Hindustan Times ST (Mumbai)

BCCI has not shown a clear line of succession

- AFP

Indian history is full of bloody wars of succession with rivals fighting to grab the throne. Indian cricket has a sorry tradition of captains being rudely shown the door or purged overnight. In history and cricket there are many examples of reigns of kings ending suddenly. Even then, it was surprising the axe fell on Virat Kohli in the manner it did.

The announceme­nt of the crown passing from one to the other came as a footnote in a press release about the selection of the Indian Test team, which Kohli is to lead. Kohli was therefore appointed and sacked at the same time through the same release. There was no explanatio­n why this happened and no appreciati­on or acknowledg­ment of the services of the deposed leader.

Next day, this omission was partially corrected by a tweet lauding Kohli’s contributi­on. The day after, BCCI president Saurav Ganguly provided more details. This happened, he said, because you can’t have two white-ball captains.

That cricket logic can’t be faulted and the selectors are entitled to take that call. Pundits are of the view that once Kohli abdicated the T20 captaincy, his desire to lead in ODIS was untenable and unworkable. The fall was inevitable. That it was done without grace, almost a surgical strike against one of your own, jarred. Kohli deserves respect for his runs, centuries, aggression, passion, contributi­on and, more important than anything else, the office he held as captain.

Sunil Gavaskar has often decried the tendency of devaluing the India cap by handing it to undeservin­g players. He likened this to gifting it to passersby at Flora fountain. Summarily dismissing the Indian captain is almost as bad and equally damaging. It is insensitiv­e and disrespect­ful and diminishes the stature of the captain.

When Kohli decided to give up T20 captaincy, the change was more systematic. That time, Kohli put out his reasons and

BCCI mentioned backroom conversati­ons that took place to give the impression everyone was consulted so that Indian cricket moves forward.

This time, Kohli got a bouncer and he couldn’t hook or duck; it appears the ball just got too big on him. Those unsympathe­tic to him think it is a lesson for a disobedien­t student who has been punished for not falling in line. But others in his corner feel Kohli is that passenger who has been taken off a flight just before take-off without a reason.

Still others see dark conspiraci­es behind the move. To them the captaincy issue is not about Kohli-rohit Sharma but a battle for controllin­g the remote and owning the turf. According to this theory, the Board is determined to take control of territory ceded to the captain/coach in the past few years.

All this could be pure speculatio­n but better communicat­ion would set the record straight and kill unnecessar­y speculatio­n. Ahead of the Mumbai Test when the captain addressed the press, he said nothing about injuries to players. But next morning at the toss we found out three key players were unfit and unavailabl­e.

Ravindra Jadeja missed the last Test and is not on the tour to South Africa apparently due to a knee issue. Reports are floating that he requires surgery and could be out for six months. It has been more than 10 days since the last Test but there is still no word on Jadeja’s fitness status.

Raj Singh Dungarpur (the late EX-BCCI president and chief selector) once famously said captaining India is the second most important job in the country and the selection of the national team is more important than a cabinet reshuffle. He didn’t mention that captaincy change is a matter of succession and requires careful thought, vision and planning. It’s about identifyin­g the best man for the job and then grooming him.

Years ago, when the Indian team toured South Africa, Ali Bacher pointed out a young Hansie Cronje to me and said he will be their next captain. Cronje wasn’t in the team at that time but was kept with the group to learn and get ready for his future responsibi­lities.

It works differentl­y with us but Indian cricket has been fortunate that players have selected themselves for the top job and Ganguly/dravid/kumble/ms Dhoni and Kohli were logical choices when the opportunit­y arose. That is not the case anymore because there is no clear line of succession.

Kohli’s workload is reduced but Sharma, a year-and-a-half older and less fit, can’t be the long-term solution to the problem. The selectors bet on Rahane all this while but that hasn’t worked out. Going forward, KL Rahul and Rishabh Pant are the likely options because they fit into teams for all formats though neither has much experience of leading first-class sides.

 ?? ?? Did Virat Kohli lose out due to a battle for owning the turf?
Did Virat Kohli lose out due to a battle for owning the turf?
 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India