The BCCI selection committee has done it again. As if the whole controversy surrounding Sourav Ganguly’s selection fiasco wasn’t enough, the ‘wise men of Indian cricket’ have decided they want to remain in the news come what may. So this time, it’s the exclusion of the talented paceman Shanthakumaran Sreesanth that’s opened a whole new can of worms. Though the backlash over Sreesanth’s axing hasn’t been anywhere near as what happened when Sourav was shown the door – expectedly so, because Sreesanth is still a rising star and Keralites aren’t as cricket crazy as Kolkatans either – reactions from various sections of the Indian cricketing fraternity make it absolutely clear that the selectors have committed a major blunder.
Strangely enough, the shining Keralite has been included for the ongoing DLF Cup in Malaysia (the write-up was written when the series was still in progress) and then axed for the following Champions Trophy tournament to be held in India. How can a player be selected for one series and then be dropped for the next without performance in the previous series being taken into consideration? Further, he has not been part of the XI in both the matches held in Malaysia so far. Sreesanth has shown that he has a great fighting attitude, but nothing can be more disheartening for the youngster than to know that the selectors are playing around with his budding career.
This raises a big and very pertinent question – Is merit is the most important criterion for selection? Definitely not. Ask John Wright and the ex-Chairman of selectors, Kiran More, himself. These are two men when who have been closest to Indian cricket in the last half a decade and their take on Indian cricket gives one reason enough to believe that something’s rotten in the system. The discussion on the apathetic state of India’s cricket administration can go on endlessly. But it’s more important to bring up the issues of those who become the scapegoats of such unprofessional approaches, in this case Sreesanth.
Strangely enough, the shining Keralite has been included for the ongoing DLF Cup in Malaysia (the write-up was written when the series was still in progress) and then axed for the following Champions Trophy tournament to be held in India. How can a player be selected for one series and then be dropped for the next without performance in the previous series being taken into consideration? Further, he has not been part of the XI in both the matches held in Malaysia so far. Sreesanth has shown that he has a great fighting attitude, but nothing can be more disheartening for the youngster than to know that the selectors are playing around with his budding career.
This raises a big and very pertinent question – Is merit is the most important criterion for selection? Definitely not. Ask John Wright and the ex-Chairman of selectors, Kiran More, himself. These are two men when who have been closest to Indian cricket in the last half a decade and their take on Indian cricket gives one reason enough to believe that something’s rotten in the system. The discussion on the apathetic state of India’s cricket administration can go on endlessly. But it’s more important to bring up the issues of those who become the scapegoats of such unprofessional approaches, in this case Sreesanth.
According to one of the national selectors, Sreesanth’s elimination was purely on ‘cricketing reasons’ and that his exclusion did not merit a controversy. Sreesanth was left out because the team did not want more than four fast bowlers, added the selector. Fair enough, but on what basis do you drop one of the country’s premiere bowlers in the preceding series? (Ref – the Windies tour). His replacement R P Singh was picked because he performed exceptionally well for India ‘A’. R P is a good bowler in his own right, no doubt about that. In fact, R P Singh, VRV Singh, Munaf Patel and Sreesanth are the future of India’s pace attack. But, on current form and performance, Sreesanth deserves to supersede Singh in the national team.
After all, if R P has shone in ‘A’ grade cricket, Sreesanth has proved his ability on the international stage itself. His 10 wickets in the 3-match Test series against West Indies went a long way in helping India win the series. Not to forget, this was immediately after coming back from injury. And those who doubt his ability in the shorter version of the game, his 6/55 at Indore against England is proof of his genuine wicket-taking ability. Before Sreesanth, only three other Indian bowlers had taken a six-wicket haul in one-day cricket. What’s more, the Kerala speedster achieved this feat in his debut year in international cricket. If all these performances don’t count then, sorry to say, nothing will. And anyways, if R P Singh, was picked on the basis of his strong ‘A’ game performances, why is India’s one-time pace spearhead, Zaheer Khan, still languishing in the wilderness after a sensational stint in county cricket. The selectors will find it very hard to answer this question for sure.
Cricket is not always about numbers. After all, one bowler may trouble batsmen and his partner and the other end may end with better figures. It doesn’t make the performance of the former any less meritorious. What has instantly stood out during Sreesanth’s performance in his short stay with the Indian team is his ability to pose problems for the best of batsmen. Ask Brian Lara and, being an honest man, he wouldn’t hesitate to say yes. Also, his aggressive attitude is very refreshing and defines the changing face of Indian cricket.
Ironically, this is what the Indian selectors have held against him. At least the explanation given for his omission points to this factor. His economy rate of 5.71 may seem a bit too high but lets not forget that he’s played a mere 18 matches and is still learning the intricacies of one-day cricket. But even if economy is taken as a criterion, the others in the side aren’t miserly either. R P Singh himself conceded over 5 runs per over in one-day cricket and it’s not very different for the more experienced guys either. Irfan Pathan has an economy rate touching 5 while Agarkar is only slightly worse.
The bottom line is that with the inclusion of ‘Power Plays’ and other fielding innovations, life is getting more and more difficult for the bowlers with each passing season. In today day and age when 300 is being raked up as easily as a stroll in the park, it shouldn’t be considered a crime that bowlers are conceding over 5 runs a over. Times have indeed changed. Gone are the days when anything 4 runs per over was considered expensive. With everything against the bowlers in modern times, they need to be given some leeway. And the selectors must keep that in mind while picking a squad.
It’s all very well for coach Greg Chappell to say that Sreesanth would recover from this setback. But things don’t quite work out that way always. Especially when you have been eliminated unfairly. Amazingly, in Chappell’s own words, “Sreesanth is getting better every day in bowling, batting, fielding and even fitness.” Wonder if the selectors have made a note of that. Instead, they rewarded him by axing him. The decisions taken by the ‘so called’ selectors can have wide-ranging consequences – to the extent of making or break careers. But then is anybody bothered?
Sreesanth is still young and, with the never-say-die attitude that he has, should make a comeback into the side pretty soon. But one only hopes that his career doesn’t follow a parallel path to that of his numerous predecessors like Balaji, Zaheer, Nehra, Mohanty and his own statemate Tinu Yohannan among others. Because if that happens, Indian cricket would be the biggest loser and another name would be added to the never-ending list of India’s genuinely talented cricketers who couldn’t transform potential into performance. Period.
Sreesanth’s record so far
Tests – 5 matches, 19 wickets, Best Bowling - 4/70, Average - 29.78
ODIs- 18 matches, 24 wickets, Best Bowling- 6/55, Average- 36.20
No comments:
Post a Comment