Selectors' vision and not Tendulkar's beliefs should matter

Sachin Tendulkar is 39 and will be 42 by the time the next World Cup comes around.

"Not only me, but the whole country misses Sachin when he is not in action," said Virender Sehwag recently. "But one should realise that he is 39 years old, and he should be allowed to pick and choose which series he wants to go. He will certainly be available for the Test series against New Zealand."

Tendulkar is currently in London, watching Wimbledon and spending time with his family. According to the selectors, he had asked to be excused from India's limited-overs tour of Sri Lanka that starts later this month.

But despite having finally won a 50-over World Cup last year, there's no indication that he's ready to quit the one-day arena.

Speaking to a television channel, Tendulkar said: "It's not about what X-Y-Z thinks, it's about what I feel and I feel as long as I am enjoying and I feel like being part of it, I'll continue. I think it [speculation over when he'll call it a day] has been going on since 2006.

"I am enjoying cricket and as long as I am passionate about cricket it makes sense being part of a team sport."

No one can force a sportsman to retire, especially one with a record as illustrious as Tendulkar.

But the debate over whether he can pick and choose which games to play should be secondary to another one: are the selectors doing their job?

Sportsmen and women are seldom good arbiters of when they've reached the end of the line.

Kapil Dev carried on two seasons too many in pursuit of a record, and stalled at least a couple of promising careers in the process.

Javed Miandad went on till he was a parody of his old street-fighting self.

They clearly believed that they had something left to give, even if the evidence from the field suggested otherwise.

It is in such situations that selectors must earn their money. It is often suggested in India that Tendulkar is too big a name to be dropped or asked to retire.

That is nonsense.

No one, no matter what their achievements, is bigger than a team and its future prospects. Sportsmen every bit as legendary as Tendulkar have discovered that.

Just as Tendulkar is Mr Indian Cricket, so Joe Montana was Mr San Francisco 49ers, a peerless quarterback in pressure situations. He won four Super Bowls with them.

But just short of his 37th birthday and with Steve Young having proved himself an able understudy, they let him go. Less than two years later, Young would quarterback them to another Lombardi Trophy.

Raul Gonzalez played 16 seasons for Real Madrid. When Jose Mourinho arrived in 2010, he left, having accepted that he would no longer be first or even second-choice striker. There was also Fernando Hierro, a Real stalwart from 1989 to 2003.

Like Raul, he was synonymous with the club's second golden age, as they won the Champions League thrice between 1998 and 2002. Yet, neither man got the dream farewell.

Tendulkar is perfectly entitled to want to continue playing. But the final decision should not be his.

If the selectors say that, it amounts to dereliction of duty. They need to decide what the blueprint is for 2015, when the team will go to Australia to defend the 50-over World Cup.

If Tendulkar is part of that plan, then it makes sense to nurse him through the next three years. If they cannot see him being part of that competition - he would be 42 by then - then the time has come for a firm decision.

Individual achievements are one thing, but losing sight of the bigger picture will only take the team one way – down.

twitter

Follow us

& Dileep Premachandran