Toothless ICC, ever-ready Laxman

Tony Becca, Contributor

Once upon a time Test cricket was everything to me.  It was the biggest stage in cricket, it was where you saw everything, it was where the best faced the best, and when it was all over, when one defeated the other, maybe with the help of an umpiring decision or two, the winner was regarded as the best, at least the best on the day.

In those days, cricket was played under the rules of the Imperial Cricket Council, and that was final.

Today, cricket is under the International Cricket Council (ICC) and in most cases when two teams meet, when one defeats the other, one of the questions asked is this: is the match fixed?

To me, however, the one question which may be asked if the match is between the best players from either country is this: is the match being played under the rules of the international body, or is it being played according to the rules of one or the two teams?

In the first of two Tests between India and Australia in Chandigarh earlier this week, Australia wanted to use the umpire review system and India did not. After much debate, the ICC, the game's ruling body, agreed not to use it.

More money

That, however, was not surprising. In cricket, the more money you have, the more power you have, the more you can do what you like and get away with it, and that is just what happened this case.

With more than 70 per cent of the games money coming from India, they seem to be able to do anything - just as years ago England and Australia got away with anything.

In international sport, however, there should be one rule for everybody, the governing body should control the rules, and India or no India, power or no power, the rules should be obeyed.

After years of fiddling with the rules which allowed, for example, a batsman to be out in one country and not out in another, depending on whether a country uses the umpire review system or not, the ICC is still to make the use of the umpire review system compulsory, and that is amazing.

In international sport, that just cannot work.

For international cricket to be respected, for performances to be respected, for them to stand the test of time, for performance to be compared and assessed, the rules must be the same for all, just as they are in track and field, in football, and in tennis, etcetera, etcetera, where a man runs the same distance for the 100 metres, plays on the same size football field, and on the same size tennis court in Britain as he does in China.

In the Test match just completed in Chandigarh, Michael Hussey and Gautam Gambhir got out to what appeared to many as bad calls on the fourth day; towards the end of an exciting match, with six runs to get and one wicket to go, Pragyan Ojha was ruled not out after a shout for leg before wicket.

The match could have ended in controversy, and all because the ICC refused to do the right and proper thing.

Thank God, the players involved in it welcomed the class of a great one, the brilliant Vangipurappu Venkata Sai Laxman, and instead it ended in celebration.

Laxman usually bats at number six. This time around, because of an injured back, he batted at number 10 in the first innings with a runner, and in the second innings, at 76 for five, with Sachin Tendulkar standing at one end, he went to bat in what appeared, to all but Laxman and his team-mates, a hopeless cause.

Soon it really appeared hopeless to every man on the ground. It was 124 for eight, and it was all over, or just about.

Laxman is famous for his heroics, however, and he settled down to produce another.

At the Eden Gardens against Australia in 2001, Australia scored 445, India replied with 171, and after they were forced to follow on, reached 657 for seven before they declared and bowled out Australia for 212.

Laxman, batting at number six in the first innings and at number three in the second, made 281, and Rahul Dravid, batting at number three and then at number six, made 180 run out.

Sailing to the boundary

At Adelaide in 2003-04, in reply to Australia's 556, he joined Dravid, 233, and scored 148 as India replied with 523 and went on to win the match; and on the same tour, Tendulkar scored 241 and he scored 178 as India chipped to 705 for seven to draw the fourth Test.

At Sydney in 2008, Australia made 463 and Laxman, who seems to save his best for Australia - 25 matches, 2279 runs, six centuries, 55.59 average - scored 109, Tendulkar 154, and India replied with 532.

On Tuesday in Chandigarh, he did not score a century, but he did not need to. With Sharma as his partner, and then with Ojha towards the end, he reeled off shot after shot in scoring 73 not out off 79 deliveries, eight of them, to the delight of the crowd, sailing to the boundary.

In Indian cricket he is known as a batsman who loves to play his shots, and who, with his beautiful on drives, reminds of Mohammed Azharuddin. In world cricket, he must be the batsman Australia fear most of all - especially with his team in serious trouble.