Ever since the BCCI instituted the Irani trophy it was always regarded as a selection trial tournament, so much so that on few occasions some players were picked to play for the country solely on their performance in the Irani trophy. By and large the selection committees have done a reasonably good job. However, for a few seasons now there have been cases of illogical selections wherein some players were selected despite failing consistently. Same issues plague the selections of the India-A teams.
However, with competitions increasing, the selection committees do better planning. There is a school of thought that Polly Umrigar, Mamasaheb Ghorpade, Dattu Phadkar and quite a few other selectors believed in the class of a player, and they used statistics to compliment the degree of talent. It doesn’t seem to be the case now. The criteria seems to change for each player.
Inconsistent selectionsADVERTISEMENT
Batsmen who have scored over 750 runs this season have been ignored while those who have averaged less than 30 have been selected. If a batting average of 29 and four wickets in an entire season can get a player into the Rest of India team, then there is something amiss in the approach of the selection committee. Mind you, all the selectors are paid handsomely with very good perks. They are expected to watch matches and they do watch them. However, when there is such evidence of inconsistencies, shouldn’t the BCCI hold them accountable for encouraging nepotism?
Someone who takes around ten wickets and scores around 300 runs in a season walks into the Indian team, and players with much better all-round performances aren’t lucky enough to get anywhere near the Rest of India team. The pattern of selection is such that consistent performers do get disheartened because they don’t have a godfather in the decision making set up.
Imagine, the 40 times Ranji champions Mumbai, played 28 players with seven debutants this season. Inconsistencies aside farcical unprofessional behaviour too creeps up from time to time. Pravin Tambe who was picked in the team to play against Karnataka, was asked to rush to the MCA office to complete the BCCI registration formalities and was informed to report for practice the following morning. A couple of hours later following this communication he was told that he had been dropped even though the team selection sheet was signed by the selection committee!
ADVERTISEMENT
On the other hand Karnataka rotated players well, and while some talents had to be left out, they managed to keep the balance of the team and succeed. The team’s approach to the game reminded one of the supremacy of the Mumbai teams from 1960s to 80s. Karnataka exhibited ruthlessness that champions are known for. Strategy management of the team ensured that whatever were the playing conditions, each player was expected to accomplish the role assigned to him so that no opposition could get a look in.
To attain such consistency for two consecutive seasons, majority of the players had to undergo a systematic and scientific development process in the State academy for more than 5 years till 2006. Later, playing experience enhanced their self-belief.
Cricket is nothing but confidence. It can be achieved only when all players hone their skills in a tough environment. Confidence adds to one’s keenness to play and that is very important to be effective in a team game. The model followed by Karnataka could serve well for other teams too.
If a tournament such as the Irani Trophy is indeed considered as the stepping stone to the national team then the least that the BCCI could do is ensure accountability of the selection committee by being transparent about criteria, both at the national and state levels. Absence of accountability in the selection committee will certainly affect the very base of Indian cricket.