Kumar Sangakkara brings pride to Sri Lanka yet again
Source:Island
MTV 1 in its night news bulletin on March 27, mentioned that Kumar Sngakkara had addressed the Oxford Union and presented a short visual. Interest kindled, I googled and watched the entire Union session on video.
There he sat comfortable and so at ease, looking his handsomest best, dressed near casual in a dark blazer like jacket with grey slacks and subdued tie. He spoke excellently with the slightest of attractive accent, as English should be spoken. Also, no er…s and um…s at all. His talk, whether recounting incidents from his life or answering questions about cricket, was even paced and smooth flowing. Listeners’ reaction seemed to be riveted interest; questions at the end were many and penetrating.
A note on the Oxford Union is apt here. It is a debating society named the Oxford Union Society, commonly referred to as the Oxford Union, in the city of Oxford, England, whose membership is drawn primarily from the University. Founded in 1823, “it is one of Britain’s oldest university unions and one of the world’s most prestigious private students’ unions. It exists independently from the university and is distinct from the Oxford University Students Union.” Women were admitted as late as 1963. “The Union has the tradition of hosting some of the world’s most prominent individuals across politics, academia and popular culture.”
Please do note that sentence. Thus Sangakkara has been accepted by a most prestigious association as one of the worlds’ most prominent individuals. (In contrast local figures that stomp our stages hubris-filled come derisively to mind: granted PhDs from potty institutions and using Dr with names; claiming educational/professional qualifications that never were and strutting puffed up with self-inflation)
The Event
Kumar Sangakkara addressed the Oxford Union on February 23 this year. Seeing him walk up to the small platform filled me with justified pride. The convener, probably President of the Oxford Union, asked the first question on how Kumar got started in cricket. Kumar replied he was more into tennis and swimming as a schoolboy in Kandy, but at around 18 or 19, he moved to cricket and liked it as it was a team game calling for collaboration and playing as a cohesive group. He mentioned his father, several times later too, as being his guide and promoter, wanting him to always excel; while his mother was keener on his studies and educational success. His father had advised him to learn to change and never stop learning. “He threw a book at me each week – Tolstoy or philosophy or whatever and on Friday came question-time. He kept at me throughout. When in Australia for a test match, the hotel reception phoned me one night to say I had received a fax from my father. Initial alarm gave way to suspicion he was being usual. I told reception to put it under my door in the morning. As I had expected it was an entire page from the biography of Don Bradman and advice I should follow him.”
From his talk it was obvious he grew up in a closely knit family of three siblings and now his own family is very important to him. He referred to his wife several times.
He modestly said he was far from being a superior cricketer. “Talent is an overused word. Was I talented? Yes. Super-talented? No, not at all. I went through a learning curve and became self aware. What is identity – mine? Cricket for a short while, philosophy of life now. Personal relationships have been very favourable to me always.” He mentioned that leadership is basically stewardship.
Speaking of cricket per se, he stressed the fact that when they played matches it was more for the people of SL than for themselves individually or for the team or the Board or SLC. “People looked up to us and in a generous manner, more than in most countries; and we represented their yearning. In our country people go through so much they deserve to be given wins on the field. We are looked upon as an integral part of them. Hence winning a match or a series was more than a victory; it was a fulfillment of people’s hopes and dreams. To be Captain of the team carried an extra dimension to it.”
He mentioned that cricket in Sri Lanka, like much else was/is highly politicized and calls for enlightened leadership with vision and transparency. He very sensibly did not elaborate on politicization though we remember full well how after winning a World Cup he and Mahela were subject to probing. Worse was to come after he delivered that excellent ‘Spirit of Cricket’ address at Lords, invited by the MCC, for which he received a rarely given standing ovation. No, the yakkos back home, meaning Colombo, were waiting to question and blacklist him. The then Minister of Sports – Mahindananda Aluthgamage – still a VIP in the present government, pronounced that Kumar’s speech would be ‘investigated’. I commented soon after, in this column, that the use of that word itself showed ignorance. What one can do to fault a speech is analyze it. With hindsight I now wonder whether Aluthgamage was puppet stringed to behave as he did, by other/s who thought they were the kings of sport.
Question time had many hands being raised. One undergrad seemingly from South Asia wanted to know the highpoints of his life. Prompt came the answer: “Leading five winning teams.” Another queried about memorabilia. Kumar said he had no attachment to collecting souvenirs of his cricketing career, he did not know what happened to some of his medals won.
He was asked about cricket in Britain which he answered at length. Then came the question from a young woman how he felt about the Cowdrey lecture. Kumar elaborated that he hesitated at first on accepting the invitation but the people concerned persisted. So he agreed and then thought of what his topics/subjects should be. He decided to speak from a personal perspective about cricket as it is perceived by the common man and other strata of Sri Lankan society; what significance it carries; how it is the most favoured sport – even more than other team sports like rugby. The inherited game from the British colonial rulers was adapted and evolved to be representative of the country with its cultural heritage and ideals et al. Little by little ideas that came to him fell into place and fitted well. His writing the script, however, only ended just before he got dressed to proceed to the venue. He did not mention even in passing how his ‘Spirit of Cricket’ address was received and his excellence acknowledged.
Advice was sought. His answer included: “Think freely, critically, acquire wisdom which is different from education, and be honest. Stand up against policy and politicians that have been negative and caused trouble.” He was asked what his political stand was. He replied that it was of sports and politics; they being interdependent and unfortunately not a healthy relationship as of now. He said his wife more than him was out with the initial Aragalaya and was involved with protest marches and gatherings, “We have an obligation to speak for the greater good of our country.”
I do so sincerely hope more people would listen to his address to the Oxford Union, more so politicians, most of them third rate but preening themselves as the best. A personal opinion I dare place before you is that Kumar Sangakkara has never been given the honour, even public mention, that he richly deserves. Some would bring in the words jealousy and envy – two emotions I personally despise and cannot believe people harbour. But of course there was and still is this from lesser men and some so self-called sportsmen. Also, he was not a ‘hail fellow well met’ type. Not at all that Kumar made himself thus or was elitist in manner and behavior. He just was of a better breed and school from those who harboured within them innate inferiority complexes.
The final question asked of him by an Oxford Unionist was: What now? What next? Kumar smiled broadly and gave no definite answer, except to indicate spend more time being a family man which he always was in boyhood and continues in manhood as well.
He met and spent time with Sri Lankan Oxford University students, including it was mentioned, Insaf Bakeer Markar, Pres of the SL Society of the U of O. I add that the details given when googling his name are that he is a cricket commentator, former professional cricketer, ICC Hall of Fame inductee, businessman and former president of the MCC.
