July 30, 2002

Where were the Indian fans?

- Jonathan Dyson

In the end, it was just as the MCC would have liked: India, a former British colony, put in their rightful place on the cricket pitch by England through a mixture of elegant batting and persistent bowling; and around the ground not a trace of the zealous support so memorably provided by Indian supporters during the NatWest Series and yet so discouraged by Lord's' owners.

In 1995, when the MCC issued their current ban on all flags, banners and musical instruments, it justified itself by resorting to the "when in Rome..." argument; while watching cricket in England, it suggested, whoever you’re supporting and wherever you’re from, you should watch it "like the English" -- just as overseas fans could enjoy supporting their team in their own style within their own country.

The MCC never stated what exactly they meant by watching cricket in an English style, but I suspect the atmosphere at Lord’s during the first Test represented something like what they had in mind -- a predominantly English crowd producing plenty of applause, gentle cheers at appropriate moments, and a constant hum of noise created by the constant chitter-chatter of satisfied punters.

The Lord's Test, and in particular the Saturday, is for many people a social occasion. For the upper-class socialites, it is right up there with Royal Ascot, Henley and Wimbledon. At lunch the grassy area at the Nursery End is used by spectators to spread our their picnics and chat amongst themselves over a glass of wine or champagne. The fact that the cricket is of secondary importance is seen by their failure to reappear after their lunches until well into the afternoon session.

The sad fact is that the MCC are less concerned about these kind of spectators than India’s more passionate and vocal supporters. But where were they at Lord’s? Not only were there far fewer Indian fans than during the one-day series, but those that were there were far more subdued in their support. There was none of the drum-beating, horn-blowing or flag-waving seen before, nor even as much cheering and chanting, save the odd shout of "Come on India." Only when a group of teenage Indian fans who entered the ground soon after lunch on the final day, and celebrated Agarkar’s hundred with their "4" and "6" placards, was the support anything like was expected.

It is not easy to explain why this was the case. The most likely reason is that, as with native Indians, the one-day game is more popular than Test cricket amongst the ex-patriate fans in England, and tends to attract the more vocal supporters. Another is that they were simply uninspired by their team’s performance. This is unlikely, since Indian fans normally cheer their team even in adversity, as well as applauding any impressive opposition side. A key factor may have been tighter stewarding. If Lord’s' sickening policy, used during the one-day matches, of only checking the bags of Indian supporters was employed during the Test, it will have been made easier with fewer Indian fans queuing to get in, and therefore a higher percentage of flags, banners and musical instruments being confiscated. The discriminate procedure was made to look foolish, however, since a couple of English flags and a large Welsh flag could be seen at various stages of the game.

The lack of effervescent Indian support was a disappointment for many. Mark Nicholas described it as "heart-breaking" on Channel 4. What made it all the more frustrating was the promise of the NatWest Series. Christopher Martin-Jenkins expressed everyone’s expectations when he wrote confidently in The Times on the morning of the first day: "Much has been written and spoken about India’s poor recent record away from home, but all that should be forgotten now. Indian teams are no longer homesick when they play in Britain... for today’s first Test, the usual Lord’s sotto voce, a tradition of subdued fascination, will be replaced by excited and noisy support for Sourav Ganguly and his team."

The story of the five days off the pitch saw instead two shocking incidents. On Saturday, four members of the Indian media were allegedly heckled, and one of them pushed to the ground by a drunken steward as they were leaving the ground. One of the four is believed to be India’s most popular cricket journalist Harsha Bhogle. The incident is being investigated by the MCC.

Meanwhile on Sunday, as Tendulkar made his way back to the pavilion after yet another Lord’s failure, he was accompanied by the guest of an MCC member who had run right on to the outfield. He proceeded to follow Tendulkar all the way back to the pavilion, waving his arms in the air and applauding the little master. Astonishingly, despite the presence of around 500 stewards and plenty of time in which to act, the intruder was not dealt with until he had returned to the pavilion steps.

In many ways it was an accident waiting to happen. Ground regulations are stringent enough to stop Indian supporters enjoying themselves as much as they would like, but security is clearly not tight enough to stop a members’ guest doing whatever he pleases next to the world’s best batsman. This embarrassing incident is nothing more than the MCC deserve.

Finally, I need to make a correction to my previous piece, 'Ground Rules'. In this, I stated that flags and banners are allowed at The Oval. This was according to my original source. However, despite their overwhelming presence at the India-Sri Lanka NatWest Series game, I have been informed by Surrey that officially "large banners and flags are not permitted". The ground regulations also state that "no person shall interfere in any way with the comfort, enjoyment or safety of spectators including the unnecessary making of noise such as that produced by radio sets, whistles, horns, bells, mobile telephones and other instruments." Even "persistent chanting" is forbidden.

Also read:
- Grounds for concern
- India score a double at Lord's
- India rule on and off the pitch
- India's 'home' support

Backpacker's Diary archive

Mail Jonathan Dyson

Illustration: Bijoy Venugopal