New Delhi, August 16, 2025 — Legendary batter Sachin Tendulkar has found himself at the center of a storm after the renaming of the iconic Pataudi Trophy to the Anderson-Tendulkar Trophy. Former India all-rounder Karsan Ghavri has strongly criticised Tendulkar for not taking a firmer stand against the decision, calling it an “insult” to the memory of Mansoor Ali Khan Pataudi, fondly remembered as the Nawab of Pataudi.

The Pataudi Trophy, introduced in 2007 to honour the former Indian captain, had been a symbol of cricketing contests between India and England. Ahead of the recently concluded series, the name was changed to honour two modern-day greats — James Anderson and Sachin Tendulkar. The inaugural edition of the Anderson-Tendulkar Trophy ended in a hard-fought 2-2 draw, but the off-field debate over the renaming has overshadowed the cricketing spectacle.

Ghavri’s sharp criticism

Speaking on Vicky Lalwani’s YouTube channel, Ghavri did not mince words. He argued that Tendulkar should have outright refused to let his name replace Pataudi’s, regardless of the honour being extended to him.

“That is very wrong,” Ghavri said. “Number one, the Australia-West Indies series is always called the Frank Worrell Trophy. The India-Australia Trophy is always called the Border-Gavaskar Trophy. If its name changed, Gavaskar poore India ko hila ke rakh dega (Gavaskar will shake the whole of India).”

The former cricketer, who represented India in 39 Tests and 19 ODIs, stressed that Tiger Pataudi’s contribution to Indian cricket was too significant to be sidelined. “In the first place, Sachin should have put his foot down and said no. If you want to honour us, use our names for medals, not the trophy. Trophy’s name should have remained the same,” he added.

BCCI and MCC in the spotlight

Ghavri also directed blame at the cricket boards involved, questioning how the decision was cleared. He argued that the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB), and the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) should have ensured that Pataudi’s name was preserved.

“The BCCI should’ve put its foot down with the MCC and the ECB. Tiger’s name shouldn’t have been removed,” he said.

Tendulkar’s muted objection

Reports suggest that Tendulkar initially raised objections to the renaming, but ultimately did not oppose it strongly enough. Ghavri believes that distinction matters: “Objection is different. But the first thing should have been a firm no. By allowing this, you are degrading somebody of great stature.”

Cricket overshadowed

While the debate rages, the series itself produced memorable performances. Shubman Gill, captaining India for the first time, amassed a record-breaking 754 runs across five Tests. On the bowling front, Mohammed Siraj led India’s pace attack with 23 wickets, showcasing the team’s future potential.

Yet, despite the on-field brilliance, the renaming controversy has dominated headlines. Many fans and former players have echoed Ghavri’s sentiments, arguing that legacies such as Pataudi’s should remain untouched.

For now, the debate raises deeper questions: Should trophies named after cricketing pioneers be altered at all? And when legends like Tendulkar are honoured, should it come at the expense of another great’s legacy?