Assessing the chief selector Srikkanth : The man without a plan

[Feed]

As Kris Srikkanth's tenure as the chairman of India's selection committee comes to an end, Sanjay Dixit, writing in DNA, analyses his performance. Judging him on a number of categories, he says Srikkanth's devil-may-care attitude might have been his hallmark as an opener, but the same approach didn't help him as a selector. More... Kris Srikkanth — The man without a plan Sanjay Dixit Agency: DNA | Saturday, September 15, 2012 Flashback: Kris Srikkanth the player; the dashing opener, with a devil-may-care attitude. His abiding image is that of the man taking on the might of Andy Roberts, Malcolm Marshall, Joel Garner and Michael Holding in the final of the 1983 World Cup. An image of the man given to making habitual facial gestures and getting on with it. Srikkanth the chief selector exuded much the same image. Though his tenure had its highs and lows (and it must be said that the selection of an Indian team is a collective effort), he rarely rose above that impetuous image. It had probably more to do with the way he communicated than the way he did his job. It is a very difficult job to assess the performance of a selector over four years. The selection of a team should ideally be a process and not an event where five wise men just sit around and confabulate. Even though the BCCI made the right moves in professionalising the panel and making them run around the circuit, the existing system of zonal representation of selectors did negate a lot of those good intentions. Mix that with a complete lack of communication from the chief of selectors, an absence of articulation of intent and vision, and you get a perfect recipe for an opaque institution. Srikkanth, caught in that opacity, ever remained the inscrutable face of the sphinx. He had his high when India won the World Cup after 28 years, but that quickly evaporated when India rivalled their abysmal performances of the 1960s by losing eight away Tests on the trot. He succeeded Dilip Vengsarkar in 2008, who was courting controversies by the dozen by being on the other extreme of the articulation spectrum. During Srikkanth’s four years four years, 16 players made their Test debut and 17 new players donned the ODI jersey. It is also the period when Sourav Ganguly, Anil Kumble, Rahul Dravid and VVS Laxman hung up their boots. His tenure also marked the twilight of ‘The Great Indian Test Team’ of the last decade. Now coming to the problem of fixing the parameters for assessing his performance. In my view, a good selection committee is one which views selection as a process. Towards this, it has to firstly have a very good roadmap and follow it consistently. Secondly, it must identify potential players for each spot and have a communication line open with them. The idea is to optimise potential. Thirdly, it must have a very good performance appraisal system, giving due weightage to conditions in which the said performances have been achieved. Fourthly, it should not sit isolated, sphinx-like, but interact with administrators, coaches and physios to find out the reasons for below-par results, and play an advisory role in getting optimum performances. Fifthly and very importantly, it should not have any biases. Roadmap On the first count, I do not rate Srikkanth very highly. If he had a roadmap, nobody saw it. He did maintain a fair modicum of consistency in ODI selection in the run-up to the World Cup. However, I cannot fathom the logic of selecting players like Abhishek Nayar, Pankaj Singh, Naman Ojha, Saurabh Tiwary, Abhimanyu Mithun, and Ashok Dinda and then dropping them without giving them a fair run. We were all surprised when Tiwary, who was touring with India ‘A’, got picked for national duty. He missed such a wonderful opportunity of getting exposure with the ‘A’ team. And what happened to him then? He was dropped after three ODIs and banished into the woods. Mithun is another poignant case of potential wasted thanks to selection idiosyncrasies. His performance on Test debut in Sri Lanka, on unhelpful wickets, was noteworthy. Yet, he has not been persisted with. Pankaj’s case, of course, is one of regional bias. This happens to boys who come from smaller centres or associations whose officials do not have sufficient clout in BCCI. Rajasthan is only the fifth team to have won the Ranji Trophy in the tournament’s 78-year history, but look at the treatment its players have got. While the Jalaj Saxenas and Naman Ojhas get selected, the Robin Bists, Vinit Saxenas and Pankaj Singhs remain out of favour.Delhi won the Ranji Trophy in 2008, but Aakash Chopra continued to remain out of favour even as Murali Vijay was fast-tracked into the opener’s slot. It is another matter that he was found wanting. In the Test arena too, it was baffling to see some of the selections, but even more baffling was the haste with which such selections were reversed. S Badrinath, Mithun, Abhinav Mukund, Jaydev Unadkat, Varun Aaron, R Vinay Kumar and Praveen Kumar are all being played around like a game of roulette. Nobody knows the why and wherefore of this lack of a roadmap and inconsistency. Only Chet-eshwar Pujara, R Ashwin, Pragyan Ojha and Virat Kohli have become stable among Srikkanth’s selectees, which is four out of 16. So 4 out of 10 on the first count. Communication The less said the better. Srikkanth is difficult to approach, said everyone. I was the manager of the India ‘A’ in England. Mithun was the original fast bowling spearhead, but was picked for national duty. Ishant Sharma was coming from injury and needed match practice. Two of Srikkanth’s colleagues were also with the team. The tour selection committee requested for Ishant, thinking that besides bolstering our own firepower, Ishant could regain match fitness. The selectors agreed with us and called Cheeka, who just shrugged it off. It is another matter that Ishant struggled in the next Test series because he was not match fit. So Srikkanth will get only 1 out of 10 on this count. Performance appraisal system Cheeka will struggle to tell us if he even knows what a performance appraisal system means. This system, if at all it existed, must have existed in Srikkanth’s mind. He pretty much conducted the meetings of selection committee in the manner he batted in his prime — without a plan and without a care in the world. It helped, of course, that the BCCI system was favourable, or he would have been shown the exit door much earlier. Advisory role On the fourth count, the performance would be counted as average for the committee as a whole but for Srikkanth, nothing epitomised the lack of communication more than the Laxman retirement saga. Bias On the fifth count, Srikkanth would be guilty of sins of omission more than of commission. One has to see the selection of ‘A’ and ‘Emerging Players’ teams to get a flavour of this. As these selections attract less media glare, playing favourites is less onerous for a selector. Some of the selections in these games have been nothing short of scandalous. C Ganapathy, Jalaj Saxena, Naman Ojha, Jaskaran Singh, Bipul Sharma, Akshay Darekar, Kedar Jadhav. Forget the selections, nobody knows why people are picked and not persisted with thereafter. The curious case of Ishank Jaggi, who went to an Emerging Players tour and has been banished thereafter in spite of a stellar domestic record, or Pankaj Singh, or for that matter Dhaval Kulkarni! Some of Srikkanth’s Rest of India selections leave one equally bemused. Regional bias becomes apparent when virtually every Tamil Nadu player, including his son, makes it to the top teams including Team India and the twice champion side struggles to put even a handful of their players up in the highest spheres. Srikkanth could not rise above parochial considerations and give-and-take method of selections. So it’s 13 out of 50. Five grace marks for the World Cup triumph and the grand total swells to 18. At 36%, it is barely passing marks. India deserves a lot better.

[vvvslaxman]

Interesting details. Not the rn of the mill appraisal

[Sooda]

In dont think some of the names he points at as being 'scandalous' are quite so bad- Ganapathy, Ojha and Darekar at least had good domestic seasons and were rewarded. But overall good points, how many points does the selection comittee deserve for the WC win, really?? The Indian team for a lot of it picked it self- the trickier selections namely- pace 'pool', spinners- especially earlier on when it revolved around Bhajji, and A/EPT side were all very poorly handled

[Crookbond]

It's coming to a point where I am not expecting BCCI to handle things correctly at all.

[PaceAttack]

Srikkanth was stupid in his selections, but don't expect people like Pankaj singh, Abhishek Nayar, Pankaj Singh, Naman Ojha, Saurabh Tiwary, Abhimanyu Mithun, and Ashok Dinda to be persisted with. None of them look like international players to be honest.

[BeautifulGame]

In dont think some of the names he points at as being 'scandalous' are quite so bad- Ganapathy, Ojha and Darekar at least had good domestic seasons and were rewarded. But overall good points, how many points does the selection comittee deserve for the WC win, really?? The Indian team for a lot of it picked it self- the trickier selections namely- pace 'pool', spinners- especially earlier on when it revolved around Bhajji, and A/EPT side were all very poorly handled

The most trickiest selection was that Yuvi. Plenty in the media critized his selection saying both his form and fitness are poor. But selectors stuck with him for which they deserve huge credit. Same for Dhoni who promoted Yuvi in the England match when there was no pressure which helped Yuvi regain his form.

[rkt.india]

The curious case of Ishank Jaggi, who went to an Emerging Players tour and has been banished thereafter in spite of a stellar domestic record, or Pankaj Singh, or for that matter Dhaval Kulkarni! Some of Srikkanth’s Rest of India selections leave one equally bemused.

[jairamesh]

The mismanagement of India A and Emerging Players squads and the lack of any semblance of consistency and rewarding good performances with call up to senior squad was just pathetic. Case: Pujara and Rahane should have not waited so long for their international debuts, the latter still lingering about. Both put in fantastic performances for India A in 2010, yet selectors had already earmarked Rohit and Raina for Tests spots without ever proving themselves on these A tours. We already have likes of Awana and Shami looking likely to follow similar paths, just hope new selectors are different.

[MUMBAISKIPPER]

All he wants are players from Tamil Nadu to represent India.....such a biased fellow....forget the skills and class of a player,the selection criteria for Mr.Srikanth is that the player should be a Tamil....Clowns like Murali Vijay, Dinesh Kartik, R.Ashwin, Balaji are all in the team...courtesy Mr.Srikanth,the Anna from Tamil Nadu

[saket123]

I totally disagree with this appraisal..especially the allegation of bias. Typical indian mentality.... when we are losing.. we HAVE to assign blame....Indians have this notion that every time some one is always to be blamed for anything bad. None of us will be having this discussion if we were consistently winning. We win some.. we lose some.. and sometimes we lose more than we win... It's how it is. Deal with it!

[cricketpitch]

All he wants are players from Tamil Nadu to represent India.....such a biased fellow....forget the skills and class of a player' date='the selection criteria for Mr.Srikanth is that the player should be a Tamil....Clowns like Murali Vijay, Dinesh Kartik, R.Ashwin, Balaji are all in the team...courtesy Mr.Srikanth,the Anna from Tamil Nadu[/quote'] What a load of tripe, M Vijay deserved his place in the test squad before he went off boil and so did R Ashwin (He has done brilliantly in tests and ODI). Dinesh Karthik was there in the Indian team prior to Srikkanth taking over (He made his debut in 2004/05 season). He was considered as India's second best keeper after Dhoni for a long time before Saha took over (Which was in Srikkanth tenure). Balaji just got a chance this year after so many years due to his performances in IPL 2012. There is no bias. Stop crying foul just because he is from Tamil Nadu. How could we forget overrated kanitkar playing on for 34 games for an average of 17 during the late 90's. No one cried foul during that time.

[skindia]

uthappa didnt get single chance in odi in last 4 years despite good performance in challenger trophies.

[The Outsider]

Anirudha Srikkanth is the only thing one needs to know to assess what the level of douchebagness this nepotistic fracker brought to Indian cricket.

[vayuu1]

He is a man without vision,kash mohinder paaji selector bante,

[Silva]

As bad as the national selection is imagine how bad it is at the local level? If we had a stronger domestic competition the selection process who be common sense and we wouldn't really need a selector.

[Silva]

The most trickiest selection was that Yuvi. Plenty in the media critized his selection saying both his form and fitness are poor. But selectors stuck with him for which they deserve huge credit. Same for Dhoni who promoted Yuvi in the England match when there was no pressure which helped Yuvi regain his form.

Yeah but being smarter than the media is not that big of a deal. If people actually saw yuvi before the WC they would notice he improved a lot when it came to bowling and the reason why he kept getting out cheaply was because our top order kept collapsing and forcing yuvi to be defensive which not something he likes doing. He is world class when he is finishing. Not consolidation.