Cricket: SKY, Pandya and the Formatted Hassles!

The World Cup-2023 Final still remains a nightmare, a bad dream that refuses to go, in the minds of most of Indian cricket lovers: their home team on home grounds crashing to a humiliating and a listless defeat in the grand finale after winning all the ten games leading to it. Well, for most of the sober cricket lovers win or defeat is always a part of any game and it’s never an issue to be distressingly sour or angry about; but the problem was that their home team couldn’t offer a creditable fight against Australia that they defeated in the very first game of the event and also in the previous matches in a bilateral series and had gone down like a pack of schoolboys as if trying to understand or find what’s the game of cricket all about. And that rankled, and still does. Expectedly, the fans or the organizers started crying hoarse about the pitch being doctored unnecessarily or mistakenly even though it belonged to their own country and to the supposedly biggest stadium of the country never blaming their favorite stars. For me it was the Kohli-Rahul partnership, perhaps the slowest in recent years concerning any country in the one-day format, that put the match beyond India’s reach, beyond any intended fightback and most unfortunately, beyond their bowling attack which was undoubtedly the best in the World Cup. And that brings the Surya Kumar Yadav (SKY) factor into focus.

Of course, he was not selected for the playing eleven and there was no indication of that happening. Till the pivot of the new Indian team, Hardik Pandya, got injured and was ruled out of the tournament. Since Pandya is considered to be one of the great emerging all-rounders in world cricket, his replacement was not easy—the team management had to think about both the batting and the bowling possibilities. They finally made the decision to bring in Mohammed Shami to replace him in bowling and as Shardul Thakur, as a supposed all-rounder, had been doing precious nothing in those four matches SKY was also brought into the playing eleven. That Shami, the victim of arguably the most horribly wrong decision in team selection, made history afterward is not our point here. We want to discuss the SKY factor, and then Pandya.

Bringing someone into the playing eleven during the biggest event of cricket means that the team management really trusts his abilities. No doubt, SKY has been going through a lean patch in recent months, but still he was a tremendous force to reckon with on his day. In the matches that followed SKY was not fully in his elements as an electrifying batsman, and the management should’ve replaced him again if they lost trust and confidence in him. If they hadn’t indeed lost the trust in him, they would’ve definitely allowed him to play the Final in his usual place; but they didn’t.

For the first time in ten games the batting order was changed and Ravindra Jadeja was sent in ahead, when, after laboring continuously in his excruciatingly slow partnership with Rahul, Kohli managed to complete his half-century and then fell. Jadeja only succeeded in putting the final nails in the Indian coffin. When finally SKY stepped in it was already too late. But then, as the Final-nightmare lingered on SKY was made captain of the T20 Team India which somewhat meant they still trusted him for the shortest format. However, trusted cricketers normally play all the three formats and normally as well succeed in all formats too. But not with Surya Kumar even as there was no news of Pandya getting fit. So, we still don’t have an answer to the trust-riddle concerning SKY.

While conceding to the fact that Pandya was sorely missed in the Final, it was also clear that India under the captaincy of Rohit was all set to win the World Cup-2023 without Pandya. But the selectors cum the management, following sincerely the somewhat clichéd objective of making way for the new-generation Team India, continued to believe in Pandya as the future captain of India which made it clear that the SKY factor was only a stop-gap arrangement for them, with the T20 World Cup coming up next year. Nonetheless, Rohit who was unanimously hailed as the most strategist Indian captain during the World Cup is more or less set to lead India in the T20 World Cup too, unless he happens to retire from that format which is probable after what Mumbai Indians did to him. And that again brings in the Pandya factor.

In a move that was somewhat anticipated the IPL franchise Mumbai Indians bought Hardik Pandya and afterward announced that he’d replace Rohit Sharma as the captain. In a cash-rich tournament we cannot expect the loyalty ingredient at all, and therefore, Pandya had no apparent qualms leaving Gujarat Titans that he led to a debut Championship-2022 victory and again led it to the 2023 IPL Final. It was also probable that the captaincy promise was a part of the transaction, and if so, that was highly unjust. Normally a successful India captain gets rewarded with more responsibilities like MS Dhoni who still leads the Chennai Super Kings and who is much older than Rohit. Besides, Indian cricket icons, much older than Rohit had been made franchise captain in the initial IPL years. Fans as well as playing and veteran cricketers are divided on this decision. Personally speaking I feel that it is a humiliation for Rohit who, under his leadership, made Mumbai Indians Champions five times since 2013, and that he should no longer play under Pandya, nor for the franchise. In this context his announcement of retiring from the T2O format seems imminent.

Since long years I’ve been advocating the idea of having three specialized captains for the three formats. In spite of making so many captains in recent years the picture is still the same: maybe Rohit still for the Test format, KL Rahul or Pandya or whoever for the ODI and Pandya for the shortest format who, after all, is set to consume the captaincy in all three formats in near future. Hassles, contradictions and what not! That’s Indian cricket!