Mumbai is selfish. Very selfish. The culture of 'Yeh
mera hai. Tujhe isme kya lena dena' (roughly summarized and translated to 'Mind
Your Own Business') is very much imbibed, if not already born with, into every
second Mumbaikar's genes. That is seen everyday in our fight for a breathing
space in a local train or on the roads, when we don't wait for a signal to go
green. Or worse still, it is seen from the 'Priest and Levi' (from Jesus'
parable of Good Samaritan) attitude while someone's bleeding to death.
That probably explains why some section didn't care whether
Virat Kohli was an Indian. For them, he had 'cheated' against their city's
team, owned by India's wealthiest guy. Much like how Kohli himself didn't care
when he took up a verbal fight, which almost went from mouth to fist, with a
senior Indian cricketer from his own state just a couple of weeks back.
Kohli wanted the crowd to treat it as just another sport. He
probably should have done the same when he reciprocated with a middle finger
when the Aussie crowd gave him an earful. Or when he mouths a few 'non-airable'
words almost every time he hits a century.
Coming to Wankhede's reaction, the fact that it is one of
the most hostile crowds cannot be lost on anyone. 'Monkey-scandal' (not calling
it 'Monkeygate!') had its genesis here, only for their target to play for their
team a couple of seasons later. They booed their very own - a man who gets a
standing ovation even in Rawalpindi. A kind-hearted like Harsha Bhogle may say
these are a few 100! But when it happens with such alarming regularity, you got
to question a city's attitude. And this comes from a hardcore Mumbaikar, who
has no second favourites! I love it, still.
The other aspect that largely went unnoticed was the
incident itself. Rather, the attitude surrounding the incident. Yes, the bowler
didn't do it intentionally. Yes, it was all fair-and-square and Virat was well
within his rights not to withdraw the appeal. Ambati Rayudu was unlucky. But he
was out. Period. However...
Let me just draw a parallel between this dismissal and Ashwin's
infamous attempt at Mankading Sri Lanka's Thirimanne. Here (Rayudu), it was
pure bad luck! There, the non-striker was careless and stupid to venture out of
his crease. Here, the bowler's leg accidentally came en-route the batsman's
outstretched bat; there, the bowler's situational awareness caught the
non-striker napping. Yet, our experts and media called this decision fair; but
when it comes to Mankading, they'd go head-over-heels in saying how
"unsporting and unfair" the bowler and his skipper are, to appeal
(even if it is well within their rights). Playing within the rule book, I am
still not convinced how one can be called fair and the other one not! I
suppose, just like in real life, some laws are more equal than the others.
I guess, that is probably why many call Cricket a
complicated game. We all love it, still.
