Harbhajan's injured? Go figure--Sanjay Manjrekar

[rkt.india]

I am a little surprised the news that Harbhajan Singh was dropped from the tour of Australia and then missed his next Ranji Trophy game because of a shin injury didn't make the headlines it should have. A week later, we learn he may be out for a long time because the scans have revealed the injury is a lot more serious than it was originally thought to be. The obvious question here is: what if Harbhajan had been selected for the tour of Australia? Before the squad was picked, his form had been an issue, not his fitness. So it is fair to assume that had he been selected, he would possibly have made the trip to Australia carrying an injury serious enough to call for long-term rehabilitation. The way I see it, the injury has surfaced now because Harbhajan decided to bring it up by getting the scan done now. If he was on the touring party to Australia there would have been no injury because there would have been no scan. India's management of their players' fitness has left a lot to be desired over the years. It was an important reason why Indian cricket was humiliated in England earlier this year. If the curious case of Harbhajan's injury is ignored by the authorities and allowed to pass, an important lesson will not have been learned from the England tour. However, it has to be said the selectors are handling Zaheer Khan's current fitness issue and his comeback to international cricket quite professionally, and they should be complimented for it. Though I daresay it might not have been dealt with this way had it not been for England. Now that they seem to be on the right track with Zaheer, they should tackle Harbhajan's injury with the same attitude. For some time now we know there has been a convenient, unspoken arrangement between players and cricket boards with regard to excessive cricket. Players who wanted to give their very best for their country in every game but felt the prevailing international schedule made it impossible for them to do so, realised their complaints were falling on deaf ears as cricket was being driven by its market and the administrators were seemingly powerless to stop the juggernaut. So the players took a more pragmatic approach. Instead of taking on the boards to get the right balance between rest and play, they started taking their own "rest" and "injury" breaks, while their nation's cricket marched on. The boards obliged, as long as the series was played and their commitment to television to play a certain number of matches in a year was honoured. Indian TV companies wanted the Indian cricket team to play a certain number of matches and the composition of that team did not matter all that much to them. So it was a win-win situation. The established players started getting their much-needed breaks and India were still playing the required number of matches. The problem of excessive cricket taking its toll on star players was largely solved, because although India were playing a lot of International cricket, barring a couple or so, the rest of the top Indian stars were never as busy as the Indian team was. All they had to do was raise their hands and be promptly given their leave of absence. But this convenient arrangement led to an undesirable culture: of players deciding when they were fit and when not, rather than the decision being left to the coach or the board. Kevin Pietersen was not happy when he was rested for the one-dayers after a successful Test series against India, but that decision was taken because the ECB thought it was in the best interest of England's cricket. Harbhajan is unfit today because he decided to raise his hand now and excuse himself. If he had been on the trip to Australia, there would have been no shin injury - until, of course, the next time he decided to raise his hand. Where are the interests of Indian cricket amidst all this? http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/543717.html

[BeautifulGame]

One of the very few good article Manjaraker has written.100% agree.

[Texan]

Excellent job Manjrekar! What I like about this guy is he speaks his mind out. I know many Indian journalists would not dare to write such articles. Somebody had to say it. I hope the BCCI takes up this issue more seriously. Don't pick players who choose to skip domestic cricket and just want their past record to get them in the team.

[Tiger80]

Very good article :nice:

[Old guy]

nice article but i think things are improving england series was kind of blessing in disguise

[Needforspeed]

I feel, Ishant is still carrying an injury. When he came back from England he was talking about surgery on his foot...now miraculouslly he is OK. How come?

[rkt.india]

I feel' date=' Ishant is still carrying an injury. When he came back from England he was talking about surgery on his foot...now miraculouslly he is OK. How come?[/quote'] Surgery was not the last resort for Ishant. It was only if essential. Rest and rehab did well for him.

[Needforspeed]

Surgery was not the last resort for Ishant. It was only if essential. Rest and rehab did well for him.

Realy hope it is so. Australian pitches and grounds (big ones) call for absolute fitness.

[Old guy]

he seems to be fit if u can bowl at speed near 145.. ur body must be feeling fit otherwise u cant

[achilles]

Good article. Convenience in players talking about their injuries is the story of Indian cricket. A few months back, Zaheer was out for a while, Ishant was injured and Yuvraj was recovering from some injury. So the BCCI decided to field youngsters. These young boys rose to the occasion and suddenly, the seniors realize they may actually have to slug it out with the juniors to hold their spots. Surprisingly, every senior is now fit again, raring to go and has recovered from injury, without the surgery which they themselves said they required. I feel sorry for the players, who decide to play half-fit to ensure that the young kid on the block, doesn't steal the thunder and the place.

[putrevus]

The contract system was created so that players feel secure that if they don't play a match/ series due to injuries still they don't have be worried about getting paid. That system has been negated by these issues where players are still hiding their injuries to such an extent that it is affecting their performances on the field.So now we never know why these guys are under performing is it due to injuries or their from is bad. With so much cricket being played these days, they all will get enough matches to play, no need to hide injuries.

[Karan114]

Manjrekar spot on for once.

[BERGKAMP]

Well said SanjuManju.

[Sachinism]

Bizarre Analysis From Sanjay Manjrekar Kartikeya Date at Cricketingview did a little analysis of the article Sanjay Manjrekar has written a puzzling article on Cricinfo today. I say "puzzling", because it is not clear to me what his claim in it is, and what it is based on. Several events are at issue. First, India's squad for the upcoming Australia tour has been announced, and it does not include Harbhajan Singh. Second, Harbhajan Singh missed the next Ranji Trophy game that Punjab played after the team was announced, because of a shin injury. Third, it subsequently emerged that the shin injury was worse than initially imagined, and that Harbhajan Singh is now likely to miss the remainder of the league stage of the Ranji Trophy. Based on these three events, Manjrekar says the following: The obvious question here is: what if Harbhajan had been selected for the tour of Australia? Before the squad was picked, his form had been an issue, not his fitness. So it is fair to assume that had he been selected, he would possibly have made the trip to Australia carrying an injury serious enough to call for long-term rehabilitation. I must confess, that this question was not obvious to me at all, simply because it is easily answered. If Harbhajan Singh had been selected to tour Australia, and this injury had emerged, he would have been replaced. After all, isn't this what happened to Praveen Kumar? Praveen Kumar's name appears in the very same squad list for the Australian series that excludes Harbhajan Singh. Once it emerged that Praveen Kumar would not return to the ODI squad for the 4th and 5th games as he was originally scheduled to do, and that he would further not recover in time for the Australian series, his replacement was sought, and is, at the time of this writing, still being determined. It seems to me that Sanjay Manjrekar is suggesting that the injuries are really "injuries" - they exist only on paper, and not on the player's actual bodies. Though Manjrekar does not come out and say this clearly, his language is telling. What is so "curious" about the case of Harbhajan Singh in particular? Why does he not refer to the case of Praveen Kumar? If the subject of his article is poor management of injuries (whatever that means, but that's another story), then his focus on Harbhajan Singh is, to put it mildly, "curious". But it gets even more peculiar. Manjrekar goes on to say "So the players took a more pragmatic approach. Instead of taking on the boards to get the right balance between rest and play, they started taking their own "rest" and "injury" breaks, while their nation's cricket marched on" Manjrekar sees no consequential distinction between "rest" and "injury"! He seems to take each to mean "unavailability". Firstly, there is an obvious and clear distinction between "rest" and "injury". The former means that the player wants to take rest, while the latter means that the player is injured - he has some affliction which prevents him from playing. If he didn't have this affliction, he would have been able to play. When other boards do this, its called "rotation". Manjrekar does not get to his most interesting point until the very end. But this convenient arrangement led to an undesirable culture: of players deciding when they were fit and when not, rather than the decision being left to the coach or the board. The problem with this is that this assertion comes out of nowhere. He has done nothing until this point to establish that they are in fact doing so. Where does Manjrekar show, for example, that Harbhajan Singh's shin injury is nothing more than a conveniently timed event? The final paragraph is rank nonsense. It does not follow from or synthesize whatever preceded it. Harbhajan is unfit today because he decided to raise his hand now and excuse himself. If he had been on the trip to Australia, there would have been no shin injury - until, of course, the next time he decided to raise his hand. Where are the interests of Indian cricket amidst all this? That first sentence is ridiculous. Even if Harbhajan Singh has decided to take a break from cricket because he feels he's in bad form, and needs to tend to an injury, which, while not crippling, is nevertheless annoying, surely the former India off spinner is free to do so. What could possibly be wrong with such a decision? And what could be the basis for the type of insinuations Manjrekar is making? What are the interests of "Indian cricket", as Manjrekar calls it? This is never explained. As a work of journalism, this can only be called shabby. It does not contain a single piece of evidence, let alone convincing evidence. There is no reporting, But far worse than that, there is no identifiable shape to the argument. If it is at all possible, even worse, is the thinly veiled suggestion that Harbhajan Singh faked his injury. I wonder what actual journalists think about this kind of work. I cannot help but see Sanjay Manjrekar in the field of opinion journalism (which is distinct from ball-by-ball commentary) in the same way that I would see Govinda in Parliament. This is Page 3 gossip masquerading as a front page story. I really hope, for Manjrekar's sake, that he actually has evidence to back his story, and has only neglected to use it properly. In another culture, in another nation, Sanjay Manjrekar and Cricinfo might have been sued by Harbhajan Singh, his doctors and BCCI. In India, it will probably play out on twitter, if at all. As for Cricinfo, I wonder if Sambit Bal would have printed story this if it had come from a journalist, and not from a former India cricketer with a celebrated last name. Somehow, I doubt it. http://cricketingview.blogspot.com/2011/12/bizarre-analysis-from-sanjay-manjrekar.html

[achilles]

^ Fan-bwaaay?

[CoverDrive]

Bhajji does not have it in him to slog 1-2 years in domestic unglamorous circuit to make it back. he is banking on a decent IPL next year to get back in contention so will want to rest till then and maybe get in through T20 world T20 he is too much of a Star to work hard for his place.

[Desi Cartman]

IMO Bhajji declares himself injured whenever he wishes to take a break. He decided he was injured years ago against Aus @ home after seeing a green wicket and left in the middle of a test against Eng earlier this year.

[BERGKAMP]

The ultimate prima donna/diva.

[Sachinism]

^ Fan-bwaaay?

Yeh sounds it lol, but normally a good writer

[pensionplan]

Ha darty the shameless one who thinks playing for India as an entitlement and appearing in Ranji below his level. Thappad Singh O Thappad Singh.