Sachin or Bradman? Pele‘s Brazil or La Roja of today? Federer or Sampras or Borg or McEnroe? The calypso West Indians of 70′s and 80′s or the Aussies of the first decade of this millennium? Vishwanathan Anand or Gary Kasparov? Tiger Woods or Jack Nicklaus? The list goes on endlessly. They all had one thing in common: the trait of unparalleled greatness in their own times. But the question remains, who is ‘the greatest ever’ to have graced the game? The debate lingers, gaining momentum every time a sportsperson or for that matter, a sports team sustains its successful stint over a considerable period of time.
One comparison that can’t be overstated is that of the cricketing legends Sachin Tendulkar and Sir Donald Bradman. More so, for us cricket-crazy people asking for more, the debate wouldn’t be at the top of our mind, for we have had enough of it. We may pride ourselves in writing a book of records, a tribute to Sachin, but we can’t forget, try as much as we can, the mammoth batting average of 99.94 of the Don. Records apart, If their styles are to be taken into account, we can safely say that The Don’s sublime stroke-making would send any purist to a state of unbearable bliss on any given day. At the same time, Sachin’s strikes are also placed at the altars of the sport. That he has endured greatness and innovated and adapted his style to keep with the changing times is the hallmark of genius.
In fact, studies have been done on both the legends to help us establish the greater one. One such study is a comparative study of both of them in their own times and the results obtained are aimed at extrapolating the game of The Don to the times of Sachin. The study suggests that if The Don were to play alongside Sachin, Sachin would have trumped. So does it call for the ultimate settlement?
I’m afraid it’s an emphatic no. How can we forget the times of The Don? His career spanned over 20 years, the years of glorious cricket, 1928-48. Yes, 1928-48: the globally turbulent period. That his career was interspersed with the bloody Second World War and he still played on with the imagination of people is remarkable. It was tough times and he showed the people promise and hope, to keep them going. He taught them what the ideal treatment for willow to mete out to leather was. More importantly, he instilled in them an unflinching love for the game. So, it just turns out to be another contrasting study in greatness. In economics they say that for a comparison to be scientifically done it should be under the condition ‘Ceteris Paribus’ which means all other things unchanged and in this case surely many things have changed with time.
The La Rojas have won yet another Euro Cup, thus becoming the first team in the history of football to hold two successive Euros on either side of the World Cup. What is debatable is the insistence of the footballing world to crown them with the title of the ‘greatest ever’. Yes, they have topped the FIFA rankings for four years now but Brazil held onto the top rank for an astounding 12 years from 1994 to 2006 (save 2001), and they are not even in the fray for the coveted title of the ‘greatest ever’. So, there must be more to football than just rankings. Yes, La Roja have shown unmatched brilliance as they have passionately combined art, grace and flair in their game and have won many hearts worldwide. They have also revolutionized the line-up by not playing any striker, as all of their six brilliant, versatile midfielders can double up as strikers and turn any game on it’s head. And, if I were to think of another team to match or probably more than match the brilliance of this Spanish team, it would be Pele’s Brazil.
To set the record straight, nothing can really match the unbelievable run that culminated in three World Cup titles in the period between 1958-70. Records apart, Pele and company lent a certain aesthetic to the game, which is to be experienced to be believed. Their game typified the phrase ‘Jogo Bonito’ (the beautiful game in Portuguese): the ball is like a lover to be caressed and the art of goal-making akin to making of a symphony with all the elements of elegance and brilliance in it. Is there really a comparison?
The question however remains. Is there something like the greatest ever? The tech savvy post modernist would pick Sachin over Bradman or Spain over Brazil. But do me a favor by putting the same choice in front of someone who grew up romancing Bradman or Pele’s Brazil. Every generation wants to glorify its champions and what better way to do that than crown them with the jewel of ‘the greatest ever’? There is certainly an inherent bias in judgement, for people want a share of glory, that of having lived in the times of ‘the greatest ever’. Every generation claims to be better than the previous generations. And the only thing that can help our claims is Darwin’s theory of Evolution, whose application in this case is quite far-fetched.
It seems an uphill task to ascertain ‘the greatest ever’. Our task would be made much simpler if it’s the question of picking the greatest in a generation, say Federer or Nadal, Messi or Ronaldo. But there again complications would arise because there isn’t any formula or empirical procedures to measure greatness. Let’s prod the great men of science to do the needful. Until then, let’s not trivialize sports by such inconclusive ugly debates, for the greats of every generation are messiahs of the sport who rekindle the love and enthusiasm for the sport. They are the torch-bearers of the glorious tradition passing it down the ages. And, if we are still desperately wanting to ascertain ‘the greatest ever’ let’s do it for a sport which is in it’s infancy, like T20 cricket and say that Chris Gayle is ‘the greatest ever’ batsman of T20 cricket. Let’s hope it’s accepted for now. The debates come up when they will.