Skip to main content

Leander Paes and Mahesh Bhupathi - their legacy 10 years on



Date: July 2, 2022

2012 was a watershed year in Indian sport. Tennis and cricket in India seemed to be besotted with their aging stars, refusing to believe that all good things had to come to an end. The Indian cricket team had lost 8 tests on the trot, one of its most prolific and respected cricketer’s, Rahul Dravid, had announced his retirement and one of the cricket's  most revered figures, Sachin Tendulkar, would bid adieu to the game a year later, (another legend, VVS Laxman had also retired a few months earlier) leaving a billion and a half people inconsolable.

The UPA government was on its last legs and the US was slowly but steadily withdrawing troops from its misadventures in Iraq. Everywhere one looked, it seemed the old was reluctantly making way for the future. Right in the midst of all of this, two of India’s aging tennis stars were fighting a war of their own.

Indian hockey was yet to make a comeback into people’s hearts and the purses of sponsors. The London Olympics was for all purposes, Leander Paes and Mahesh Bhupathi’s last shot at immortality. One would have to really go back in time, 1996 to be precise, when the embers of hope were planted with Leander Paes winning the bronze medal at the Atlanta Olympics. And then travel to 1999 when it seemed the world was theirs for the taking, rising almost a billion hopes (India wasn’t a billion strong by then). Wins at the French Open and Wimbeldon, reaching the finals of all the major tournaments and the no.1 ranking painted a picture of invincibility. The future looked impossibly bright.

If the script went according to expectation, they would have carried on the legacy of Mark Woodforde and Todd Woodbridge, ambassadors of scintillating double’s play. But instead of sitting back and watching tennis volleys, the public were subject to verbal volleys, none of which, unfortunately, win medals, instil national pride or do any good for the game. It was Indian sports contribution to reality television, which eventually meandered into a never ending soap opera.

Great players aren’t just eulogized by their records but also by their ability to inspire generations that come after them. Toward the end of their career, the Paes-Bhupathi express veered off from being an aspirational tale to a cautionary one. It wasn’t as if their game had lost fire, nor was it felt that their presence was impeding younger legs, none of who had made a significant mark in the sport at that point. It was that their partnership would be remembered for all that it could have been, but never was.

Burying egos and personal differences in sport as well in life is an onerous task. If it is deemed reasonable to quit a job because of intolerable co-workers or bosses, putting aside irreconcilable personal differences to play for the country requires an ungainly super heroic ability. And when it came to the test, it became quite obvious that this ability wasn’t possessed by either Paes or Bhupathi.

And thus they set foot on the Olympic court, to do battle with each other. Instead of going down in a blaze of glory, tasting the saltiness of happy tears standing on the podium with medals wresting lightly on their necks as the Indian national anthem played, they went down in a war of words. 

And to think, in 1999, the future had looked impossibly bright.


P.S. Leander Paes now coaches the Indian tennis team. Mahesh Bhupathi runs his own sport management company and has acted in three movies. His next movie, a biopic on his life, is set to hit theatres next week. Sources report that the movie doesn’t portray Leander Paes in a very endearing light. Neither Leander Paes or Mahesh Bhupathi could be reached for comment at the time of filing this piece.


                                                                                                                                                                                

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

When an Iyer met an Iyengar

If you see my parents, they look like the quintessential arranged marriage couple. After nearly 35 years together, they still take care not to touch each other while posing for a photograph and my mother’s smile dangles precariously between a smile and a grimace. But this image discolours the truth a tad. Some 40 years back, they met at work, fell in love and got married. The talking point of the union being mom’s status as an iyengar and dad’s as an iyer. Simply put, the iyers and the iyengars are two castes of the Brahmin community, each, when given the chance, profess superiority to each other on all counts. If you listen closely, an Iyengar talking about an Iyer will say ‘Iyer a?’ in a condescending tone. And vice versa. Mom tells me that when she told her dad about the marriage, he vowed to stand by her at any cost. Dad never told me what happened, but allow me to hazard a guess. His mother (my grandmother), threatened to go on a fast unto death. My dad threatened to go ...

The sculptor and the stone cutter

  A story is told of two bricklayers laying brick on an afternoon when one wished the sun would scurry back behind the clouds and offer a smattering of respite. This very ordinary scene caused curiosity to get the better of a passerby in search of conversation. As the story goes, a question was posed to each as to what they were building. One replied he was merely laying brick. The other said he was laying the foundation for a cathedral. Ostensibly, the purpose of this story being recounted time and again is to get us to look at dreary tasks with a sense of reverence. And maybe, just maybe, they can turn into a masterpiece. Maybe this zealous approach is the distinction between the humdrum existence of a journeyman and that of an enchanter, who in Jack Kerouac’s words, makes everybody go ‘aaawww’. Which is why there are such few masterpieces, be it a song, a book, a movie, or a sportsperson making the field his stage, keeping an audience of a million glued to...

The lost joy of seeing a movie twice

Simple question - how many times have you seen Home Alone? I would assume more times than you can count. Actually, replace Home Alone with any of your favorite movies. You would have seen it repeatedly until you knew the dialogues by heart and what exactly was going to happen in the next scene. Still, you watched it. Sometimes out of boredom and sometimes because you actually enjoyed watching it more than once. Back in the day, life was a whole lot simpler. There was one television per home which everyone fought for. There existed only a handful of serials (as we called them back then before they metamorphosed into series). And you either saw a movie on theatre or HBO or Star Movies. Remember when the programming schedule of the week appeared in the Sunday newspaper and this allowed you to plan your TV watching time? And sometimes, if you didn’t find anything interesting, you would gladly resort to watching a movie you have already watched, ag...