PTI
Mumbai, Oct 3: Rahul Dravid's omission from the Indian squad for the first two ODIs against Pakistan in the forthcoming five-match rubber has come as a surprise to the team's manager Lalchand Rajput.
"Let's put it this way. I am surprised at his omission. He's such a class player, a virtual wall against the opposition. We will definitely miss him," Rajput told PTI on Monday.
Rajput was non-committal when asked whether he would have opposed the five-man selection panel's decision to drop the former Indian captain from the team for the ODIs at Guwahati (November 5) and Mohali (November 8).
"I was not invited for the meeting of the selection committee and I can't comment on it," he pointed out.
Rajput, who was named cricket manager for the team by the Cricket Board after the selection of the squad for the first two ODIs, was present at Ahmedabad as coach of the Indian Reds outfit when the selectors met there on October 27.
The former India and Mumbai opener said he had not had a chance to talk to the selectors after the team had been picked.
"I haven't had a chance to talk to them. Let's see," he said.
Rajput was en route to Delhi to attend the felicitation function for the victorious World Twenty20 Championship winning team being thrown by President Pratibha Patil tomorrow.
Rajput was the team's manager when it emerged triumphant in the inaugural edition of the event in South Africa last month too.
The Politics of Selection in Indian Cricket
By Anand Philar / Sify
October 30, 2007
The case of Rahul Dravid is getting curiouser by the day. Indeed, his being“rested” (an euphemism for dropped and a word that is found only in BCCI dictionary) has triggered an outrage in the cricketing circles, but being the sort of man he is, such protest will never snowball into a roaring controversy like we saw in the case of Sourav Ganguly two seasons ago. After all, nice guys are always expendable and easy option when you want to make an example of somebody.
It is no secret that the genesis of Dravid’s unceremonious ouster lie in the differences between the former captain and chairman of national selection committee , Dilip Vengsarkar, who prefers to air his views on selection matters publicly rather than convey his feelings to players directly.
His outburst when asked whether Dravid was shown the courtesy of being informed of his exclusion (“Why should I call him when he didn’t inform me of his decision to quit captaincy?”) only smacks of vindictiveness and a deep-rooted personality clash between the two.
Vengsarkar, being in authority, should not have resorted to petty “tit-for-tat”. Rather, we expect certain grace, style and decorum from chairman of the selectors. By descending to such levels, Vengsarkar has only cut the nose to spite the face.
It is obvious then ,as it has always been, that politics rule Indian cricket and not always “form, fitness, fielding and merit” as Vengsarkar likes us to believe. Having said that, Dravid, perhaps, has paid dearly for being compliant to Greg Chappell who literally gunned down Ganguly two seasons ago. The “Prince of Kolkatta” was first “rested” for a couple of games and then promptly thrown to the wolves.
It was said that Dravid did not so much as lift a little finger to support Ganguly, unlike when he openly campaigned for retention of Sehwag immediately after. And now, Dravid himself finds himself out in the cold and none even daring to provide him any shelter. He might yet be brought back during the forthcoming Pakistan series, but the damage has been done and we can now see the daggers out in the open.
I have known Dravid since he was a schoolboy cricketer visiting my erstwhile office in Bangalore along with his father with the scoresheets. Over the years, he has grown into a mature person, suave, dignified and upright. However, as a captain, I am not sure whether he could be considered as a “leader” if one were to go by the odd snippet that emanated from the dressing room. Some saw him as a pliable captain during Chappell’s turbulent days as a coach when the Aussie went after Ganguly, leaking so-called confidential reports and even text messaging select journalists.
During those dark days, Dravid did not once openly canvass for Ganguly’s return. When Dada did come back into the Indian team and also began to perform, one could well imagine the scenario in the dressing room. There have been divisions in the team along personality lines. However vehement the denials may be, I refuse to believe otherwise. Back in the 1980s, I was a witness to the off-the-field battles between Gavaskar and Kapil Dev. The team then was divided. Go back in history, and you will find plenty of instances of divided teams when personality rather than cricketing merit dictated selection. It is much the same now.
As for Dravid, he might not have been the best of captains India has produced, but surely, he is the last word on commitment to team. After all, he carried the bag for Ganguly a few seasons ago when he opened the innings in both Tests and ODIs, besides keeping wickets. There was no murmur of dissent from the Bangalorean as he repeatedly stated that team interest was the over-riding factor rather than self. Earlier this summer, he was hailed for his Test series win in England and a match-winning 92 not out in the Bristol ODI. Dravid appeared to be at the peak of his prowess.
Yet, he decided to step down. His explanation of wanting to “concentrate” on his batting, the “shelf life” of Indian captain, etc., was just a smokescreen. For somebody who has scored so heavily in both forms of the game, the talk about “concentrating” on batting was only a cover for a deeper issue that involved Vengsarkar. But then, Indian cricket being what it is, we will never get to know the reasons unless one of them or both decide to talk about it.
Nevertheless, barring Dravid’s sacking, the team for the two ODIs against Pakistan contains no surprise, though it is a mystery as to why succession of selection committee want to announce the team even before a tournament, ostensibly a trial for the National team, concludes. In the present instance, the team was announced midway through the Challenger tournament. Had they waited for another 48 hours, I am sure, Dinesh Karthik would have been selected ahead of Sehwag who has done precious little to warrant selection.
It is to be hoped that sanity would return to the selection committee and that the senior players are treated with more respect instead of as expendable objects or victimised for reasons other than cricket. However, that would be wishful thinking, considering the track record of Indian cricket.