Deciphering the Indian Selectors’ mindset

Amidst the glitz and glamour of the IPL and the chaos that later followed, there were a few other cricketing news items that would have otherwise made it to the headlines of the sports sections in the newspapers. The most noteworthy of them was the Indian team’s selection for the Champions Trophy. Not only was news important because of the exclusion of a few marquee players and a highly talented young one, but also because it lends us an insight into how the Indian selectors think.

Eye on the future

One of the things that makes a selector’s job tough is the critical balance that he needs to find between short-term success and building a team for the long-term. And for that to happen, a selection committee must be given a 3-4 year term in the office so that they can have the confidence of not being judged by their immediate success and failures. Till 2008, the selectors had a 1-2 year tenure which held them back from taking bold decisions. However, things changed with the Kris Srikkanth-led panel, and they were able to groom players which they thought would form the backbone of future success. The emergence of the likes of Kohli and Ashwin is here to be seen.

This willingness of the selection panel to take a risk continues with the current committee led by Sandeep Patil. In the Test series against England, they gave Gambhir and Sehwag a chance to get back to form. A negative response from the openers led to the axing of Gambhir from the squad against Australia. Mid-way into that series, Sehwag was dropped and Shikhar Dhawan was brought into the squad. The selectors had a choice between him and an experienced Jaffer, but they went with the youngster as they found a long-term prospect in him. Murali Vijay’s selection ahead of Gambhir even though he was not in the best of forms in domestic cricket meant that if the selectors wanted to select one among two under-performing players, it would be the one who has a brighter prospect in the long-term.

Performance is the key

The exclusion of Yuvraj Singh seems a little hard on him. He doesn’t look like the same charismatic persona on the field who was the Man of the Series in the 2011 World Cup. But a string of failures in the ODIs against England and Pakistan, where he scored a meagre 160 runs in 8 innings spread over these two series, was enough to convince the selectors that his form post his cancer recovery doesn’t warrant a selection in the Indian team.

They’ve sent out a clear message: even if you are a senior member, your experience will only take you so far. A string of failures will make the selectors look for replacements as performance takes centre-stage.

It’s tough to drop seasoned cricketers – especially the ones who are proven match-winners. By excluding senior pros including Sehwag, Harbhajan and Zaheer for the Champions Trophy, the selectors have, for all practical purposes, pulled down the curtains on their careers. That these cricketers were not even in the list of 30 probables announced on 6^th April meant that even a strong IPL performance wouldn’t help them win a ticket to England.

The IPL effect

There has always been a big debate about the importance that must be placed on a player’s IPL form. It’s a different ball-game altogether. The format and the nature of the opposition one faces in IPL is vastly different from ODIs. At best, IPL should serve as a platform for spotting talent and not fast-tracking them into the international arena. A good IPL season must be followed by careful scrutiny in the domestic circuit before a player can be drafted to represent India. While players like Ashwin and Jadeja shot to prominence with their performances in the IPL, a few others found it difficult to carry the same form on to the international circuit. Manpreet Gony’s failure and Vinay’s Kumar unimpressive bowling at the international level are examples where a player’s IPL form shouldn’t be the sole criteria for an Indian team selection.

The selectors took a stance with Sehwag, Harbhajan and Zaheer and took their IPL performances out of equation when they didn’t select them in the list of 30. But what about Rohit Sharma? He has been Indian cricket’s most tragic story so far. He failed to make it to the starting XI on a consistent basis in the last two ODI series that India has played. So how does he find a place in the side? One wonders if it on the basis of his IPL performances where he was the leading run scorer for the eventual winners.

Even Vinay Kumar’s inclusion ahead for Shami Ahmed comes as a surprise considering that the latter has shown good skill and control in the 5 matches he has played for India. He might not have a bagful of wickets, but an economy rate of 4.57 on flat Indian wickets commands respect. Vinay Kumar’s IPL performance, where he took 23 wickets, can be the only reason explaining his inclusion. This again begs the question – should IPL performances serve as the yardstick for selection? If yes, then it has to be consistent for players – something which the selectors haven’t done by selecting Sharma and Kumar.

The mother of all ambiguities

The exclusion of Cheteshwar Pujara nullifies all that has been established in the lines above. Yes, he was injured; but that can’t be the reason for his exclusion from the list of probables. A shining star like him with one of the best techniques in the country and an impressive record in the home Tests against England and Australia signals talent and good temperament – and copious amounts of both. One needs good skill to counter the moving ball in the English conditions; and if there is anyone in Indian cricket who can do that, it’s Pujara. He has ticked all boxes – he is young, has a bright future and has had success in international cricket so far. His exclusion remains a shocking surprise. Why is he being measured with a different yardstick?

Thus, the selection committee definitely has a clear focus on performance and grooming players for the future. However, there remain a couple of questions which haven’t been satisfactorily answered by the selection committee’s recent decisions. A much fairer and clearer approach will go a long way in building a meritorious and stronger cricket team.