One knock must not ensure permanent place

there is no point discussing the performance of the indian cricket team or the reasons for its losing a final for the umpteenth time in the last couple of years unless the india captain and the national selectors take a vow not to put their personal agendas aside or not to pander to the high and mighty in the cricket board. they all must realise that by feathering their nests they are ruining indian cricket.how many times do we, ad nauseum, keep saying that indian batting means sachin tendulkar and sourav ganguly. that's the case with most teams. you don't expect a team to come back after three of its top five batsmen fail to deliver. the only difference is that in the case of australia and south africa the middle-order and the tail try to give the side a fighting total if they can't bat the opposition out of the contest. in india's case once tendulkar is back the entire side seems to get paralysed, though in the just-ended tri-series, ganguly showed signs of form that had deserted him ever since he took over as captain. as former chairman of national selectors kishen rungta used to say, the real cricketer is one who picks himself and not the one pushed into the side by the selectors. if a player has it in him he will come good sooner or later and doesn't carry the tag of being talented and possessing immense potential series after series. why only players, even selectors have to be there only if they can pick themselves, not courtesy those careerist cricket politicians passing off as honorary administrators of the game. how else can one explain asking one of the selectors whether he would prefer to be a selector or would he like to be the administrative manager of the indian team! obviously, he weighed the perks of the two jobs and opted to be a selector, though the reason he gave is that managing a side involves much flying and that he hates the sight of a plane! the selectors and the captain, in particular, should realise that talent and potential can't be a treasure hunt for ever, some kind of an el dorado. giving ample opportunities to a player doesn't mean carrying him as part of the baggage. signing on a debonair-looking young man for his looks is okay, but an event-management company can't be performing for him through the good offices of the captain or the selectors. an odd knock once in a blue moon shouldn't ensure anybody a permanent place in the squad. the showing of some of the highly potential batsmen is so pathetic that the only person who is enjoying their misery is navjot sidhu who's ravelling in adding new expressions to his vocabulary. things have come to such a pass that the commentators have started counting cricketing shots some of the whiz kids play. it's all so stupid to rationalise the indian batting crash by attributing devils to the pitches or talking about the technical ineptitude of the batsmen by comparing the indian wickets with the one they encountered at kingsmead. then, of course, the experts will have to sympathise with ganguly for losing the toss and explain it away that had the indians bowled first they would have been in the same position as the south africans were! even if tendulkar's batsmanship is under microscope and he also needs pitches of his liking to score heavily, god save indian cricket. look at the way the squad for the three-test series has been selected. connor williams was confident that he would be in the side after two big knocks in the irani trophy, never mind the number of chances he got in his big first-innings hundred, and the selectors may justify the selection saying there must be someone from the national champion side! on the same token someone is going to ask for weightage for mumbai players as their side had won the ranji trophy more than any other side. there's a sneaky suspicion that eventually the captain might ask virender sehwag to open the innings, not williams since yuvraj singh is not there. the less said about the wicketkeepers the better. a country which seldom bothered about players being made to look like circus animals is today worried about the load a wicketkeeper has to bear, and included a second gloveman citing the side matches as an excuse instead of picking an extra spinner. it's strange, the captain has no faith in spinners other than kumble and harbhajan and the selectors have no choice but to have faith in ganguly. the selectors will tell you that it was the captain's choice and the captain will say it's better to keep a young 'keeper to learn the "tricks of the trade" whatever that may mean. the next thing one heard is the learner is out and a mainline batsman had to keep wickets, possibly to justify his own inclusion! if it is harsh on rahul dravid, it's insulting to nayan mongia to bring in his name every time the selectors meet. mongia must be wishing there's a vrs scheme in indian cricket!