Cricinfo Blogs
cricinfo.com About cricinfoblogs
Beyond The Blues Beyond The Test World Different Strokes From the Editor Girls Aloud Iain O'Brien Inbox
It Figures Pak Spin Shot Selection The Buzz The Confectionery Stall The Surfer Tour Diaries

Cricinfo Blogs Home
Inbox From our readers

« Change masters | | Pace like fire »

Genius?

Posted by Cricinfo - on 01/01/2009

From M.R.Sharan, India

I've often been fascinated by the way economists work. How their theories are formed; how, in the complicated world that we live in, with nothing certain and true, they manage to still come out with theories that substantiate empirical data. Even more fascinating is how, when confronted by conflicting data, economists with completely contradicting theories can win Nobel prizes. At some level, I think it has a lot to do with assumptions they make: some realistic, some based on popular consensus, some iffy, some downright hilarious; but mostly contrived, to justify some ends and backed by, they all claim, 'sound logic'.

So, I thought, I'd try my luck at an analysis, pick up a question, a puzzle, a debate and see if I could make sense of it. Most questions in my life stem from the world of cricket. Even the most existential ones: Who am I? (A dispassionate cricket-lover or an India fan?); what am I doing here? (And not someplace where there's a TV so I can watch my Test Match in peace?), Where do my roots lie? (Why do I support Hyderabad? Would I choose Hyderabad over even Bangalore?) But, I am beating about the bush.

In essence, this is a piece on genius. Who qualifies as one? Most importantly, is Laxman one? In order to justify that inexcusably long first paragraph, I begin by paying obeisance to my economic roots and making a few assumption/statements (none too far-fetched in my opinion): a genius is someone who is special; who, if in an academic field, thinks and acts and theorises at a level that the normal man can only dream of; who, if an artist/sportsman, is someone blessed with infinite amounts of 'creative power or natural ability' (OD); who, therefore, is a pioneer of sorts; who is far ahead of his times, innovative, inventive and different. Laxman's a man who's hard to catch or just isn't flashy enough to be under constant media glare. Interviews come at a trickle. And in the precious few, he's never verbose, not even close. But, he's not as soft or as silent as the media portrays him to be: he does say what he wants to say, perhaps more politely than most of the younger lot.

What interests and appeals to the cricket-lover in me is his take on any cricket-issue, his comments on the state of the game, the pitch, batting, slip-catching, they are mature, intelligent and incisive, indicative of a man who is a sound cricketing brain. Cricket-wise he is an extremely good strategist. Azharuddin, one of India's best captains ever, still believes he should be made captain and it really is a pity that we haven't seen enough of Laxman the Captain. Unlike many, I wouldn't judge him by his IPL stint simply because we just didn't get to see enough of him; however, that being said, he showed little of the spark or the genius a Shane Warne did, even in his initial few games. In conclusion, I think it would be far-fetched to term Laxman a genius, purely on academic terms; I don't see him as someone who has the 'vision', who sees the game from a level above the modern-day thinking cricketer.

'Creative power or natural ability': both interesting terms. Laxman has wrists of God, his flicks and clips of, not merely his pads but off deliveries a good two stumps away from his off-stump are special and unparalleled (no, even Azhar couldn't produce the shots he does). Blessed with tremendous amounts of natural ability, he's managed to 'create' his own range of strokes: different, silky and very, very special.

Every batsman has his own style and in a way, it may be argued that every batsman 'creates' his own style based on what comes naturally to him. But, what makes VVS stand apart is how different his predominantly wristy style is: the scale of the deviation from the batting manual is immense, far too much to be in the 'permissible' range; and yet, unorthodox as it is, it is still extremely effective. It is a manner that is new comprising of shots that are outrageously distinctive, testimony to his creative powers that can only be derived from his phenomenal natural ability. He definitely will not be a pioneer, simply because his batting is impossible to replicate. And he is different, though not a man ahead of his times (in fact, some may argue that he is slightly behind given the difference in his Test and one-day records).

If being innovative is bringing to the game something that it has never seen before, then Laxman, perhaps, just fits the bill. His stroke-play is unique, 'ground-breaking' even (a cruel adjective for such a gentle batsman). But, in a broader sense, innovation might also imply a continuous tendency to adapt, to learn, to change. And though, even after so many years of watching him bat, some strokes still leave me awe-struck, I can safely say that it is pretty rare that they'll shock me. The fact that he continues to retain his place in a line-up so star-studded shows that he's made adjustments, some technical, some mental, to the way he approaches his batting; the fact that he will always remain, in many eyes, someone of unfulfilled potential probably indicates that he hasn't done enough (or couldn't do enough) to continuously adapt to bowlers who began to see more of him. He's still managed to stay a couple of steps ahead, but it probably isn't quite enough to catapult him into Genius Inc.

Purely on natural ability, Laxman would make the cut. But, otherwise, taking all other grounds of qualifying into account, he'd probably qualify as a 'limited genius': one who probably requires a whole set of pre-requisites to actually come into his own. Most important, amongst those, is an opposition who is unashamedly attacking, a fielding captain who is not too familiar with his game and Laxman in a mood to be instinctive, to bat with abandon. There are few occasions where this happens: the most recent being that brilliant 109 in Australia, but otherwise, by and large, bowlers have learnt not to feed his strengths.

Laxman's response has been to mellow down, to solidify his defence, to let his instincts be guarded, in a strange way, in a quest to maintain his place in the side, he has limited his genius: it has proved productive, his innings are still punctuated by those magic flicks, but whole innings of magic are few and far in between. He's realised that the costs of continuing to try and live by the sword greatly outweigh the benefits of curbing his natural instincts. You won't see those beautiful but frustrating twenty-eights anymore, it's the gritty seventy-two that's become his trademark, valuable contributions, running around with the tail.

There's a lot to Laxman's batting that's brilliant: his timing, his much-praised hand-eye co-ordination and when in full flow, his invincibility against even the greatest of spin-bowling. It's not just his wrists that have got him to where he is. But, those very wrists have made him special - that have separated him from other greater mortals; that have flummoxed, with their snapping bite or their yummy roll, the best of bowlers; that have taken him to the brink of genius. He's there. Almost. And that's how it should be.

 
Feedback Feedback
Comments Submit your piece >>

Posted by: deepak2 at January 1, 2009 10:29 AM

great piece about one of the most underrated batsman by indian cricket mob.i am sure,sir.with more writing you can reach mukul kesavans excellence

Posted by: Amandeep Singh at January 1, 2009 7:42 PM

Wow! Glad to see a post on Laxman, one of my all time favorite batsmen and a role model in life but sadly a hugely under-rated cricketer who has never been given the recognition His enormous contribution deserves by His countrymen.

Anyways genius or not, Laxman is truly Very very Special and any genuine cricket lover will never forget the sheer class of His batting and any genuine Indian cricket supporter will always recognize the fact that when the Big Names were struggling, Laxman always did the unglamorous but massively important task of bailing the team out in the crunch situations against quality bowling attacks.
Against the weak bowling attacks or on flat tracks, the Big three boosted their averages.
Thank You Laxman!

Posted by: Saswata at January 2, 2009 5:27 AM

hold on!hold on! Laxman is a great batsman,a lot of good, perhaps excellent qualities as batsman, a magician with his wrist. But he has lots of drawbacks like every great man in this world. He struugled to prove himself as a good batsman for the first 5 years of his career(averaging only 35 or so). He is a changed player since 2001(281),perhaps he has become the player of a class what he should have been lot earlier. Apart from 281 i can't see Laxman shouldering his team too often.Of course there are few occasions where he has played some breathtaking innings. Laxman is good only when he is backed by some good players like Dravid,Tendulkar and Ganguly. I personally believe he is the best strokemaker in the team after tendulkar. Laxman does not have the ability to clear even a small ground with big hits. These things cannot be done with wrists......but Azahar did it all with his abilities. Laxman is a fine fine player of bounce and legspin. But when it comes to swing he is a disaster.

  Post your comment
Posting Guidelines >>
Name:
Email Address:
Comments:
characters left
About this blog
'Inbox' will feature submissions from you with us playing gatekeeper as we do with the rest of the site. We will set no rules apart from ensuring a certain quality that you have come to associate with Cricinfo. You may write on the aspects of the game that you hold dear; about matters that rile you; about players, teams and trends; you may share your memories and views, and you may so do so in 100 words or 500. The only tip we will give you is to repeat a line from our style sheet: Brevity is not just the soul of wit, it is the heart of all writing. Welcome. (Editor, Cricinfo)
Submit your piece >>
Categories
About American cricket Ashes Australian Cricket Bangla cricket Batting Bowling Cricket through the decades Cricket videogames Crowds English cricket Extras Fans Fielding IPL Indian cricket League cricket New Zealand cricket Pakistan cricket Pitches Rankings Rules Selection T20 World Cup Twenty20 Umpiring West Indies Cricket World cricket
Recent Posts
Making sense of strange omissions Cricket and generation Xbox Restructure the game around Twenty20 A cricketing renaissance Grandmasters of cricket Where are my slippers? The genesis of a cricket nut Mystery and Magic: Iverson, Ramadhin, Gleeson and Mendis Mystery of the missing wrist-spinners Finetuning D/L method for Twenty20s
Archives
November 2009October 2009September 2009August 2009July 2009June 2009May 2009April 2009March 2009February 2009January 2009December 2008November 2008October 2008September 2008August 2008
RSS Feeds RSS Feed
© Cricinfo 2009