In a bald and brazen piece of politicking, the Australian Government today awarded Indian cricketer Sachin Tendulkar an Order of Australia.

Tendulkar was recognised "for his service to Australia-India relations by promoting goodwill, friendship and sportsmanship through the sport of cricket", according to a statement from the Australian consulate-general.

"Mr Tendulkar, as a member and former Captain of the Indian Cricket Team, has made an outstanding contribution to international cricket for more than 20 years," it said, describing his career as an "inspiration".

His career has indeed been an inspiration for many, and his contribution to international cricket (51 Test hundreds, 15,533 Test runs, 100 international centuries, and so on) has been prolific and well-publicised. But what about this ''service to Australia-India relations''? I wonder if Arts Minister Simon Crean - who handed out the gong to Tendulkar in Mumbai today - could spell out exactly what that actually means.

Apart from batting beautifully, sending the purists into a swoon and, early in his career, winning the acclaim of Sir Donald Bradman - what has Tendulkar done to Australia-India relations apart from make piles and piles of runs in the Gavaskar-Border Trophy?

I mean, did he conduct lots of cricket clinics in Australian schools, promote the game endlessly in this country, lend his considerable weight to cricket's marketing - (heaven's knows, the game here could have done with the Tendulkar imprimatur in recent years) - or make himself available for myriad interviews with the game's media rights holders? Not that I saw. By and large, he's been a shy, well-mannered but slightly reclusive figure. 

In fact, during India's tour of Australia last summer, Tendulkar distinguished himself by giving not so much as one interview to the local media. Poor old MS Dhoni was trotted out to explain away India's lamentable performances while his more senior teammate - on the verge of making his 100th first-class ton - remained stoically silent, iPod in his ears. 

Apart from all that, I'd be especially interested to hear what Andrew Symonds, Matthew Hayden and Ricky Ponting think of this news out of India today. I'm imagining, in Symonds' case, not much.

Those three Australians were central figures in the ''Monkeygate'' incident of January 2008, when Indian spinner Harbhajan Singh, while batting at the SCG in the second Test, allegedly called Symonds - one of whose parents is West Indian - a monkey. (After some provocation from Symonds, it should be said.)

That sparked a huge row between the pair, and prompted Ponting to lodge an official complaint with the umpires who then then laid a formal charge against Harbhajan under the racial vilifcation provisions of the ICC's Code of Conduct.

A hearing was called at a time when relations between the two cricket teams, indeed the two countries, had deteriorated markedly and the atmosphere had become decidedly fraught.

Symonds, Hayden and Michael Clarke gave evidence that they heard Harbhajan call Symonds 'a big monkey'. 

This is where Tendulkar comes in. He was batting at the other end to Harbhajan when the row erupted - 22 yards away - and told the hearing he did not hear the word 'monkey' used. Later, at an appeal hearing, the Little Master changed his version of events and gave evidence which helped Harbhajan - who was suspended for three matches initially - have his penalty reduced to a fine.

In his book True Colours, Australian wicket-keeper Adam Gilchrist, who retired at the end of that 2007-08 season, was furious, describing the appeal as a "joke".

"Tendulkar, who'd said at the first hearing that he hadn't been able to hear what Harbhajan had said - and he was a fair way away, up the other end, so I'm certain he was telling the truth - now supported Harbhajan's version that he hadn't called Symo a 'monkey' but instead a Hindi term of abuse that might sound like 'monkey' to Australian ears," Gilchrist wrote.

"The Indians got him off the hook when they, of all people, should have been treating the matter of racial vilification with the utmost seriousness."

It is believed some recent Australian players, Symonds and Gilchrist among them, have not forgiven Tendulkar for his role in that "Monkeygate" scandal, and lost respect for him when - as a hugely influential witness - he gave those completely differing accounts of what took place.

Announcing his honour in New Delhi in October, Prime Minister Julia Gillard said Tendulkar deserved the "special honour" because he was a "very special cricketer".

"Cricket is of course a great bond between Australia and India. We are both cricket-mad nations," she said.

Australia is also a nation that knows which side its bread is buttered. It can see the Indian economy burgeoning over the horizon, and wants to be part of that action, especially in the increasingly competitive area of uranium sales.

What better way to curry favour with the nawabs of Indian business than hand out a gong to the country's most famous and best-loved son?

So, sorry about the cynicism, but this decision smacks of political pragmatism and serves as another poke in the eye for Andrew Symonds and one or two of his former Test teammates.