Harbhajan's colourful history is confusing

Just as his list of achievements is long, so is his list of misdemeanors. So what is one to make of this personality? Part of the answer lies in his roots – he is from Punjab – the only son in a largish family, obviously doted on and used to having his way.

People from Punjab tend to be more emotional, head strong and can be more “in your face” than from some other parts of the country. However, all these are generalizations and often do not offer the full explanation of the psychology of an individual. At the end of the day it is not the collective psyche of a nation, a state, a family that determines behaviour as much as the individuals own psyche and the circumstances surrounding the action.

It is here that Harbhajan is different from say, Bishan Bedi or Navjot Sidhu or Balwinder Sandhu or Maninder Singh. He is not so well shaped in the traditions of old, a bygone era when the arrival of a rival captain at the crease was greeted, good strokes of the opponents applauded both by the spectators and fielding side as were landmarks such as centuries and records.

I don’t know Harbhajan but my guess is Harbhajan wouldn’t have read Neville Cardus, Robertson – Glasgow, Jack Fingleton, Ray Robinson or John Arlott and K N Prabhu. He is unlikely to be familiar with the poetry of cricket – he is obviously quite familiar with its modern, verbal prose. Bishan Bedi and (for all his bluster on TV) – Navjot Sidhu are extremely well read about the game of cricket, its history and traditions – Harbhajan is a product of his times, brash, confident, in your face, giving as much as he gets, if not more.

He, like many in his generation, carry no baggage of the past even if that baggage is part of the ethos of the game he represents. Like many of the young India, he is not bothered about the colour and reputation of the opponents, he is confident of his abilities both on and off the field, both in action and words. He will not back down, in fact, as the Australians have realized, he is spurred by the verbal jousts and gives it all when aroused.

One also wonders whether there is an element of clash of personalities because of similarities rather than differences as far as the Australians and Harbhajan are concerned. The Aussies are fine people off the field but once they cross the white line on the ground they display the schizophrenic part of their personality. Wanting to win is not only a good trait, it is the raison de etre of sport but with the proviso that it must not be at the cost of the spirit of the game.

The Aussies of the modern generation, at times, forget this. Great winners are humble in victory and graceful in defeat. If you were to cast your memory back to Ponting and his men when they went to receive the trophy from Sharad Pawar and the way they have behaved in Australia recently, what I am saying above becomes self explanatory.

Generally, Australians, accustomed as they are to winning, have developed a reputation of being poor losers but their behaviour when they lost to England and when they do to India or Sri Lanka tends to be different.

The Zaheer Khan’s (Jelly bean incident against England in England) and Harbhajan’s of his new India refuse to take things lying down. Not just with bat and ball, they will give it back with tongue and mouth too and the Aussies are not used to it.

Finally just what is it with Australia and off spinners! First it was Muralitharan, now it is Harbhajan. Is it their success against the Aussies, their “suspect” bowling arm or is it some “doosra” baat?