281 & Beyond - The VVS Laxman Story
I love reading autobiographies. The interesting anecdotes, understanding the personal struggles, knowing where they stand — and all of this even more appealing when it’s about VVS Laxman, one of the mainstays of India’s batting line-up during the years I fell in love with Cricket. The book is written in a simple manner and, much like Laxman’s career, VVS makes sure not to overstep any boundaries or create any controversies.
In the first chapter, for example, while talking about the Kolkata Test of 2001, VVS briefly mentions Rahul Dravid’s animated celebration after getting to 100 but immediately follows it with “that’s for Rahul to elaborate, not me.” Similarly, on the disappointment of not getting picked for 2003 World Cup — he mentions how he felt the relationship with John Wright was never the same and yet never says anything harsh about his friends (skipper) Sourav Ganguly and Rahul Dravid. Yet, it has plenty to keep you interested.
Stories from his journey
The Hyderabad boy reminds the readers about the perception around fitness back in the mid-90s. While the Indian team’s fitness regimes weren’t very solid until John Wright showed up, those of Ranji teams were even worse. Hyderabad team, for example, used to jog a few rounds of the ground, followed by a handful of sprints, stretching exercises, and some catching practice — then take a break for tea and samosa. This regime is almost hard to believe in today’s day and age when almost every Indian cricketer shows off his six-pack abs.
Almost every Cricket fan has heard of this story by Sachin Tendulkar on how Dravid and he negotiated a testing spell of reverse swing by Chris Cairns. VVS remembers a similar story back in 1995 where Dravid had recommended the tactic against Salil Ankola and it allowed them both to get hundreds. But the most shocking incident from the book is one that involves Greg Chappell.
After having taken over from John Wright recently, Greg was with the Indian team on a tour of Zimbabwe. After scoring a hundred, Laxman’s back was getting stiff (while fielding) so he decided to walk back to the dressing room for a quick massage. With 4 balls in the over remaining after the massage, Laxman picked up a piece of toast just as the substitute (Dheeraj Jadhav) dropped a simple catch. Chappell blamed VVS for the dropped catch and questioned why he needed to grab food during a session. Someone who had played for the country for 5+ years certainly didn’t expect to have his commitment questioned and it laid the foundation for the rocky relationship between Greg Chappell and Laxman.
Laxman has also talked about various technical aspects of the game such as watching wrist positions to pick the length of the ball or adjusting the stance to ensure the head doesn’t fall over. However, one around catching was quite interesting where he mentioned that Hashim Amla and Brian Lara were the toughest to field in the slips due to their complicated backlift. While we have all heard commentators mention specific grounds being tough for catching but I wondered if statisticians have looked for specific batsmen with a higher dropped catch % as compared to others (I didn’t come across much except for this article).
On coaches he played under
From Sachin Tendulkar as captain with coach Madan Lal to Duncan Fletcher under MS Dhoni — Laxman played under a variety of people but interestingly, his commentary on them has one commonality. It always feels like Laxman’s feelings for the captain are separated from that for the coach. Whether its because his captains became his closest friends or it was just how the team was structured is hard to tell.
John Wright was one of the best coaches in Laxman’s book. He communicated clearly, put a high price on fitness and changed how the team trained and constantly talked about putting team over self. He also started an internal Man of the Match award for the team to give to the unsung heroes who played an important role like Sanjay Bangar in Headingley 2002. Laxman credits him with giving him a lot of confidence when previous coaches had not given him chances consistently. Interestingly, he barely mentions too much about Ganguly’s captaincy and focus is mostly on John Wright’s role.
This habit of Laxman’s continues when he describes the times under Greg Chappell takes over. The blame for the bad team environment, treating individuals poorly and just unclear communication goes all to Chappell. He barely mentions anything about Dravid’s captaincy except for the test series wins and 16 consecutive ODI triumphs while chasing. Interestingly though, Laxman admits the solid core that Wright had created had ended due to injuries and the odd bad series towards the end of 2004–5, just before Chappell took over.
A commonality between Wright and Chappell’s stint though is clearly highlighted. The team leaders had a say in getting them appointed as captain. Dravid played a big role in convincing Ganguly to get Wright for the job after spending time with him at Kent. Ironically, Ganguly (the man Chappell later removed from captaincy) was the man behind getting Chappell after consulting with him in Brisbane. With that in mind, it doesn’t seem that out of order that Virat Kohli had a say in Ravi Shastri getting picked as India’s current coach.
The stylish batsman is all praises for Gary Kirsten specifically in the areas of mental fitness. Like Wright, Kirsten was a clear communicator but he ensured that players were feeling mentally solid and gave them the responsibility of making their own decisions. He talks about MS Dhoni as someone mature beyond his age and discredits any theories of a rift with him. Yet, like with other coaches and captains, his thoughts for MS Dhoni are linked to his personality rather than his captaincy style.
ODI Cricket
In the book, VVS is not afraid to admit that he did not always have a game plan for ODI cricket. He talks about a chat with Dean Jones which really helped him organize his ODI game and yet he seems to allude that the main reason for him to be a one-format player for India was the inconsistent chances he got in the one-day format. Adding to that, a bunch of talented youngsters in Yuvraj Singh, Mohammed Kaif and later Suresh Raina did well in the middle order. Was it fair to leave VVS Laxman out considering his fitness as well as his inability to be as effective in the middle order? Yes, I think it was.
However, during the first half of his career, VVS made no secret of the fact that one of his dreams was to play a World Cup. That raises the question — was it fair for him to not be picked for the 2003 World Cup? Prior to the 2003 World Cup, he played at number 3 for a majority of ODIs (33 out of 49 innings), yet the top of the Indian line up was crowded with the presence of Virender Sehwag, skipper Ganguly and of course the legendary Sachin Tendulkar.
Yet, Dinesh Mongia picked instead of Laxman had a very similar record (average of 27 with 1 ODI century although Laxman had more innings) at that point. Interestingly, both had batted majority of 2002 in the top 3 where their services weren’t needed for the tournament. Some claim that Mongia was preferred as an additional 5th bowling option but he only bowled more than 4 overs in 2 world cup games — so personally I think it was a somewhat harsh decision that Laxman wasn’t part of the 2003 World Cup squad.
Playing for the country over self
Laxman was a fine competitor who scored runs against top bowling attacks in Australia to Sri Lanka. And still, he batted at number 6 thanks to the packed top order as well as his ability to play with the tail. It’s not hard to imagine him fitting well into 3 (his favorite position) or 4 had he played for a different country. He also mentions a number of knocks or games where he continued to play/bat on the team’s request in spite of a stiff back or feeling sick. It’s hard not to think of Laxman as a team man.
Yet there were a few occasions when I felt he preferred his personal choice over the team. As an example, Duncan Fletcher (former India coach) asked Laxman and Dravid if they would like to rest for the 3rd test in Mumbai versus West Indies in 2011 since the series was already won. Laxman refused since he was uncertain how long he will be able to play for the country and wanted to take every opportunity.
Similarly, there are occasions when Laxman states that no game is a dead-rubber when playing for the country (while referring to Mumbai test of 2004) and yet is pissed why he is flown to South Africa for an ODI of ‘academic interest’. By no means am I trying to indicate that Laxman was a selfish player — just pointing out that often people who have delivered at the highest level for a long time, have such self-belief that they think they know what is best for the team or country.
There is no doubt though that Laxman put the right foot forward on most, if not all, occasions whether you look at the timing of his retirement (just before a season of 10 tests at home) or the fact that he was honest enough to even bring up the discussion with Fletcher.