'There are no half-volleys in international cricket'
Dilip Vensgarkar speaks to Nagraj Gollapudi after the selection for the first two India-Pakistan games
Nagraj Gollapudi
28-Oct-2007
Cricinfo spoke to Dilip Vengsarkar, the chairman of India's selection panel, shortly after he announced the squad for the first two games against Pakistan. Among other things, he spoke about the decision to drop Rahul Dravid.
 |
|
It's been just about a year in the job for you. How difficult is it being the chairman of selectors?
It is very difficult. You cannot make everybody happy. Every time you have to pick the best combination, a winning combination. If we pick somebody, we are asked, "Why did you pick him?" If we drop somebody, we are asked, "Why did you drop him?" It's how you take it. You must have the courage of conviction.
It is very difficult. You cannot make everybody happy. Every time you have to pick the best combination, a winning combination. If we pick somebody, we are asked, "Why did you pick him?" If we drop somebody, we are asked, "Why did you drop him?" It's how you take it. You must have the courage of conviction.
How do you derive this courage?
From years of experience. I have been part of selection committees for the past 15 years, having picked teams for Mumbai, and the record is open for everyone to see. I do not want to boast about myself, but we always pick the best side. Yes, one or two mistakes can happen, but nine out of ten times the decision is right.
From years of experience. I have been part of selection committees for the past 15 years, having picked teams for Mumbai, and the record is open for everyone to see. I do not want to boast about myself, but we always pick the best side. Yes, one or two mistakes can happen, but nine out of ten times the decision is right.
What are the parameters you use when you pick someone?
We pick a player on his form and fitness. And purely on merit. You watch cricket and you know how well the person is batting, whether he is in form or not.
We pick a player on his form and fitness. And purely on merit. You watch cricket and you know how well the person is batting, whether he is in form or not.
How do you judge form? Is a good 30 better than a half-century, say?
It depends. It's a very thin line. The important thing is how the player is playing, his body language and things like that. And to get the right judgment, you need to back your instincts - unless it's an exceptional talent.
It depends. It's a very thin line. The important thing is how the player is playing, his body language and things like that. And to get the right judgment, you need to back your instincts - unless it's an exceptional talent.
How much of selection is from the heart, how much from the head?
Sometimes you are in two minds and that's where instinct comes in.
Sometimes you are in two minds and that's where instinct comes in.
Say, if two cricketers are similar talent-wise, what would be the clinching factor?
Mental strength is very important. Without talent you cannot play at the top level, but mental strength separates the also-rans from the best.
Mental strength is very important. Without talent you cannot play at the top level, but mental strength separates the also-rans from the best.
You pick a cricketer on form, but how long can you support a cricketer
who is not in form?
When you pick a player it means you believe in him, unless he proves you wrong "ki nahi isme nahi hai"(no, he doesn't have it in him). But that is very rare.
When you pick a player it means you believe in him, unless he proves you wrong "ki nahi isme nahi hai"(no, he doesn't have it in him). But that is very rare.
Can you quantify that?
You can't put numbers to it. For instance, say that if the player does not perform for five games, he is out. You cannot do that.
You can't put numbers to it. For instance, say that if the player does not perform for five games, he is out. You cannot do that.
The previous selection committee believed in giving a long rope, of about 30 games. Do you believe in the same?
Thirty games is too long. You mean to say that if someone does not perform for 30 games, he would still play? But then, if you believe in somebody, he is bound to come good. You won't give a chance to someone just for nothing.
Thirty games is too long. You mean to say that if someone does not perform for 30 games, he would still play? But then, if you believe in somebody, he is bound to come good. You won't give a chance to someone just for nothing.
Does the speculation in the media sway your mind in any way?
No chance. Even today, in Ahmedabad, TV channels were saying that the meeting is just a formality, the meeting will get over in just five minutes, and so on. Sometimes they go overboard. If there is constructive criticism, then I can understand. But it's being done just to increase TRPs. Because I have never seen them praise anybody. They are only criticising because if they start praising someone, nobody will watch them. They have to have a go at somebody.
No chance. Even today, in Ahmedabad, TV channels were saying that the meeting is just a formality, the meeting will get over in just five minutes, and so on. Sometimes they go overboard. If there is constructive criticism, then I can understand. But it's being done just to increase TRPs. Because I have never seen them praise anybody. They are only criticising because if they start praising someone, nobody will watch them. They have to have a go at somebody.
You can't put numbers to it. For instance, say that if the player does not perform for five games, he is out. You cannot do that
What's the ideal role the media should play?
I can understand the economics of how it works. There are so many channels in the country now. They have to do something out of the ordinary to create hype. End of the day, they have to see how much is there on the balance sheet.
I can understand the economics of how it works. There are so many channels in the country now. They have to do something out of the ordinary to create hype. End of the day, they have to see how much is there on the balance sheet.
How difficult is it to drop a senior player when he is out of form?
There is nothing like senior, junior or middle-aged guys. Just because someone is a youngster, he won't be getting half-volleys in international cricket. Everyone has to be picked on merit, form and fitness.
There is nothing like senior, junior or middle-aged guys. Just because someone is a youngster, he won't be getting half-volleys in international cricket. Everyone has to be picked on merit, form and fitness.
Rahul Dravid was a regular in the middle order. Now that he has been dropped, who do you think can take his place?
At this stage Yuvraj Singh, MS Dhoni, Gautam Gambhir are the middle-order batsmen, and waiting in the wings are Manoj Tiwari, Suresh Raina, Rohit Sharma. So we have a lot of options.
At this stage Yuvraj Singh, MS Dhoni, Gautam Gambhir are the middle-order batsmen, and waiting in the wings are Manoj Tiwari, Suresh Raina, Rohit Sharma. So we have a lot of options.
Doesn't having a selection meeting in the middle of a series create insecurity among players?
If there is any injury or if there's a sudden loss of form, and you have picked a team for a five matches and players carry that for three or four games, then you have to carry them. But if we convene during the second match, we can review and it's not necessary to change the team. You can see how the series and the team is shaping up.
If there is any injury or if there's a sudden loss of form, and you have picked a team for a five matches and players carry that for three or four games, then you have to carry them. But if we convene during the second match, we can review and it's not necessary to change the team. You can see how the series and the team is shaping up.
Why not have a pool of players who can be rotated?
At the moment there are 22 players who are always ready to play for India. I wouldn't say it's a pool but there are 22, and that augurs well for Indian cricket.
At the moment there are 22 players who are always ready to play for India. I wouldn't say it's a pool but there are 22, and that augurs well for Indian cricket.
Nagraj Gollapudi is an assistant editor at Cricinfo.