writing for his column in Mid-day, Gavaskar had criticised Sunrisers for opting to sign Abrar by equating it to ‘indirectly contributing’ towards the attacks on Indian soldiers and civilians along the Indian border. In strong words, Gavaskar asserted that any payment made towards a Pakistani player would be aiding India’s enemy on the battlefield.
“The furore created by the acquisition of a Pakistani player by the Indian owner of a franchise in The Hundred is hardly surprising. Ever since the Mumbai attacks in November 2008, Indian franchise owners have simply ignored Pakistani players for the IPL,” mentioned Gavaskar, bringing up how the IPL hasn’t employed Pakistani players since its inaugural season.
“Although belated, the realisation that the fees that they pay to a Pakistani player, who then pays income tax to his government which buys arms and weapons, indirectly contributes to the deaths of Indian soldiers and civilians is making Indian entities refrain from even considering having Pakistani artistes and sportspersons,” Gavaskar explained as a manner for defending his assertion that paying and playing a Pakistan player in the UK would somehow hurt Indian soldiers in the subcontinent.
“Whether it is an Indian entity or an overseas subsidiary of the entity that is making the payment, if the owner is Indian, then he or she is contributing to the Indian casualties. It’s as simple as that,” Gavaskar continued bluntly.
He then went on to state that coach Daniel Vettori could be excused in part – but didn’t have the same grace for Sunrisers CEO Kaviya Maran, who was present at the auction table alongside the Kiwi coach.
“Daniel Vettori, the coach of the team in The Hundred who hails from New Zealand, may not understand this simple dynamic, and so may have wanted some Pakistani players in his team, but surely the owner should have had an understanding of the situation and discouraged the purchase. Is winning a tournament in a format that no other country plays in much more important than Indian lives?” Gavaskar had said.
What has the response to Gavaskar’s quotes been?
Following Gavaskar’s words, the opinion in reflection has been vastly different. Yes, there have been supporters, those who believe that Gavaskar has it absolutely spot on in illustrating and articulating why Indian franchises even in overseas leagues should stand clear of Pakistan players.
Equally, there are many who have put Gavaskar on blast, accused him of crossing the line, and called him out for a type of hypocrisy. Some have asked Gavaskar why he is on-board to do commentary in matches when India play Pakistan, when the proceeds from those media rights go towards the Pakistan Cricket Board and government in turn – how is that any better than private citizens of Pakistan earning for their labour?
Gavaskar’s comments haven’t settled well but it is not shocking – the India-Pakistan conflict is one which has been extremely multifaceted and without any easy answers, especially when as the primary conceit and pastime of each country, cricket is a battleground of sorts in its own right, and continues to be one which receives a lot of focus and attention.
