Nair’s axing drama calls for transparency in selection
Karun Nair’s exclusion from the squad to play the two Tests against West Indies starting today sparked an unsavoury controversy even before celebrations over the Asia Cup victory had subsided.
Nair revealed to a website he hadn’t been informed by selectors or team management that he would be dispensed with. This seemed bad form by those in authority, considering Nair hadn’t played a single Test in England, and earned the young batsman widespread sympathy.
Not much later, chief selector MSK Prasad spoke to the media claiming that one from his committee as well as the team management had spoken to Nair in England itself about their plans against the West Indies, so this was not the bombshell decision everybody assumed.
It is not inconceivable that the confusion could have arisen from some misunderstanding between the two parties because of unclear communication.
Maybe the selectors sugarcoated the pill to an extent that Nair didn’t misread their missive. Or maybe Nair was too highstrung about his future -– not unnatural given the competition for places -– and closed his mind to what the selectors/team management was telling him.
LATE REACTION
In either case, the problem wouldn’t have arisen had the selectors explained why Nair had been dropped when announcing the team, rather than leaving it open to speculation and then rushing in to do belated damage control.
Frankly, I see some logic -– however thin -– in the current selection. Unlike in England where the squad was of 17 players, only 15 had to be chosen for the Tests against West Indies so two players had to be dropped.
Maybe the selectors also believed they have seen enough of Nair (as also M Vijay, Shikhar Dhawan, Rohit Sharma, all still in contention for the tour of Australia), and this was an opportunity to try out some others who’ve been demanding attention.
Hanuma Vihari has been retained because he scored a promising half-century in his debut Test where he leapfrogged over the unfortunate Nair because he also bowls off-spin. Interestingly, he is not in the 12 announced for the first Test against West Indies! But such instances are not unknown.
Picking a playing XI is the prerogative of the tour management after the selectors have done their job. I am assuming here, of course, that the selectors and team management are consulting each other, with inputs from India A coach Rahul Dravid to prevent malafide actions.
The problem arises when team selections are treated as state secret.
Historically, the Indian cricket establishment – which includes administrators, selectors and players -- has never fully appreciated the need for transparency. In today’s day and age, however cumbersome, this has become imperative.
Fans are among the biggest stakeholders in the sport, and to keep them informed of all except ‘top secret’ decisions is not an indulgence, but a responsibility that the establishment must practice. With the BCCI now coming under RTI I suppose things will have to change.
At the core of the Nair issue however, is another aspect that needs thorough examination, which is about planning itineraries of major tours. It boggles my mind still that India played a fiveTest rubber England without a first class match in between any of the matches.
In the good old days there would have been at least one match between Tests to give out of form players opportunity to regain touch and confidence, as also those on the bench to showcase their talent instead of the team management going just by gut or past reputation.
In Nair’s case in England, for instance, if there were even three first class games, it is reasonable to assume he would have played two. Had he scored well enough, he could have played in a Test or two, and had he done well in these, there wouldn’t be reason to drop him now.
If, however, Nair flopped in the side games, there wouldn’t have been any misgiving about him being omitted from the squad against the West Indies. He had had his chances and blown them.
This helps in three ways. It doesn’t leave the concerned player bitter, gives the team management on tour more options to play out their strategies, and would also stymie allegations of bias against selectors.
AT THE CORE OF THE NAIR ISSUE IS ANOTHER ASPECT THAT NEEDS THOROUGH EXAMINATION, WHICH IS ABOUT PLANNING ITINERARIES OF MAJOR TOURS.