One press conference by Shahid Afridi that BCCI and their selectors must watch

Here are a couple of lessons for the BCCI. The Chief Selector’s media interaction – now a forgotten tradition in Indian cricket – helps dispel doubts and curb speculation. Second, only high-profile selectors – an extinct breed in Indian cricket – can guide, second-guess and at times manage high-profile captains and coaches who are not always above reproach.

After the implementation of Justice RM Lodha’s committee reforms – which excluded commentators and IPL coaches due to potential conflict of interest – the BCCI has had to remove the barrel to name the selectors.

BCCI officials fought tooth and nail in court to extend their own tenure, but never asked to withdraw the appellants’ conflict clause. Nor did they make the national selector the highest paid employee of the BCCI, which would have attracted the cream of the crop.

This has had consequences. More recently in India, a country with 10 former cricketers and over 100 Tests to their name; The all-important task of choosing the national team has been left to those who do not have even a fraction of the team’s experience. The collective international experience of the BCCI selection committee has been significantly less than that of the captain and the coach alongside whom they sit to take important decisions.

View:

MSK Prasad or Chetan Sharma, the two recent chairman of selectors, are by no means members of Indian cricket’s Hall of Famers. During their playing days, they did not excel as great leaders, great visionaries or out-of-the-box thinkers. Prasad was not Dhoni behind the stumps. Sharma will always be remembered as Kapil Dev’s understudy.

Prasad and Sharma along with other teams of humble cricketers have been part of the gathering which also features giants of the game – Virat Kohli, Rohit Sharma and Rahul Dravid. So what are the odds that modestly successful international cricket selectors would have led this star-studded team?

Maybe they could have. But recent evidence suggests that the chances are slim. Remember the media reports of former president and former Indian captain Sourav Ganguly’s unconstitutional presence at selection meetings and alleged “bullying” of voters. None of the debilitated voters walked out or went public with their grudges. They just nodded silently. It wasn’t surprising at all, they were just sticking to an old tradition.

Cricket, like most sports, has a deep-rooted hierarchy. “How many Tests have you played?” – is still the favorite used by responsible players when dealing with journalists. Even the “those who have played” circle has a pecking order. Over 100 test instruments are the gold standard, the resident of the top floor. The rest, depending on their international tours, line up below.

As a rule, the one with the most international games is heard the most at the players’ meeting. The only opinion that matters is that of the one who played the most. To confirm this claim, listen to ex-players in the comments section next time. If you keep your ears sharp, you can catch those subtle nods and condescending drops when the junior tries to argue with the senior.

So the selection committee needs well-travelled, seasoned professionals, undisputed masters of the game. This is because captains and coaches need to be questioned. Over a period of time, while the captains are comfortable on the throne, they form troops. Shared agents, common interests and friends can lead to captains giving longer ropes to undeserving players and even hiding their injuries.

Ever since India exited the T20 World Cup in the semi-finals, there has been speculation in the committee. (FILE)

This results in deserving youngsters cooling their heels at home. The job of the voters is to raise the flag, to be a strong neutral voice of reason. They must be devil’s advocates and conscious watchmen as well. They should intervene to break these cliques.

Afridi has done just that. In a press conference, he revealed the circumstances in which the team’s MVP, vice-captain and Babar’s Man Friday Shadab Khan were not present. A day before the announcement, Afridi called the all-rounder to check on his fitness.

“Shadab bola, Shahidbhai mai Khel jaunga, koi maslaa Nahi hai (Shadab said, Shahidbhai, I can play, no problem). But I refused, told him to go to the ground next morning and bowl. So today before the meeting he called me and we came to know, that there was discomfort in his finger,” Afridi had told the media. Had it not been for Afridi’s aura and work as a selector, Shadab would not have been asked to bowl in the nets, the semi-fit star might even have made the cut.

Only Lala could have done that. What about Chetan Sharma? Could she have the captain’s pet take a fitness test against her will?

The change of guard in Pakistan cricket also saw Babar’s old partner, his opening partner and player of all forms till now, Mohammad Rizwan, sit out the Tests. His place was taken by batsman and former captain Sarfraz Ahmed.

In the past, conspiracy theorists have said that Babar did not want Sarfraz in the team because he feared a parallel powerhouse would form around the veteran. Afridi also sprung in the clutch. Sarfraz, he said, was there for Tests and could not be considered a white ball because it was Rizwan’s turf.

Only Lala could have done that. What about Chetan Sharma? Do we know who is India’s No. 1 wicketkeeper in Tests, ODIs or T20s?

Even on the controversial issue of Sharjeel Khan’s return after his match-fixing ban, Afridi was clear. He said that the only reason why Sharjeel was in the probable 24 was because of his stellar performance in domestic cricket. But when the PCB’s top brass objected, there was a change. I will be very direct, we did not get a green signal from the chairman about what had happened in Dubai, he said.

Afridi also repeated a line about Babar that he has been parroting ever since he was appointed selector. “Babar is a great batsman, now we all have to support him to become a great captain too,” he said. It was a matter-of-fact statement, a realistic assessment that the Pakistan batsman was not the omniscient god of cricket.

Only Lala could have done that. What about Chetan Sharma? The world does not know the selection committee’s view on Kohli’s captaincy.

Afridi’s appointment is short-term as he is busy with the work of his foundation. It remains to be seen whether mercury will replace the universal game length selector.

Both India and Pakistan need to be at their best as selectors as many of their recent disasters in ICC events have been down to wrong selections, incorrect injury assessments and the inability of the team management to make bold calls.

The game is changing. India and Pakistan have been slow to realize that the selection criteria for each format must be different. Tough calls must be accepted. In order to displace the famous ones, there should be famous selectors first. This decisive position requires visionaries, not appeasers and nods. Becoming a chairman requires you to know the feeling of the hot seat.