Taking Ishan’s place in the T20I squad were a couple of lower-order wicketkeepers – Sanju Samson and Jitesh Sharma. They were the designated finishers, the high-pressure operators, chasers of impossible targets. Meanwhile, the position in the team where Ishan bats in white-ball cricket was now to be occupied by the old owners. Back in the team were two stalwarts in their mid-30s – Rohit Sharma and Virat Kohli.

The selectors were making a statement – the veterans of many failed ICC events were once again the designated Top 3 batsmen for the T20 World Cup in June. Was it the right move? Not really.

Both Virat and Rohit are known to be the anchors – an ODI cricket concept that is on the verge of extinction in T20s. In this day and age, having even one ODI native in a T20 playing XI is considered a luxury. India, oblivious of the changing dynamics of T20 cricket, was indulging two of them. Both might have enjoyed spectacular individual success at these world events but India under their watch haven’t won an ICC trophy for more than a decade. Even in IPL, they don’t have the numbers that give them the aura of match-winner batsmen. They are brands, they are seen as leaders, but not your every-day game-changers.

Were the selectors being conservative or were they reluctant to take the tough unpopular calls that could potentially trigger waves of social media attacks by troll armies of the dropped megastars? Since the good old tradition of national selectors facing the media after every meeting has for long been dumped, the rationale behind these decisions would forever remain a state secret.

🏃‍♂️ pic.twitter.com/XjUfL18Ydc
— Ishan Kishan () January 12, 2024

Days later, head coach Rahul Dravid, before the first game of the Afghanistan series, would further complicate the Ishan matter. “Ishan Kishan was not available for selection. He requested for a break in South Africa which we agreed to. He has not made himself available for selection and when he does, I am sure he’ll play domestic cricket and make himself available for selection,” he said.

Unequal treatment

Those tuned in to Indian cricket long enough know what “he’ll play domestic cricket and make himself available” means. It’s a euphemism for a rap on the knuckle. It’s the classic class teacher’s ‘go stand in the corner’ snub. Worryingly, it can also be the proverbial push over the cliff into the abyss that has thousands of hopefuls trying to crawl up.

There was a counter-question that Dravid needed to be asked. With the five-Test series against England round the corner, a vital outing keeping in mind the World Test Championship calculations, aren’t Sharma and Kohli better off playing a Ranji game than a T20 series against Afghanistan?

One of the decision-makers, when asked about the Ishan situation, fished out that good old cliche. “Ishan remains in the scheme of things,” he would say.

It’s that stale carrot that gets historically dangled in front of all horses – those genuinely in race and also the ones practically out of it.

But what exactly is this “scheme”? It’s the same that the selectors have stuck with for years now. By including Rohit and Virat for the Afghanistan series, the selectors were making it clear that transition will have to wait. As has been India’s good old tradition of giving an unendingly long rope to seniors, the bold decision seems to have been pushed back. In Indian cricket, the barn door gets slammed only after the horses have bolted.

Only once, before the 2007 World T20, India took the courageous call of trusting a bunch of promising youngsters and a fresh leadership approach. But MS Dhoni’s historic win, with a team without Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly and Dravid, is considered an exception, a miracle that just happened. The success of that leap of faith didn’t inspire subsequent selection committees. They continued to take those mini hop-scotch jumps without going anywhere.

To be a true world leader, India’s decision-makers need to keep pace with the ever-evolving cricket, and more importantly the cricketers. Those in the know say that the Indian team management was insensitive to the frustration that Ishan faced while being benched for a long time. Mental fatigue is a Western concept, and we, the relentless toilers, never face such frivolous trauma – was the thought process.

Ishan was also blamed for not taking his non-selection in the right spirit. The leadership wants the Ishans of the world to be grinning widely, running enthusiastically with drinks while waiting on the fringes. Even when the seniors get undeserving extensions, the juniors shouldn’t sulk but do joyous cartwheels for the sake of the team. They shouldn’t even take a break from the game and post happy pictures from Dubai. That’s not what good juniors do, feel India’s decision-makers. Ok boomer.

Send your feedback to sandydwivedi.com