London: David Gower was one of the finest batters from England to have played the game. At the age of 68, he is currently focusing on moving on from cricket and is auctioning off his cricketing possessions online. He was at Old Trafford watching another closely-fought Test between England and India. Moments after Rishabh Pant hobbled onto the pitch with a broken foot on the second day of the fourth Test, he sat down with TOI for a chat. “When Pant got injured yesterday, part of me said, well that’s good for England. But then the other part of me said, it’s going to get dull now,” Gower said. Excerpts from the chat…Why are you auctioning off your cricket stuff?My family as a whole is trying to clear the decks. There are things, like, say, my first blazer from an England tour, the original MCC colours, very special. But it’s been in a box in the attic for 30-40 years. I’ve nowhere to put it. It does bring back memories. If someone has a place to put that, then I’m happier it’s on display somewhere, because my memory of that doesn’t dim. Not everything went in the auction. There are medals and trophies which I’ve kept for my daughters.
You were one of the most elegant batters in your time. What do you make of modern-day batsmanship?You’ve got the contrast. You’ve got someone like Rishabh Pant who is a unique animal, and animal is not a pejorative term. At the same time, you’ve got Shubman Gill, who made hundreds of runs in a very old-fashioned way — controlled, elegant, using timing and not brute force. It was really important for India that a new captain makes a mark. The absence of two of the greats suddenly doesn’t seem to matter. If there are enough people with the right sort of talent to make it exciting, then by all means pick them. If you are still playing Tests with a view to winning them, then you still have to look for the best players you can. If their styles are different, like Shubman and Rishabh, then the two things can live together in some sort of harmony. England’s No. 1 to No. 7 are intent on moving the game forward quickly and being very positive. With a bit of added smartness, they can make it brilliant more often.Do you view Mike Gatting’s use of the reverse sweep in the 1987 World Cup final differently now?The reverse sweep has become much more common. It’s played as easily as even an orthodox sweep or a cover drive or any other orthodox shot. With Mike’s, I was commentating in London and I remember saying that’s the worst shot I’ve ever seen. It wasn’t needed. The game was almost won. It was Allan Border’s last throw of the dice and Mike could have done anything. If you’re Mike Gatting or Joe Root, if you try and scoop it over third man in a Test match and you get caught at slip or get caught reverse sweeping, it never looks good.
Poll
Do you think Test cricket is facing a serious threat to its existence?
Has the responsibility of saving the Test format fallen on England, India and Australia?That is a major fault in how world cricket is being administered. It tells you who has the money, who has the power. I love the way New Zealand play their cricket and I love the way they’ve taken their Test cricket to smaller grounds, pretty grounds, and made it look good. South Africa couldn’t give a flying figure about Test cricket because the only thing that makes money is the SA20. I use the tiger as an example. The tiger was threatened with extinction.It’s the most beautiful animal you’ll come across anywhere. And when people realized that it was heading for the exit door, Project Tiger gave it a lifeline. I see Test cricket in very much the same sort of way. I love it when Virat Kohli says Test cricket is the most important thing in his life, in his career, because that is 1.4 billion votes for Tests if everyone in India follows his work.You’ve played with Ian Botham and extensively covered Andrew Flintoff. Both allrounders struggled as captains. What makes Ben Stokes different?There’s a difference between handling them and them handling a team, for sure. Ian was the most brilliant cricketer, instinctively good. And the problem in the end for him was that he didn’t have the instinct to manage people. He just rather expected them to do what he did and get on with it. Flintoff was brilliant for a shorter period of time. He did some extraordinary things. But trying to captain in Australia proved a step too far. He would admit he was a disaster off the field. He didn’t cope particularly well.Now, Stokes has impressed me enormously. He too had off-field issues. The difference is that Ben, if you met him 10 years ago, you would never ever have predicted that he could be the captain that he is now. He was as talented as the other two, as instinctive, as self-centered as you might expect a young man to be at that stage. What those life problems have taught him is a lot about himself. The clearest demonstration is that empathy that he has with all the guys that come into this team. Ian didn’t understand that people are different.
