wrong sort of people are always in power because they would not be in
power if they were
Over the years, if the performance of our selectors is anything to go by, we would realize that they have done reasonably well to vindicate the above quote. The word 'cricket- selector' has an aura of enigma and intrigue and it has always been an object of criticism. And it is not very difficult to fathom the reasons because their actions have always been louder than their words!
The selector's very selection is often the result of politics, manipulation, maneuver and regional interest. Becoming a national selector is not an easy task, to do so, one has to please too many 'guardians' of Indian Cricket. In recent times, there has been a lot of debate on the selector’s selection process. There is one school of thought which believes that only former cricketers should be made selectors because they know what international cricket is all about. Apparently, it seems a good suggestion but again, it is not entirely necessary that only a former player will make it good selector.
There is another school of thought which believes that playing cricket at the highest level should not be made the only criteria for appointing someone a selector. It may deprive the chance to many who may not have played cricket to the highest level but whose knowledge may be better then others who have.
The examples of Harsha Bhogle or Amrit Mathur, to name a few, have more astute and perspicacious approach to the game. They may not have swung the ball, the way Kapil did or they may not have played the incredible square cut, the way Vishwanath did, but their knowledge and love for the game can't be questioned. So, there should be a way where a selection committee comprising former player and genuine professionals can be formed. Meanwhile, Sunil Gavaskar has suggested that a selector's selection should only be for 6 months and after each 2 months, their performance should be evaluated. The cricket lovers in India have always been demanding that the selector's job should be made accountable. They should be paid for it and there should be an element of professionalism. The so- called 'honorary' selector is a whole rubbish concept. By the way, why doesn't the Board let the selection committee's proceeding be live telecast- an idea suggested by one of most controversial selectors of all times - Kishan Runta, two years back. Thus, people would be able to know what exactly happens during a selection committee's meeting. However, it is very unlikely that our conservative board will embrace this revolutionary idea.
For India to become a World Class team it is imperative that the composition of the team is balanced and only the deserving candidates get a chance. The selectors must realize that the future of Indian cricket lies in their hands and only they can save it from going down in the dumps.
sincerely hope and wish that eventually common sense would prevail
over this honorary gentleman who have made a mockery of the word selectors.
|| Homepage | On Line Polls | Polling Results | Post Your | Messages From | Rankings | Statistics | Teams | Autographs ||
|| Cric-Calendar | New Interviews | Picture Gallery | World Records | History | Comparative Charts | Refine Your Cricket ||
|| Cricketology | Dream Team | Time to Laugh | Did U Know | Legends | Quotations | Savi's Diary | Fan-doo Letters ||
|| Match fixing Saga | Articles Archive | Cric-couples | Inspiration from Hollywood | Dupliket | Chat ||
|| World Cup Archive | Chilli 'N' Pepper | Columns | Controversies ||
Contest | Tournament
Info | News | Membership