DO THE ENDS JUSTIFY THE MEANS?

Knock! Knock! Who's there?

by R Kaushik • Last updated on

Since his unbeaten 303 in Chennai. Karun Nair has played only three more Tests, and none since Dharamsala, in March 2017. © Getty

In the summer of 1986, Kapil Dev's India were chasing a series victory, their first in England for 15 years. Armed with a gun batting unit and a bowling group brilliantly equipped to exploit the seamer-friendly conditions, they schooled the hosts by five wickets in the first Test at Lord's. The architect of that victory was Chetan Sharma, whose 5 for 64 on the opening day of the series set the tone for what was to follow.

When the teams travelled to Leeds for the second Test a little over a week later, the Haryana medium-pacer with the quirky action was rendered unavailable with back spasms. A readymade, like-for-like replacement was at Dev's behest in the form of Manoj Prabhakar, the feisty all-rounder. Instead, the skipper pulled the Madan Lal rabbit out of the hat, summoning the experienced hand from the anonymity of league cricket in England. Lal didn't let his skipper down, scoring handy runs in both innings lower down the order, either side of a burst of 3 for 18 in the England first innings. Dilip Vengsarkar was the headline act with 61 and 102 not out in a game in which no other batsman touched 40, but Lal had justified his left-field inclusion as India romped home by 279 runs to take a winning 2-0 lead in the three-match series.

In the immediacy of that result, Dev proclaimed, "Manoj Prabhakar was unhappy. I was looking for more depth and experience in bowling. Madan Lal was already playing in England, so he came and delivered. I would have been criticised if he had failed."

It was a slight Prabhakar never forgot. Not even when his career ended a decade later, with upwards of 250 wickets and nearly 3500 runs in international cricket. His contention was that if he was good enough to be in the Test squad, he was good enough to also command a place in the playing XI. And that the ends, Lal's performances, did not justify the means - his own shock exclusion.

It is unlikely that Karun Nair will ever ape Prabhakar vocally, but if the same maelstrom of emotions are sweeping through the 26-year-old batsman, it is perfectly understandable. Nair's has been an extraordinary story thus far. In December 2016, he became only India's second Test triple-centurion, cruising to an unexpected unbeaten 303 against England in Chennai. Since then, he has played only three more Tests, and none since Dharamsala against Australia in March 2017.The powers that be seemed to have been swayed enough by his Ranji Trophy performances for Karnataka in the season gone by - 612 runs at 68, inclusive of three centuries - when they brought him back for the one-off Test against Afghanistan in Bengaluru this June, at the expense of Rohit Sharma. MSK Prasad, the chairman of selectors, had told this writer then that the move was triggered with an eye on the five-Test series in England later in the summer. Nair didn't play the Afghanistan Test, nor did he make his expected comeback in England.

The intrigue, of course, doesn't end there. Prior to the England Tests, Nair had led India A during the unofficial 'Tests' against Windies A and hosts England Lions, thus accelerating his acclimatisation process. He made attractive runs - two half-centuries and a 42 in six digs - and had set himself up as the reserve middle-order batsman for the Test series, only to see his dream rudely shattered by the few wise men.

In one of the increasingly bizarre moves beginning to become commonplace, the selection panel thrust Hanuma Vihari into the squad for the fourth and fifth Tests, in place of Kuldeep Yadav, the left-arm wrist-spinner. Vihari is primarily a top-order batsman for Hyderabad and now -- not coincidentally -- for Andhra. Logic suggested that should a middle-order place open up in the Test eleven, Nair would be the automatic first choice. Instead, when Hardik Pandya was dropped for the final Test at The Oval, it was Vihari who broke through. As if in celebration, he made a half-century in his maiden innings, and dismissed Alastair Cook in the latter's last hit in Test cricket. Do the ends justify the means?

Vihari is a wonderful lad, a hard-working cricketer who averages close to 60 in first-class cricket and smashed a triple-ton in the Ranji Trophy last season. He has been a consistent performer for India A across formats and, at 24, is clearly one for the future. But his present hasn't been so glorious as to plant giant seeds of self-doubt and negativity in Nair, at 26 wondering if his Chennai heroics are more a millstone than a milestone.

It is unclear if the selectors/team management have had a chat with Nair to explain the rationale behind his continued omission despite impressive numbers. Or, what that explanation entailed, if it did transpire.

What is certain is that the chief selector has been in touch with Mayank Agarwal, the prolific Karnataka opener whose mountain of runs haven't moved the decision-makers, yet. Between November last year and the start of this month, in a 10-month period, the 27-year-old has stacked up upwards of 3,000 runs in senior cricket. In fact, he amassed scores of 304 not out, 176, 23, 90, 133 not out, 173 and 134 in November 2017 alone in the Ranji Trophy. That amounted to 1,033 runs in a four-week period as Agarwal finished the season with 1,160 runs. The second-highest scorer last season, Faiz Fazal, had 912 runs to his name.

Agarwal backed up his Ranji heroics with a season-high 723 runs in the 50-over Vijay Hazare Trophy, smashed two centuries for India A in the triangular series in England this summer, followed it up with 220 against South Africa A in an unofficial Test at the M. Chinnaswamy Stadium in early August, which preceded 236 runs in four outings in the Quadrangular A series and culminated in scores of 80 and 47 in a four-day game against Australia A earlier this month. He has been told that his time will come, that he is on the radar of the selectors. It is such erudition and clarity of thinking that enhance our faith in the selection process. The fast-tracking of the supremely gifted and precocious Prithvi Shaw is well-merited, but is Agarwal destined for a life on the sidelines, never mind the quantum and the quality of runs against varied oppositions in different formats?

There is a sense of despondency and persecution in cricketing circles within Karnataka, and probably with no little justification. The treatment meted out to Nair and Agarwal is enough to get their goat, but what of KL Rahul and Manish Pandey, the two middle-order batsmen playing the dead Asia Cup rubber against Afghanistan on Tuesday, only because Rohit and Shikhar Dhawan are being rested? In August last year, when the team for the five-match ODI series in Sri Lanka was announced, Prasad emphasised that Rahul was being groomed for the No. 4 spot. The classy 26-year-old has played only six of India's 30 ODIs between then and now; he has batted at two-drop a mere thrice. Rahul has now been picked as the reserve opener, behind Rohit and Dhawan, while the frantic hunt for the occupant of the No. 4 position continues with the World Cup no more than eight months away. Wouldn't Rahul have been better off playing in the Hazare Trophy instead of looking on from the outer, given that India have decent makeshift opening options at the Asia Cup in Ambati Rayudu and Dinesh Karthik in an emergency?

And why not try out Manish Pandey at No. 4? Why not try him out at all? In 22 ODI appearances, Pandey averages 39.27 and strikes at 93.10. He has seen Rayudu and Kedar Jadhav take their places in the eleven after clearing the Yo-Yo test and recovering from injury respectively, while his own international record as well as his recent form have gone unnoticed.

Pandey led India B to the quixotically named Quadrangular A series title in Bengaluru last month, finishing as the tournament's highest scorer with 306 runs from four matches. While his strike-rate was an impressive 100.99 in occasionally tricky batting conditions, he couldn't manage an average, like you can't when you put together scores of 95 not out, 21 not out, 117 not out and 73 not out. Many of these entertaining runs were conjured with at least one member of the selection panel in attendance, the unbeaten 73 in front of a global television audience. Unless the travelling selector is no longer a member of the tour selection panel, Pandey ought to have been a shoo-in. Recent form, it would seem, is only a yardstick convenient.

There is much to admire and appreciate about a system that, contrary to popular belief, is anything but self-sustaining. It is no coincidence that India continue to unearth shimmering gems, and flirt with the pedestal in all formats. But man-management and handling of talent leaves a great deal to be desired. Mere lip service to meritocracy won't suffice.

© TNN

TAGS