Blogs Rest;euphemism for dropping players.
October 28th, 2007 by varinmuldiyar“Rahul dravid has been rested for first two matches against Pakistan,” said one selector. We all know that he was also asked to take “rest” before the final one day match against Australia in recent future cup. And our favourite “dada” has been rested so many times before.
Frankly speaking, I don’t understand this whole idea of rest, especially when the player is physically fit. There has to be a valid reason for a player to rest; injury or discomfort. Otherwise why would you ask a sportsperson to rest when he is fit to play?
In fact, the board of cricket in India hides behind such vague expressions so as not to be accountable for its actions. If the replacement does not work, then they can always say that they had no choice. And the player rested has to keep mum, otherwise he risks losing his place in future as well.
It sickens me to death, when I think about the way selectors go about doing their job. There is no accountability or professionalism in the system. Why can’t they put their hands up and say that they have dropped a particular player on account of his poor performance. Why do they have to invent such silly expressions ‘ has been given rest’ when they want to drop a player. The reason could be many apart from his performance. It could be their “collective wisdom” or shall we say collective foolhardiness. It is one of the same things.
I strongly believe that not only players but selectors should also have to be accountable for their decisions. If the team doesn’t perform well for an extended period then the chairman of selector should take responsibility and tender his resignation or should be axed. We all know what need to be said; he has been rested.
October 28th, 2007 at 7:48 pm
Fantastic blog. Really enjoyed reading it. I agree with you all the way varinmuldiyar. I am personally not happy with the whole selection “process” myself. Resting Dravid and selecting Sehwag, when Sehwag, to my knowledge has done nothing either domestically or otherwise to deserve a recall. If they had to recall someone then they could have/should have, chosen Suresh Raina.
Now the most interesting part is selecting the playing 11. Who would be there and in what batting order?
October 29th, 2007 at 2:10 am
I agree with you on that. It’ll be really interesting to see if Shewag at all gets a chance to play. I don’t see Dravid playing any one-day match against pakistan unless batting order capitulates. Gautam Gambhir will be team’s first choice to open with Sachin. He needs to fail twice for Sehwag to get a chance.
October 30th, 2007 at 8:48 pm
As some of you must have read on cricinfo et al. quite a few of the senior Indian cricketers are heavily criticizing Dilip Vengasarkar for dropping Dravid in such a “planned” manner. From all the remarks you can clearly see that there is something more to it than just “get back your form and fitness”.
I clearly remember “Colonel” Dilip Vengasarkar selecting Irfan Pathan, saying that he is fit to play, just to find out that he would be missing the following matches due to fitness issues. He has also randomly but persistently selected Sehwag, that too for playing in the middle order when Sehwag is completely out of form (just like now).
Please take a moment to read my following blog written on May 13th and let me know your thoughts.
No idea how Sehwag is still holding on to his spot?
October 30th, 2007 at 9:00 pm
For whatever it is worth I read elsewhere on the web that there is a ego clash between Dravid and Vengsarkar and that Dravid was pushed from captaincy, now that is beginning to make some sense…
November 1st, 2007 at 2:40 am
I’ve posted a blog too, on the same topic.
Selectors’ impulsive moves taking Indian Cricket backward:
http://sandeeppatilsblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/selectors-impulsive-moves-taking-indian.html
Do leave a comment on the post if you like it
- Sandeep