So he hit big centuries at the right times, broke records, played the critical part in winning an away series against the West Indies, hit a crucial fifty and forty in a low scoring match to help seal another Test rubber and basked forever more in the love of a grateful, win-starved nation. Wrong. One year later Sardesai had played his last Test and retired to the obscure limbo that was the fate of all but the most successful Indian cricketers before television.

Sardesai turned in one of the three or four most significant series performances ever by an Indian batsman but he was unlucky that the crowning moment of his career coincided with the greatest batting debut in Test history. He had barely set the record for aggregate runs in a series, when Gavaskar broke it, by scoring 774 runs in four Test matches with four centuries at the absurd average of 154.80. I was in high school at the time and I can testify to the way in which Sardesai's achievement was obscured. India had beaten the West Indies in their backyard and found a great young champion: in a fourteen-year old's head the two things had to be related, the script cried out for the connection. So we made the connection.

And it wasn't that far-fetched: Gavaskar had struck two fifties in the Test we won and his subsequent heroics (including that double century and century in the same match) kept India's 1-0 lead safe. The knowing ones gave Sardesai credit: his captain, Wadekar, made it clear more than once that Sardesai's batting had contributed more to the series win than even Gavaskar's, but in the public's mind (and mine!) it was Gavaskar's series. The fact that Gavaskar went on to become India's greatest batsman confirmed that judgment for posterity.

Alert cricket writing might have redressed the balance because a) professional writers don't have the excuse of being fourteen and b) they have the advantage of hindsight. What Sardesai achieved in 1971 was the equal of Laxman's run of genius thirty years later. I grant that Australia's bowling was superior to the West Indian attack in 1971 and, yes, the Australian team was one of the greatest sides ever. As against that in Sardesai's favour is the enormous fact that we were playing away, that to beat the West Indians, even a team in transition, on their own grounds, Indian cricketers had to chart unknown regions of self-belief. 1971 was the year Indian cricket learnt to walk, became adult, made its bones, call it what you like, and Sardesai did more than anyone to make that possible. And he did it without a helmet.

Till the mid-Seventies, great Indian performances couldn't be watched by the majority of fans: they had to be heard or read about. Weeks after Wadekar's team returned from its glorious tour, Doordarshan showed us twenty-odd minutes of film that summarized a five Test series. Great Indian performances in the West Indies suffered from the double disadvantage of no television and radio silence.

Geniuses like Gavaskar don't need television to immortalize their deeds. They perform so consistently as such a high level that they live godlike lives in lore and legend. Journeymen or the merely good, do. This is not to suggest that Laxman is merely good. Laxman is an under-performing genius but if he had had an interrupted run of thirty Tests over a dozen years as Sardesai did, and ended with an average around forty (which, given Laxman's inconsistency and selectorial whim, is possible), cricket's public and its posterity would take a dimmer view of his career without the live telecasts, the archival footage and the DVD nuggets which keep that incandescent 281 alive in our minds. In cruel contrast Sardesai's heroics in the West Indies didn't even have radio commentators bearing witness because AIR was too cheap to send any and there was no Caribbean World Service broadcasting a West Indian version of Test Match Special.

Indian fans worship the loaded individual career. Looking through the contents page of my book on cricket, Men in White, I realise that all the Indian players profiled in it have one thing in common: they were all conspicuously successful, they were the best. It might seem reasonable to celebrate excellence, but the problem with the heroic tendency in cricket writing is that it confuses great deeds with great men. So the great works of lesser men don't get the recognition they deserve and our understanding of Indian cricket is skewed.

Soumya Bhattacharya, in his excellent cricket memoir, You Must like Cricket?, supplies us with the perfect example of such skewing. Describing an eccentric and unlikely century hit by Chetan Sharma (who opened the bowing with Kapil in the Eighties) in the course of a Kanpur ODI against England in 1989, he writes:

"Thank heavens for Chetan Sharma. I have never otherwise—either before or after this particular incident—had cause to say these words. (And by the way, thank heavens for not having had to say 'thank heavens for Chetan Sharma' ever again)"

Reading these lines I felt an almost comical indignation on Chetan Sharma's behalf. Given that his passion for Indian cricket lights up his lovely book, I suspect Soumya was either too young at the time to remember, or Sharma's modest career record has misled him into forgetting, the large debt he and every other Indian fan owes this tiny fast bowler. Three years before Sharma made this ODI century, he did something considerably more important: he played a crucial part in helping us win a Test series in England. It's been more than twenty years now and no Indian touring team in all that time has won a rubber in England. In fact till Dravid's men beat the West Indies in the West Indies, no Indian team had won a Test series outside the sub-continent since Kapil's men, spearheaded by Chetan Sharma, defeated England 2-0 in 1986.

Sharma took five wickets in the first innings of the first test to set up the game for India which we duly won. Sharma finished with sixteen wickets for the series despite missing the second Test. In the third Test he took ten wickets in all, and left the Indian batsmen nearly a whole day to make 236 runs to win. They managed a leisurely 174 for five in 78 overs.

The extraordinary thing about this series which India won 2-0 (it would have been a clean sweep if our batsmen hadn't been asleep at the wheel in that final Test) was that India's dominance was founded on a bowling attack made up of honest triers. The second Test was won by Roger Binny who took five in the first innings and two in the second. Maninder Singh and Binny took twelve wickets each in the series, two more than Kapil Dev. There's a certain irony to this: India's most decisive 'away' triumph (if you count the whole sub-continent as 'home') was made possible by the likes of Chetan Sharma, Roger Binny and Maninder Singh. And yet, we remember that series for Vengsarkar's fine centuries because he was a batsman of pedigree and class while the bowlers who shone were bit players.

In fact, if you wanted to generalise, you could argue that the little golden age in the mid-Eighties—India's World Cup win in '83, the victory in the World Championship of Cricket in '85 and that uniquely emphatic Test triumph in England in '86—was made possible by the josh of journeymen.

Our plaintive demand that Tendulkar ought to win us more matches, has more to do with our need for bona fide heroes than it has to do with winning. Not giving a 'lesser' player credit where he has earned it is the flip side of our hero-obsession. When we neglect Sardesai's role in that watershed series or Chetan Sharma's inspired bowling in 1986, we don't merely do them an injustice, we misread our past and we devalue our victories. India hasn't won often enough for us to be careless with our triumphs: we need to attend to them and to pay our dues to the men who made them possible, men like Chetan Sharma and Dilip Narayan Sardesai.

A shorter version of this post appeared earlier in the The Telegraph, Kolkata

Nice piece. Wish we had more of Sardesai's ilk involved in the running of Indian cricket these days, instead of the likes of the batting genius (no questions about that his skills in that department) who is such a disaster in his post-retirement avataars.

indeed.. very well written article. In our country we tend to put personalities above the cause. That is one of the big problem with our cricket. In this regard we need to look at Australia - they ensure that game is always bigger than the players.

Bingo Mukul!

Thanks for an entirely fresh perspective on heroic deeds of normal(ordinary sounds insulting)men in landmark events. Applied to Cricket, our collective obsession for Individual heroes/hero worship makes us criminally ignore the great deeds of other heroes.

What better example than our most cherished triump 'The 1983world cup'. It was every bit a fantastic team effort.....but do we remember Yashpal Sharma as much as we remember Kapil's heroics(justifiably so). Yashpal's flicked six of Willis in the semi-final was every bit as astounding and daring as the one hit by the master blaster Vivian Richards in 1979 of decidedly slower Hendricks! And Yashpal scrored a glorious 89 in the first match against the Windies which India won duly to commence their extraordinary journey.

As you rightly said VVS is an underperforming genius and without the benefit beautiful footage for posterity of all of his sublime innings his plight wouldn't have been dissimilar to that of Sardesai. For godsake the selectors with tacit nod of the captain should stop messing with Laxman's career. How ungrateful a nation are we....his 281 is the single most important innings that resurrected the Indian cricket in 2000's. Without the confidence of that series victory not quite sure how careers of Ganguly and more specifically Dravid would have flourished.

Pardon the digression but any remarkable achievement, be it in sports or other spheres of life, would entail contribution from more than an Individual in most cases!

Let's salute the performance of Sardesai in that landmark 71 series as much as we credit it wholly to Sunil Manohar Gavaskar!

Hi Mukul..Probably the best obituary on Sardesai, along with Harsha Bhogle's. You being an indian historian will know better than us that we record our history very poorly, hence this scenario. We know that during the Lahore test in 2006, Sehwag wasn't even aware of the indian record for the first wicket. He didn't even know who Vinoo Mankad was, if Raj Singh's statement is to be believed! We must be the ones with the poorest sense of history. This is the 75th year of Indian Cricket, yet what has been done by the BCCI or any other official arm of its. It is just another year with plethora of non-descript ODIs being played across the globe. We have time to play a Diana memorial match but cannot have any event to commemorate the platinum jubilee and remember the players that played in India's first test match. No we don't have the time.
Interestingly, Sardesai's feat being overshadowed by Gavaskar's was setting the tone for the future. Except for a handful of series over the next 17 years, achievements of the others were always overshadowed by the bigger light, the little master. As you rightly point out, lack of visual images or in somecases even audio footage also augmented this problem. It is also regrettable that some of our erstwhile great cricket writers haven't recorded our cricketing history very well.

Mukul,you have hit the nail hard where it matters with regard to our adulation of the heroes and the neglect of the also rans,without whose contribution Team India would not have carved out those famous wins abroad.Dilip Sardesai was a star in his own way,sadly the lack of Televison and media publicity available to the present set,was not there then to showcase his talents to the world.

Hi Mukul, this article written by you is damn good. Well till today i remembered Chetan Sharma as the bowler who was hit for a last ball six by Miandad. It is great to know that he played such a vital role in india;s biggest overseas win ever.

Mukul, I agree and disagree.

When I first read about the 1971 series, I was struck by the weakness of India's batting, that had collapsed so badly twice. Dilip's twin centuries can be described as the most heroic efforts yet (on par with VVS Laxman single effort or even better than what Gilcrhist has managed a few times). I looked for his name and there was no mention of him as one of the greats. That too when India hardly won any matches. It is ironic that you have discounted WI because they failed against India. That could not said of England in 1971.

On another note, VVS Laxman was a failure for first 25% of his career. He build his career around the 281, and has played most of the tests nearly 3 years after his golden period ended (Aus 2001- AUs 2004).

SINCE Aus 2004, he has played 30 out of 80 tests and averaged 33.76!! His highest score is against Zim (140). He is nolonger very good at anything. In fact, Warne and Mcgill had pocketed his wickets regularly during 2004 and 2003 series. He hardly scores at domestic level and is a run-out liability for himself and his partner. He is a lucky guy.

Breakdown against teams: Australia 17.6, Most others 32-39, Zim 74, Bangla 20. He averages just 28 in India!!
Average v Warne 15.7. He has done better against Kaneria, Akhtar, Murali, averaging 39 v spin and 26 v Pace.

So much for perceptions!! Since you disagree and made a note of 'selectorial whim', what of Virender Sehwag!! Sehwag's triple against Pakistan at Pindi is one of EPIC proportions. First test win in Pakistan leading to the first away series win as well. Statistically he is one of the best ever.

Good one. Adding comment just because a blog like this that deserves more traffic and comments than incosequential contversies about team selections.

Excellent blog.....wonerfully written. I liked that last bit on our expectations of winning matches by Sachin Tendulkar....excellent point.

Outstanding article! Thank you

Dilip Sardesai was my father's colleague at the RBI. To put his achievements in perspective, it seems that the only concession he would get was to be able to leave early a couple of days aweek. Contrast that with the pampered brats we have around now and you would have an idea of the extent of the man's hard work and genius and indeed the quality of most of the blokes who played in the pre-tv era.

Thanks for a perceptive tribute to one of the less-recognized greats of Indian cricket. Perhaps, though, a few more details are in order about the miracle that Sardesai wrought in 1971, beginning (in case people have forgotten) before Gavaskar's debut test. On the first day of the series, with Gavaskar ill, India were in the familiar position of 75/5 when Sardesai, batting at no. 6, was joined by another of the little-acclaimed heroes of Indian cricket, Eknath Solkar. Together they put on 137 before Solkar was dismissed. Sardesai, however was not done. With Prasanna, the great off-spinner who fully deserved his no 10 slot in the batting order, he put on 125 for the 10th wicket. After being down on her knees on the first morning, India had amassed enough to make the mighty West Indies, Fredericks, Kanhai, Sobers, Lloyd et al, follow on.
Sardesai then top-scored in our Port-of-Spain triumph. But then came Barbados and the threat of nemesis. Facing a West Indies total of over 500, India crumbled. Gavaskar, Mankad, Wadekar, Vishwanath and Jaisimha all fell to the searing pace of the newest West Indian tearaway, Upton Dowe. India were 70/6 when Sardesai was joined by, yes, Eknath Solkar. Together, they put on 186 before Solkar departed. And then Sardesai added another 75 with yet another genuine tailender, Bishen Singh Bedi to save the follow-on and the series.
You have written movingly enough on Chetan Sharma's and Roger Binny's contributions to India's victories but were perhaps too young to remember the details of the heroic year of 1971

If i remember we did get to hear the radio commentary of that 1971 westindies series.we used to hear the commentary in the wee hrs of morning.Tony cozier made his debut during that series as a commentator.Your tribute to sardesai was thought provoking that there are many instances of lesser known having played great innings and contibuted to indian victories.

And didn't Chetan Sharma take a hat-trick in a one day match?

Fantastic piece of article and I hope all indians wake up to forget hero worshipping and not the original heroes.

Josh of the Journeymen. Very apt..
Yes, R. Sankar. Chetan Sharma got the first hat-trick ever in a World Cup ('87 - I think it was vs NZ and I remember seeing footage of him clean-bowling all 3 batsmen!). He was being billed as the next allrounder in the Kapil Dev mould - but then while he made good progress in his batting, his bowling started to just fall away. Irfan Pathanesque?

Very rightfully put. The obsession with the 'big' players winning us the matches rather than just winning made me sit up and take notice - I have fallen into that trap more than once, not to say I dont remember the 'unsung' heroes!

To draw a parallel to recent times:
1. Headingley: Sanjay Bangar played out the first day on a seamer's paradise to vindicate Ganguly's decision to bat first. Though Dravid deservedly got the MOM for his 148, Bangar's contribution is easily forgotten.
2. Adelaide: Ask anyone to relate two words - Agarkar and Australia. The answer almost certainly would be 'duck out'. Adelaide 2004, anyone?
3. India's test win in South Africa was the first time we had won in SA and the architect of the win was Sreesanth more than anyone else. Though he is still fresh in public memory because he is still playing, I doubt anyone will remember him unless he goes on to become a so called 'great'

Wonderful analysis of the yeomen role of the journeymen.

Must also say that I agree with Mr Bala Yugandar's observation that Dravid and Ganguly's career were resurrected by that special knock by VVS.

Maybe this is going against him now?

Would like to engage Mr Arvind Agarwal on his piece of statistics about VVS post 2004. Ok, the numbers are not impressive but overall he averages more than Ganguly, inspite of being left out of the playing XI many times for reasons like playing 5 bowlers, giving chances to younger players based on their ODI performances, etc whereas the others bolstered their tally and averages against friendly bowling.
He does not get selected in the ODI team reckon despite being the leading Indian scorer of ODI 100s in Australia. How many 100s have the others scored vs the ODI matches they have played in Australia?

He was also instrumental in winning the 1st ever series in Zimbabwe, West Indies & the 1st ever test win in South Africa.

Plus he is also one of the safest slip / close-in catchers in the team.
Maybe he didn't have the fanatic support of locals or the smartness to take multiple roles to be a member of the playing XI (his high arm off break bowling was hardly utilised) but he is a match-winner.

Why was he dumped as VC after the SA tour even though he was the captain when we won the 1st class match before the first test?

If only he was part of the ODI team to play international cricket on regular basis for him to get into the groove like the others.

Give him the confidence that he is a regular in the playing XI for him to perform consistently.

To me, there is no other sight as pleasing as watching Laxman at his best and he also wins matches.

He is an artist who is shackled by undue pressures to maintain his place even in the test side and that is constraining his vibrant stroke play.

The Australians regard him highly, wonder why our team management is not reposing the same regard and confidence in him?

Firstly, I wish to pass my condolences to Mr Sardesai's family in these trying times. May Mr Sardesai rest in peace.

Secondly, thanks for a good article indeed Mukul. We tend to either forget or deliberately ignore significant contributions by so called "lesser" men.

In saying this I wish to highlight my idol, Anil Kumble's case. Until this recent past he has not been given the recognition due unto him, what a shame as Kumble has been toiling hard for Indian cricket for a very long time (16 years for godsake)!!

You go Kumble!!!Youre da man!!!

Mukul,
The Edgbaston test in '86 was drawn - but the final score doesn't tell the entire story. India slumped from 101/1 to 105/5 and were actually in danger of losing that game. More and Azharuddin blocked out the rest of the game making the final score look healthier than it seems!

It might be interesting to do a list of 'lesser mortal' contributions in Indian victories (or great escapes). Agarkar at Adelaide? Dasgupta at Port Elizabeth? Prabhakar at Manchester? Jasu Patel at Kanpur? Doshi/Ghavri in Melbourne?

Also, I can't understand this fuss about Laxman not being given credit - he's played 80 test matches - and 60 tests since 2001 that's a lot of tests - which means that he's rarely ever been dropped.

Excellent piece! Mukul u deserve a place in the sun !

Having played cricket till the Intervarsity level, i am a contemprorary of Kapil's period, i can vouch some points being made.
We used to travel(for intervarsity/district/under15/under19) matches by III class and later II class. Sometimes, if the jokers in the admin. office of the local bodies or the univ. got it right, we got reservation othrwise it used to be next to the toilets sleeping or trying to sleep on kitbags !! still we enjoyed the game purely for the love of it!

Sardesai et al were the torch bearers. i remember playing a intervarsity match at Bombay (it was still Bombay those days) and there were so many of the contemprorary cricketers like Umrigar,Bapu,Sardesai,Eknath solkar, the unsung Shivalkar etc. to watch the games. It was a learning experience for us (18-20yrs old) to interact with them during nets and also intervals in th matches. One opening bat of our team was always getting beaten and during a drink break i remember he had come to the pavilion to go to the loo. Sardesai who was there wispered something in his ears and showed him by stricking a stance and moving his arms as if playing a stroke.that guy was a transformed player after the break. The opp. bowlers were sent packing to all parts of the field. that was the greatness of the man. Uninhibited and without airs....

Mahesh

Excellent piece... another one you can add to the list of unsung heroes is Anil Kumble. He is only beginning to get credit due him, at the fag-end of his career...

Just a thought- somewhat related to this - had Michael Bevan been Indian, would Indians have celebrated him as the greates one day batsmen of his era (if not of all time)? I don't think so... He was not glamorous enough...

Once more, an excellent piece.

Very well written, sir. Possibly the best tribute to Dilip Sardesai I have read.

And what you say about Chetan Sharma is certainly true - people remember him less for that series or his hat-trick; and more for *that* last ball in Sharjah. A pity.

Brilliant Post again MK!!
And thanks for batting for Laxman again..
I will reiterate the comment that I made in my comment on ur blog on Laxman during India Bangladesh test series..
Ganguly & Dravid have been extremely unfair to this artiste.. They felt insecure due to His prodigious talent & knew that if Laxman was given a proper run,He would not only cement Himself in both the tests & ODIs,He would also be a huge threat to the captaincy so dear to both these individuals..
Shame on Ganguly & Dravid...
But I will say it again..
Laxman is an artistic batsman who has won us many matches & for me He has nothing left to prove any more..
Thanks VVS for giving us so much joy..
You truly are Very Very Special
And Sir Dilip Sardesai REST IN PEACE...

Very well written-fully endorsed.Chetan Sharma never got his due credit for his exploits in the 1986 tour.Another guy is Madanlal ,in fact you've erred in naming Roger Binny,it was Madanlal actually ,the other medium pacer who sparkled in 1986.To this day,Madanlal never got the full credit for his brilliant bowling against the mughty WestIndies at Eden Gardens,Kolkata in Dec'74/Jany'75Analysis of 16-6-22-4 in the Ist innings&the prize wicket of Viv Richards in the 2nd innings just when he was getting the game away from India by himself. Then Madanlal was dropped in the Bombay Test which we lost.Even Sanjay Bangar was very unjustly treated by the selectors after his impressive showing with the bat&ball in England

I too was in high school when this tour started in Jamaica. I was listening on my battery powered radio home in Guyana. India were tottering to the likes of Vanburn Holder when Sardesai came to the wicket. There were a few spilled catches at slip but Sardesai batted and batted for his double and occasioned that spark of self belief that the Indians could compete against the West Imndies and latter that summer against England as well. Gavaskar was to start his career in the next test in Trinidad but in my estimation it was not the feared Indian Spinners or latter their world class batters that made them believe but the spark that Sardesai caused by his occupation of the crease in that first test of the '71 series that was epoch making in its historical context.
Did not Indira Ghandi declear a public holiday in India after India finally beat the WI in the West Indies?

Well-done, Mukul.
This is what we are (were) missing in today's journalism..a true reflection of our (Indians) mentality of going crazy after "Heroes" and forgetting all those who made bigger impact then "Heroes"..be it politics, Sports, or even family...that's what we are..otherwise there should be no "Vridhashram" (old age parents' shelter) or Cricket before field hockey or Badmington (only two sports where India had excelled to one of the best in the world, besides Men in blue or white's '84 WC win!!)..Do we even care to talk about them? To worse, field hockey is degraded by goverment...Did we even notice it?
Yes, Madanlal, Binny, Chetan Sharma, to list few from long list of our un-sung "Hero" did made big impact in history of Indian Cricket. Late Shri Sir Dilip Sardesai is truly an example of how stupidly we are crazy about someone who is favourite of media!! Yes, such "Hero" did do to earn the place in our heart...but, truly this article do remind us those "Commet(s)" who sparkled for short duration of time but left with "Big Mark" in their field........On same line, how many Great spinners got lost due to presence of "World Best - Trio",,but it is Kumble and Bhaijee who is ripping the fruiet.......Just like Late Shri Sir D.S...how can we forget - possibly the best "come-back" in Indian cricket history by Mohinder Amarnath? Why we don't even refer to contribution made by gretest of all Vivy, Eaknath, Farook, Venkat, Abid, Surti, Budhidhan - and many many of thoes who had done everything and played for their country - and not for the record or money or fame.Aren't they all forgotten? Do you all think, that Dada of Kulkata - Nawab of Delhi - or even, Maharaj of Maharshtra would have been still surviving if media of yester years are in place?
What you have done here, Mukul Kesavan, is spendid job as a media person - we need this kind of coverage across the board before we forget "Lalji - Sardarji - Shastrijee" from political or "Prkash.P - Anand & Vijay A - Solker & Abid - and all Singhs & Pals" from Sport world..
Keep it up, and go beyond the Sports coverage..So, we Indians don't undertake our "Gulami Mentality" for "Shining India"!!!!!!!!!! {at this juncture, India and China are the only shining stars in global horizon...and if media fails to deliver the root cause of it, then it will be only a PURNIMA which follows by "Andhkar"!!?)
Keep it up.
Regards,
Nilesh

Thanks, mukulji for the lovely requiem on Sardesai.Equally moving are the comments of 'mahesh a' and 'samir Hajarnis'. How many current stars would turn upto view a local match? When most of them do not find time to play Ranji Matches, how can we expect such things from them now. Mahesh's recount not just confirms the criecketing acumen of S'desai, but moreso his willingness and keenness to see the youngsters grow. I still remember his interview in Indian Express in 1984. Most of his observations were simply spot on and proved correct in the days that followed. I am not sure whether he was involved in Selection or Governing of BCCI anyway. His demise has surely made the Indian Cricket poorer in every respect.

Good one. Keep posting such good ones.

That is indeed a different perspective compared to a normal lukewarm word of appreciation we generally sprinkle, upon people who have had their crucial contributions gone unnoticed. Mukul you bring into our view how Sardesai and others like Chetan Sharma, had indeed changed the future of our cricket. Especially, for this generation which sees cricket all spiced up and feasts on the shorter form of the game, we tend to forget those significant contributions which lead to an evolution, and a change in thoughts of an avid, 12 year old cricket fan. It affects the genes in this embodiment called cricket. Sardesai's impeccable technique, which stood out in his generation were primarily carried forward by means of words to our generation. So bad we could not witness those matches where he turned our team's wheel of fortune..Nevertheless they came alive with this article of yours. Thank you!

Fickle is the memory of the average cricket follower of the sub continent. How many remember the exploits of 'Sardi maan' on the historic 1971 tour of the West Indies where India under Ajit Wadekar won a series there for the first time . Over shadowed as he was on that tour by a young opener who answered to the name of Sunil G. But , ask Ajit Wadekar even today and he will be the first to vouch that Dilip's contribution was no less in acheiving the near impossble then. Years on when Rajdeep Sardesai got into the media glare on TV he was always known as Dilip Sardesai's son but now.....Dilip is known as Rajdeeps father. Does one need to say more about the short memory of the cricket fan in India hmmmm food for thought???