The Cricketing Poet: VVS Laxman

As VVS Laxman retires, it brings an end to an extraordinary career. As one does on such occasions, I would like to look back upon the career of this wonderful batting genius. Laxman played cricket for India in a very special era. It was an era where India had arguably its best ever middle order. VVS Laxman was one of the major pillars of the Indian batting in that era. Out of the four giants of Indian batting, I had found VVS was the most attractive. His batting was almost like the manifestation of the divine. When Laxman batted, it was not just about the number of runs he scored but also the manner in which those runs came. When he batted, the context of the game, the opposition and everything else lost meaning. There was an artist's touch to his batting. When Laxman played, he did not merely hit a boundary. He wrapped it with his magic.

Blessed with divine timing and freakish wrists, VVS conjured some breathtaking shots. The brand of cricket that Laxman played can never be taught to anyone. It is an ability one has to be just blessed with. He could gracefully cover drive a half-volley to the boundary for a four. He would flick the same delivery to the mid-wicket boundary just as gracefully he had cover driven the ball. In fact he could play at least four different strokes to the same delivery and each of those strokes would be leave you gasping, with mouth wide open. 

Laxman was not all about this mystical player who could play these seemingly impossible strokes. I had always thought there are two kinds of batsman. The first charmed you with their grace. They kept you riveted to their batting - pulled of shots from impossible angles, almost as if they were defying gravity. The second were the 'get the job done' kind of players. These were the guys you needed in tough situations. They fought hard with courage, may not be looking elegant but got the runs. Laxman combined these two diverse batting methodologies. He was gritty and yet so elegant.

Laxman had built the reputation of being India's crisis man. When the chips were down, when it looked gloomy and bleak, VVS Laxman found his comfort zone. When the rest of the team faltered, Laxman rose to the occasion. Laxman has scripted many improbable wins, pulling victory from the jaws of defeat. It began in Kolkata against the mighty Australians. The 281 he scored against Australia in that historic test match of 2001, is regarded as the greatest innings ever played by any Indian in test match cricket. From that day Laxman has given hope even in the darkest hour. 

Another great quality of Laxman was his ability to play with the tail. He brings out the best of what the tail-enders have got. Whether it was Ishant Sharma in Mohali or Zaheer Khan in Durban, Laxman rallied with them and produced match winning partnerships.

In the 134 matches VVS Laxman played, he scored 8781 at an average of 45.97 scoring 17 hundreds. These outstanding statistics for any cricketer. But when you put the fact that for the better part of his career he batted at number 6, these statistics look even better. I am certain that if he would have batted at number 3 or 4, he would have scored at least 10-15 centuries more and averaged may be 5 - 8 runs higher. But Indian cricket was best served with him batting at number 6. This is what Laxman has always stood for - putting the team's needs above his. Laxman's career can never be judged by the numbers. His contribution is way beyond those 17 hundreds he scored. 

Laxman has never been the darling of the masses. He has rarely featured in advertisements. That is purely because Laxman was a cricketer of the elite. Like Shakespeare or Milton, whose work can only be appreciated only by the connoisseurs of English language, Laxman's batting was an art that could be understood and appreciated only by the devoted fans of cricket. 

As Laxman calls it a day, poetry stops in Indian cricket. In my opinion he would the cricketer who would be missed the most. Rather than getting bogged down, he faced adversity face to face and invariably thrived in such situations. I have been privileged to be born in an era where I could follow the career of the greatest poet of Indian Cricket.   

Wrap up of the Olympics!

The Olympics has concluded and indeed on a very historic note as far Indian sport is concerned. On the 12th August 2012, Sushil Kumar became the first ever Indian athlete (individual athlete) to win back to back Olympic medals. Sushil Kumar bettered his performance from Beijing and won the silver medal. 

Now that the games are over it is a good time to sit and reflect back on how India fared in the games. Although the Gold remained elusive till the end, this was India's best ever medal haul. In fact India doubled it's medal count from Beijing. From Atlanta and Sydney where we had just won one Bronze or the years before that when we had a long dry spell, to finish with 6 medals is an astounding achievement and I am thrilled with this performance. At this point, I would like to address a really flawed argument - 'How can a country of 1.2 billion produce only 6 medals?'  We need to realize the fact that we not a sporting power house. 76% of the medals lie in Track/Field events and aquatics, where India does not have any history. I would even go on to say that perhaps we are not naturally built, to produce great Track/Field events. The weather conditions that prevail, the diet of the Indians and probably the genetic factors does not make Indians naturally very athletic which is important for these events. To corroborate that, even in our most celebrated sport- cricket, we have produced really few genuine fast bowlers- Fast Bowling being an art which requires genuine athleticism. In India, traditionally the brain takes precedence over the brawn and probably there is very little tradition of taking part in such events. Keeping all this in mind, having won 6 medals is indeed an achievement to be proud of.

Vijay Kumar, the Subedar from Indian Army and Gagan Narang by winning medals have made shooting India's most successful individual sport. In the past 3 years India has won 4 medals in shooting.

Fighting all odds, from a village in the eastern most state of the country Manipur, came the mother of two 5 year olds - Mary Kom. Mary Kom's story is both inspiring and historic. She stood on the podium when the event was introduced for the first time in Olympics. Also, when we keep in mind that she was fighting in a higher weight category than her usual fly-weight category, which was not there in Olympics, the success tastes sweeter.

Saina Nehwal's story has been that of sacrifice and single-minded devotion towards the game. The hours spent in the training translated into a Bronze Medal. This achievement is also a story of another great Indian player - Pullela Gopichand who is living is dream of winning medals through his student. Gopichand's contribution to Indian Badminton as a coach has been fantastic.

Yogeshwar Dutt brought a different success story. He is a seasoned wrestler and was competing in his 3rd Olympics. He was tantalizingly close to a medal in Beijing and almost fell short again in London when he lost his pre-quarter final bout. Fortunately, he entered the repacharge round. In a span of 40 minutes Dutt fought his heart out and won 3 bouts. In the Bronze Medal match he came from behind to win his bout. Dutt's story has been that of an ever lasting hunger and the desire for the Olympic Medal. It is to Dutt's credit that despite the disappointments he was able to his passion and desire alive.

By bettering his Beijing performance Sushil Kumar has etched his name in the pages of India's sporting history. Sushil Kumar became the only Indian to have multiple medals in an individual event. Despite illness Sushil fought his way to a Silver medal.


The Non-Medal winning Heroes

It has not just been the medals that makes me feel happy. There were so many other heartening performance. Joydeep Kamarkar's effort in Men's 50m Rifle Prone was one such performance. There were so many moments in the game, when Joydeep looked good to win a medal and in the end it was just a matter of couple of points between him and the Bronze medal winner.

Krishna Poonia (Women's Discus Throw) and Vikas Gowda (Men's Discus Throw) were other positives. As I have already mentioned India has never been a country which has excelled in track/field events. So, the very fact that they qualified for the finals is something to take pride in and celebrate. Krishna Poonia became only the 6th Indian to qualify in the finals of a track/field event. The 7th Indian to qualify also happening in the same Olympics in the form of Vikas Gowda is a very positive sign. Milkha Singh, Gurbachan Singh Radhwana, PT Usha, Sriram Singh and Anju Bobby George are other Indians to have qualified for the finals.

Irfan Thodi finished an impressive 10th in the 20KM Walk race. Yet again, such a performance is really refreshing.

Cynics may say that by celebrating the mere qualification of our athletes into the finals or celebrating an athlete finishing in the top 10, we are setting our bar too low. I do not share that view. We need to remind ourselves that in athletics, India has almost no history of great achievements. Putting that into perspective, we would realize that 3 of our sportsmen doing well in athletics is indeed something to take pride in. I hope this rather than being an abrupt peak be the beginning of the gradual improvement in India's performance at athletics.

The 20 year old boxer from Manipur, Devendro Singh is one of the biggest non-medal winning heroes for India. In fact the AIBA chairman believed that the verdict of his quarter-final bout should have gone in his favor, which would have meant that he was at least ensured of a bronze medal. But, not getting into the problems we had with our boxing verdicts, Devendro Singh Laishram is a great talent to be watched closely. The amount energy with which he fought his bouts, was indeed great to watch. His pre-quarterfinal bout was against Mongolia's Purevdorjin Sedamba, who was the Silver Medalist in the 2008 Games. Contrary to all expectations Devendro trounced the Mongolian 16-11. I am certain, if groomed properly, Devendro Singh would be a huge medal hope in Rio.

18 year old wrestler, Amit Kumar's was another performance, which has kindled hope for the future. Though beaten in the quarterfinals, and not being able to win his repacharge rounds (one must keep in mind that he had lost the toss both the times in the repacharge), he has shown, with proper coaching he is a wrestler to look forward to.

The performance of Parupali Kashyap, in the Men's Badminton and Jwala Guttha and Ashwini Popanna (in Women's doubles) were other such highlights. In this Olympics along with the medal winners, there were many such inspired performances which showed, India does have a very decent pool of sportsmen. 

The Downers

There have been a few disappointing moments - Deepika Kumari in Archery and Ronjan Sodhi in Double Trap Shooting were big downers. Perhaps, we could have had a few more medals in boxing if the rub of the green would have favored India. In Tennis I feel India definitely had the potential. The events that happened prior to the games were really disappointing. I believe those events extinguished any chances of winning. It is a pity, that two India's greatest doubles Tennis players - Leander Paes and Mashesh Bhuapati will have finish their careers without a single Olympics doubles medal. 

The biggest disappointment was Indian hockey. India failed to qualify for the Beijing Games and when it qualified for the London games they finished last (12th) loosing all the games. Expecting India to win a medal was too far-fetched. I had believed that a top 6 finish would be equivalent to a medal winning performance. But, coming 12th is indeed disheartening. The answer to the question whether we can get back the lost legacy in hockey seems more and more in the negative which is really sad. 

This Olympics has shown that Shooting, Boxing and Wrestling could be India's forte with a lot of talent emerging from these areas. Now, we look forward to 2016. Let's hope that in Rio we touch the double digits as far as the medals are concerned! 

The Rise of West Indies?

When the New Zealand and West Indies are playing test cricket, it is hard for me to decide whom to support. One one hand I want the resurgence of West Indies cricket on the other hand I fear  the demise New Zealand cricket. West Indies and New Zealand both are very important members of out cricketing family. West Indies add a very unique flavor to the game. The style with which they play the game- the kind of cricketers they produce are the ones who compete fiercely on the field but at the same time do not the game too seriously. New Zealand on the other side have been this poor kid who has always tried to maximize what he has. They have never been a team of stars. Sir Richard Hadlee and Martin Crowe are probably the only two starts that NZ have ever produced. Despite the paucity of stars, NZ have always been competitive at the world stage. It is the resilience of NZ that has always fascinated me. Thus, it is really hard to see any of these two teams lose. 

This series has kindled a hope for the long awaited resurgence in West Indian cricket. The arrival of Chris Gayle has had a very positive impact on the team. It was so important that Gayle used all his talent for the betterment of West Indies cricket rather than draining it away playing for the T20 leagues all over the world. Marlon Samules finally seems to realize the potential he is with the bat.  Powell and Bravo are a few other good batsman in the West Indian ranks. Shiv Chanderpaul has always been the crisis man who fights the solitary battle for the WI.  

Sunil Naraine and Kemar Roach add a great strength to the Windies' bowling attack. Roach in particular has been extremely impressive. One attribute which is so rare to find in modern fast bowlers which Kemar Roach has is that he rarely gets injured. He does display good fitness levels which are very important for a quick bowler. Darren Sammy may not be a great batsman or a very penetrative bowler but he does give the impression of being a very good man-manager which is very important for a team like West Indies which is going through a very turbulent phase.

I am not saying that this performance over  NZ will mark a revival in the WI cricket. To expect them to be a side of 80s and 90s is too far fetched. I understand that it has a long way to go. But, things do look much brighter now. With the arrival of Gayle, the batting looks much more solid. With bowlers like Naraine and Roach WI look like a side which can pick up 20 wickets. It does bring a ray of hope and probably their is indeed light at the end of the long tunnel of darkness which the WI cricket has traveled through. The performance of WI in this series, keeping aside the wins does send a glimmer of hope.

I suspect this World T20 could be the turning point in WI cricket if they do well. Sometimes all teams need is an inspiration. WI on paper do look a very potential side. With Gayle, Pollard, Bravo and Naraine they are side to reckon with. If they indeed become the World T20 champions it would go a long way not only to inspire it's cricketers do well in other formats but would also re-kindle the interest in the game in the Caribbean which does seem on a steep decline.

Thus it is important that the administration and player alike keep their vested interests away move forward for the betterment of cricket in the West Indies. They surely have the potential to be a force to reckon with again. The question is can the potential be tapped properly and used completely. The last thing cricket wants is young talented blokes in the Caribbean wiling their time away playing just beach cricket.

Bodyline Revisited!

I have been enjoying a long vacation. One thing I usually do in my free time is search YouTube for some cricket videos. Recently I stumbled upon one fantastic TV series called the Bodyline. It beautifully portrayed the three protagonists of the Bodyline incident - Douglas Jardine, Harold Larwood, and Sir Donald Bradman. I strongly recommend every cricket fan to watch this TV Series. 

In order to give a preamble to my post, let me narrate the Bodyline story briefly. By 1931 Don Bradman had already built the reputation of being the greatest batsman to have ever taken the field. If England had to get the Ashes back, they would have to find someway to stop this almost supernatural batting displayed by Don Bradman. After a bit of controversy, Douglas Jardine was appointed as the captain of the England team. Against the wishes of the selectors, Jardine demanded a strong fast bowling unit. Jardine had in fact thought of a plan to restrict the Bradman dominance. He asked his bowlers especially Larwood to bowl fast and at the body of the Australian batsman. He had set a predominantly leg-side field, with fielders there waiting for a catch in case the batsman fended one of the balls aimed at the body. In fact, with this kind of bowling, the batsmen were left with only two options, either to fend the ball to the fielders or to get hit on the body. This ploy worked and England had won the series 4-1. But for this ploy to work, Jardine required a fast bowler who could tirelessly bowl at extreme pace and accuracy. For this Jardine had found Harold Larwood. 

What Jardine did was perfectly within the laws of the game. To be fair to Jardine, he did not have enough options if he wanted to win the Ashes.  In the opposition was a batsman blessed with almost super-human abilities whose could single-handed performance could win the series for the Aussies. What does one do when one faces such a player - Use everything at one's disposal to win the game or surrender to the greatness of the player. Jardine was not the kind of player who ever surrendered. In fact, Jardine had gone on to infamously say -  "I have not travelled 6000 miles to make friends but to win the Ashes."

But, we all know that cricket is a unique game. It has more to it than, just the laws governing it. So much so that in English, the phrase - "It is not cricket" refers to something which is not correct. Almost the entire cricketing fraternity feels that Jardine by employing those tactics breached the code of conduct. The supporters of Jardine would say that it is the responsibility of the lawmakers to ensure that they have covered all grounds. On the other hand, many others believe that it is the responsibility of the sportsmen who are the custodians of the game to play it in the spirit of the game.

While I am here not here to either defend Jardine or to condemn Jardine, I must point out, amid the copious amount of criticism being shed out, one must not forget to appreciate Larwood - the Bowler. It takes a lot of skill to bowl with that accuracy and pace as Harold Larwood did.

At the same juncture, it is worth examining the other Bodyline-like events that have taken place in the modern era. The famous Bodyline series is succeeded by numerous incidents where a few players have taken advantage of a loophole in the laws of the and a few have refused to do so. As I have already mentioned I feel a debate on what is correct is not really fruitful.

The Australians were very upset with the Bodyline tactics. The then Australian captain Bill Woodful even went on to say that only one team was playing cricket. Jardine went on to become the most hated man in Australia. On the occasion of Jardine's death, Bradman refused to give him an obituary.  On February 1st, 1981 Half a century after the infamous Bodyline Series took place the infamous Underarm incident. This time it was an Aussie who was the perpetrator. Greg Chappell asked his brother Trevor to bowl a ball underarm (all along the ground), with New Zealand requiring 6 runs off the last ball to TIE the game - Not to win, but to tie the game. Like Jardine, even Greg Chappell did not do anything to break the law. Neither Jardine nor Chappell were guilty of 'trying to win by hook or crook'. They did not cheat in any way.  They simply used, (if I am permitted to say) the loopholes in laws to their advantage. While Jardine's was a planned tactic, Greg's was the one that came in the heat of the moment. Whether they were right or wrong is a debate that has no end.

One more such incident, which is not talked about too often happened when the Indians toured West Indies under Bishen Singh Bedi in 1976. Sunil Gavaskar describes what happened at Jamaica as barbarism. More than trying to get the Indians out, the West Indians were trying to get them injured. Gavaskar in his autobiography Sunny Days says that the crowd rejoiced every time an Indian got injured. As many as five Indians were absent hurt in the second innings of the test match. It is true that this bowling did differ from the Bodyline in one major regard - The field placements. Nevertheless, that strategy adopted by the West Indies has to be in question from the point of view of the spirit of the game. As a bowler, if one continuously aims at the body of the batsman rather than the stumps, then there is something wrong going on.

Now, there is a question of Mankading. It was started by the Indian left-arm bowler Vinoo Mankad the 1947-48 tour of Australia, when he ran out the Australian batsman Bill Brown while delivering the ball (While Bill was backing up ).  There have been quite a few instances since then where batsman have been mankanded by bowlers like Greg Chappell did it in an ODI and so did Kapil Dev. Few bowlers have refused to mankand.  For instance, quite famously in the 1987 WC Walsh refused to Mankad Salim Jaffer and that cost the WI a place in the semi-final. In 2003, The Bangladeshi bowler Mohammad Rafique refused to mankand Umar Gul. Pakistan won that test match by 1 wicket. If the mankading was done, Bangladesh could have had historic Test win.  Quite recently, there was an incident involving Ravichandran Ashwin and Lahiru Tirhumanne. After Ashwin mankanded Tirhumanne the stand-in captain Virender Sehwag withdrew the appeal.

In Christchurch, there was another incident that sparked a bit of controversy. It was test match between Sri Lanka and New Zealand. Kumar Sangakkara was batting with the last man Muttiah  Muralitharan. Sanga took a single to get to his hundred. There was never a second run in it and both the batsman knew it. Murali casually tapped his bat in the crease, assuming that ball was dead (which was not the case), and with no intention of the second went towards Kumar Sangakkara to congratulate him. Since the ball was not yet dead, Brendon McCullum ran out Murali.

A very similar thing had happened in 1974 at Trinidad. Tony Grieg and Alvin Kalicharan were the men involved in that incident. Kalicharan had assumed the close of play for the day and Tony quick to realise that the ball was still in play ran him out. This resulted in a huge outbreak in the crowd. The next day the English camp decided to reinstate Kalicharan.

A more recent incident of this kind happened when India toured England in 2011. In the second test match at tent-bridge, Ian Bell after playing the last ball before tea started walking towards the dressing room as the ball was still in play. The Indians quick to realise this ran him out. But after the interval, they  withdrew the appeal for the sake the spirit of the game.

In fact, after the bodyline incident, there have been so many incidents that have happened (I have just narrated a few of them that came to my mind) in the game which have asked the same question. The question that remains is if it is okay to be within boundaries of the laws of the game and not worry about the manner in which the game has to be played or should we remember that there is much more to our coveted game than the thick law book.

All these incidents, especially the Bodyline series has helped the game evolve. Since ours is a very complicated sport with a Law Book which almost resembles the advocate's law book with so many laws, it can only improve and become perfect when it learns from such incidents.


Please let me know your thoughts by posting your comments down here