Let's make a bad boy out of Laxman

I can’t believe it, I just can’t believe it: how is it that in this season of storm VVS Laxman has managed to escape the clutches of notoriety? What does it take on top of a wholly unjustified dismissal to gain some attention in the press? Does he need to crash his bat against a stump, a television set, or Carlton Baugh’s head? [caption id=“attachment_40225” align=“alignleft” width=“380” caption=“Indian batsman VVS Laxman deserves a controversy worthy of his standing. AFP”]  [/caption] This series has featured a fair bit of drama. Media commentators, fans and casual spectators alike are currently caught up with debating the wisdom of MS Dhoni’s mouse-hearted declaration against theWest Indies. And they’re right to ask: what does that say about the World Cup winners? There were several other points of contention. Chris Gayle got the boot before the series began. We’ve barely got over Dhoni’s accidental dismissal to a no-ball and the premature retirement of an umpire. Damn it, even the Decision Review System – an abstract element of technology – has been subject to a lengthy dissection in the media. In the middle of all this, why have so few bothered to point out that Laxman’s dismissal, earned after some nifty work behind the stumps, was entirely against the spirit of the game? I can understand the desire to appeal, certainly. Baugh was perfectly within his bounds when he whipped the bails off. Laxman had left a wide ball well alone but then lifted his leg a second later; it might have been hard for the wicketkeeper to judge in those circumstances whether Laxman had overbalanced. But the replays made it clear to the third umpire and viewers that Laxman had merely raised his foot as a reflex action, while perfectly balanced, and was essentially moving on to prepare for the next delivery. The appeal for Laxman’s wicket should have been dismissed then and there but Laxman was declared out. The Hyderabadi, known for his epic gape-mouthed expressions of shock, walked without a murmur of protest. Unlike some of his more media-savvy contemporaries he didn’t trash the dressing room. The media paid cursory attention to the event, talked about how “bizarre” the dismissal was, made it out to be Laxman’s own fault in part, and compared it to other weird ones in the past. Dig a little and you will come across Muttiah Muralitharan’s controversial dismissal when running up to congratulate Kumar Sangakkara for completing a century against New Zealand. There was also Inzamam-ul-Haq who blocked a shy at the stumps with his bat, while well out of his crease; he was given out obstructing the field. But remember: in Laxman’s case he wasn’t seeking out the slightest advantage that would fetch a single. While we obsess over Dhoni’s pusillanimity here’s a thought: who knows if India could have forced a win had Laxman lasted longer? Notwithstanding the new-found maturity, had this happened to him Virat Kohli would have ranted at least a little. Gautam Gambhir would have launched a couple of f-bombs, and someone would have made a hilarious YouTube video. If this had been Dhoni, an official of some kind would have voiced his disapproval. If it had been Sachin Tendulkar, the BCCI would have gone to war. But this is good old, absent-minded Laxman, the peace-loving anachronistic artist with impeccable manners who has always seemed like he belonged to eras past, not to the slap-and-dash of modernity. Laxman has evolved in sophisticated ways since his 281 against Australia afforded him a vulgar stab at instant celebrity of the reality show variety. First he became renowned for his gorgeously tragicomic 20s and 30s; then over the next decade he was identified as Australia’s greatest nemesis. Laxman and his string of match-winning fifties finally began to register in public consciousness late last year. But he has always been a servant of the sport, never once exceeded it. We could remember the actions of men such as Courtney Walsh and Mohammad Rafique who refused to ‘Mankad’ batsmen at the non-striker’s end in more clear-cut circumstances. Their stance resulted in defeat for the team, but it was suffused in honour. If ever there was a time to write a powerful essay on the relationship between cricket as commodity and its place as a sport for idealists, it was now. Instead, a day passed, and Laxman receded in our memory. Where I had imagined a righteous ruckus, barely anyone squawked in disapproval. I mean – for heavens’ sakes, even Duncan Fletcher, India’s new coach, has waded into his first controversy. It’s time the media made a blazing bad boy out of Laxman.