Aakash Chopra
Aakash Chopra Aakash ChopraRSS FeedFeeds  | Archives
Former India opener; author of Beyond the Blues, an account of the 2007-08 Ranji Trophy season

India's selectors pick populism over vision

The final selections by Srikkanth's committee have sent all the wrong signals to the players and fans

Aakash Chopra

August 16, 2012

Comments: 47 | Text size: A | A

Wriddhiman Saha got a game in place of the suspended MS Dhoni, Australia v India, 4th Test, Adelaide, 1st day, January 24, 2012
Wriddhiman Saha was vice-captain on India A's tour of West Indies, and is being groomed to take over the keeper's role in Tests. Why then is he not in the A squad to tour New Zealand? © AFP
Enlarge

After India's 0-8 rout in England and Australia in 2011, the BCCI took some measures to ensure the team doesn't face such a drubbing again. Among these were scheduling two India A tours every year and revamping the domestic structure to make it more competitive, with the aim to produce players who will do well in all conditions. These efforts may not form the complete blueprint for success, but we must laud the BCCI for taking the first few steps in the right direction.

But while the board has showed it intends to bring change, the national selectors have simply delayed the process of repair India need if they are to be successful against all teams in all conditions.

The beginning of a new season was an opportune moment for the selectors to show their vision and intent. It was also their last selection (four of the five selectors will finish their terms in September), so the moment could not have been more appropriate to perhaps undo the errors of the past. Instead, they chose to bury their heads in the sand.

Where they could have taken a few radical, if possibly unpopular, decisions, they preferred to play it safe. Instead of showing vision by backing youngsters for the India A tour, they chose to please everyone by picking a completely different squad from the one for the A tour of West Indies a couple of months ago. This shows not only a dangerous incoherence in thought process, it also raises questions about the selectors' credibility.

While Yuvraj Singh's comeback for the World Twenty20 grabbed the headlines, it was the other, unemotional, selections that revealed the selectors' lack of vision. Sidharth Monga covered several of these in his column last week. Decisions like Ishant Sharma's inclusion for the New Zealand Tests without him having played a single competitive match after undergoing ankle surgery, Suresh Raina replacing Rohit Sharma in the Test side, and Gautam Gambhir replacing Virat Kohli as vice-captain for the World Twenty20 are jarring enough, but none betrays the lack of clarity as much as Piyush Chawla's return to the Indian team for Tests and the World Twenty20 does, 16 months after playing his last international game, in the 2011 World Cup. In fact, Chawla was a surprise selection for the World Cup as well, and was dropped after taking four wickets in three matches (two of them against Ireland and Netherlands). It isn't often that a member of a World Cup-winning team isn't played again for 16 months. Only a sub-standard performance can lead to such a long absence, and it would then be fair to assume that Chawla must have forced his way back with a series of sterling performances. Not really.

Rahul Sharma, who replaced Chawla in the squad after the World Cup, did very well in the 2011 IPL, and was picked for India on the basis of his performance in the league, despite poor first-class figures - 18 wickets in ten matches till then. But then selection is not always about numbers, or we'd have statisticians for selectors. Every selection committee has the right to look beyond statistics and go by instinct for potential and talent.

 
 
It isn't often that a member of a World Cup-winning team isn't played again for 16 months. Only a sub-standard performance can lead to such a long absence, and it would then be fair to assume that Chawla must have forced his way back with a series of sterling performances. Not really
 

There are only two ways to justify any selection: by merit, backed by seriously good numbers, or by the selectors' instinct for considering potential over performance. Rahul's selection fell into the second category. But while he was picked with the long-term idea of playing Tests, he was dropped after only ten months, not having been given an opportunity in the longer format. So was his being picked an error in judgment, or was dropping him without giving him a chance a mistake? Chawla has now reclaimed his place without producing any earth-shattering numbers - 27 wickets at 40.62 from nine first-class matches. Yes, there were only eight spinners in the top 30 wicket-takers last season, and the best took 28 wickets in eight matches, but then again, if Chawla was going to be picked for the Test series against New Zealand, why wasn't he picked for the A tour to West Indies?

National selections rarely demand out-of-the-box thinking because most players select themselves. You need to simply pick the best team possible to win the assignment, which means there isn't much scope for working towards a vision. Not so with an A squad, where the selectors have opportunities to plan for the future, and gives us a peek into their thought process. If selected fairly, an A squad is a great indicator of the country's bench strength.

Being consistent in selections for the national team is the default mode, but consistency in A team selections can only be achieved through a carefully crafted design. A team is as good as its bench strength, and the bench can only be as strong as it is allowed to be.

In July 2011, Srikkanth Anirudha was picked in a three-day squad for the Emerging Players tournament, even though he wasn't a regular in Tamil Nadu's Ranji team. It goes without saying that one deserving candidate was pushed further back in the queue for no fault of his own.

Only six players from the India A tour to the West Indies have survived for the A tour to New Zealand in September-October. Robin Bist, the highest run scorer in the 2011-12 first-class season, Wriddhiman Saha, who is being groomed take over the gloves from MS Dhoni in Tests, and Parwinder Awana, considered one of the most promising young fast bowlers in the country, have all failed to make it. Saha was the team's vice-captain, while Bist and Awana got only one match each on the tour. What did Saha do wrong? Was one opportunity enough to judge that Bist and Awana aren't good enough? Shikhar Dhawan and Abhinav Mukund both failed to score runs in the West Indies, but Mukund has now been named captain for the New Zealand tour, while Dhawan has been dropped. RP Singh was picked for the West Indies but couldn't make it because he wasn't fit. Now Jaydev Unadkat has been preferred over a fit RP.

And what about Praveen Kumar? If he wasn't considered good enough for the World Twenty20, shouldn't he have been a part of the India A set-up? As a rule, A squads consist of promising players from the first-class circuit who have a realistic chance of graduating to the next level and those who have fallen off the national radar and are trying to make it back. Picking completely different teams every time defeats the purpose of organising such tours.

India are about to begin a very long home season, and this selection could have been used to make a statement of intent. Unfortunately, the out-going selection committee didn't see it as an opportunity; maybe they looked at it as a liability.

Former India opener Aakash Chopra is the author of Out of the Blue, an account of Rajasthan's 2010-11 Ranji Trophy victory. His website is here and his Twitter feed here

RSS Feeds: Aakash Chopra

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by beeblebrox on (August 19, 2012, 9:16 GMT)

Not said a word about Tendulkar continuing in the team! Strange.

Posted by Sackz on (August 18, 2012, 8:53 GMT)

Hi Akash, I agree with you. I always wished selectors were more set of people.

Posted by   on (August 18, 2012, 3:26 GMT)

What a joke selectors have made, picking Piyush Chawla, ironically, the person who called selectors Bunch of Jokers are also part of this squad now...what to do...

Posted by PD40 on (August 17, 2012, 23:42 GMT)

This is a god article about selection policy. But I also think there should be an examination of captain Dhini's determination to promote Chennai Super King players at the expense all other players. His persistence with Jadeja, Ashwin at the expense of Ojha is not well documented. Then he tries so hard to keep Manoj Tiwary out of the team - I thought someone like Akash Chopra or Harsh Bhogle would be able to notice that.

Posted by mark2011 on (August 17, 2012, 17:00 GMT)

i think the movements made by selecctors for NZ series is ok and nothing much to worry..NZ is no great threat to current Ind team and can easily win this series too... so guys dont bother too much...no need to see storm in the tea cup!!

Posted by basophil on (August 17, 2012, 15:39 GMT)

why are some of the people here ranting that just because aakash chopra and sanjay manjrekar didn't contribute much with the bat to the indian team, they shouldn't be making these analyses? at least they have a good knowledge about cricket - there's no hypocrisy in that

Posted by ravi_hari on (August 17, 2012, 13:14 GMT)

Akash has been giving good analysis after selections and matches. I think you are right in commenting that the selections are clueless and inconsistant. I feel the selectors do not have a definite plan of action. If I were in the selection panel, I will first draw a list of 30 probables. I will first select the the top 15 who would represent the country at International level. Then I will look at the rest 15 and see if anyone needs to be replaced to suit a particular format. Like, I would pick a player like Rayudu for T20s and ODIs and not probably for 4 day games or tests. Then I would pick players who are outside the 30 list who have performed exceptionally well in domestic tournaments, IPL, english county, etc. and see if they fit into my selections. I will then have a flow chart of their performances and why they failed, if they did so. The flow chart will be a transparent document for players to see for themselves where they stand and their chances of further selection.

Posted by SouthPaw on (August 17, 2012, 10:58 GMT)

You forgot a very important question, Chopra. Why has Harbhajan Singh been picked?

Posted by   on (August 17, 2012, 9:33 GMT)

its nt that kind of selection we thought piyush was a surprise pick and praveen kumar missing out is a huge upset to team india if yuvi performs srikanth is safe and if he dosent then its going to be d- day for him!

Posted by   on (August 17, 2012, 8:34 GMT)

Many questions comes up from the current selection of national team and A team. Can we file an application for RTI for selectors?

Comments have now been closed for this article

FeedbackTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Aakash ChopraClose
Aakash Chopra Aakash Chopra is the 245th Indian to represent India in Test cricket. A batsman in the traditional mould, he played 10 Tests for India in 2003-04, and has played over 120 first-class matches. He currently plays for Delhi in the Ranji Trophy; his book Beyond the Blues was an account of the 2007-08 season. Chopra made a formidable opening combination with Virender Sehwag, which was believed to be one of the reasons for India's success in Australia and Pakistan in 2003-04. He is considered one of the best close-in fielders India has produced after Eknath Solkar.

    'I was the mad scientist who threw ideas at the side'

Former New Zealand coach John Bracewell talks man management, county v country, and the evolution of the game

    Rossouw's agony, and most stumpings in international cricket

Ask Steven: Also, the highest scores by wicketkeepers, and the most ODI fifties without a hundred

    The legend of Watson's 11

My Favourite Cricket Story: Martin Crowe remembers batting with a man who had his score written on his bat

'Pietersen plays the innings that matter'

Modern Masters: Many of his tons have been match-defining and his ability to score them quickly has boosted England's chances

Why didn't anyone pick Bruce Martin?

Beige Brigade: The boys discuss Cook and Swann, and Richie Benaud's lounge. Plus, the Mystery Man song

News | Features Last 7 days

England need disruptive strategy to counter spin

Alastair Cook needs an out-of-the-box plan that veers India from the set pieces. One of those plans could be an early Powerplay

Test cricket's young Fab Four

Kohli, Root, Smith and Williamson will take turns as the No. 1 Test batsman. So far each has shown only one technical weakness

Dhoni doesn't heed his own warning

Plays of the Day from the second ODI between England and India, in Cardiff

The curse of the Sharmas

Plays of the day from the third ODI between England and India at Trent Bridge

Utseya joins Brandes, Rossouw joins Tendulkar

Plays of the day from the tri-series match between Zimbabwe and South Africa

News | Features Last 7 days