top of page

By:

Bhalchandra Chorghade

11 August 2025 at 7:24:18 pm

Domestic Cricket: The Road to Team India

India needs a clear selection policy that establishes consistent standards for newcomers and established stars alike. Indian cricket’s domestic circuit has often been described as the foundation on which the national team is built. Yet, there is a need to reinforce a fundamental principle: a place in Team India must be earned through performance, not protected by reputation. Domestic cricket must remain the most credible proving ground for aspiring players, established stars, dropped...

Domestic Cricket: The Road to Team India

India needs a clear selection policy that establishes consistent standards for newcomers and established stars alike. Indian cricket’s domestic circuit has often been described as the foundation on which the national team is built. Yet, there is a need to reinforce a fundamental principle: a place in Team India must be earned through performance, not protected by reputation. Domestic cricket must remain the most credible proving ground for aspiring players, established stars, dropped cricketers and those returning after a break. For an aspiring cricketer, scoring runs in the Ranji Trophy or taking wickets in the Duleep Trophy should carry considerable weight in the selection process. Talent may open the door, but sustained performance in competitive conditions should determine whether a player deserves to walk through it. Reputation and potential cannot become permanent substitutes for runs, wickets and match-winning contributions. The same principle must apply to established international players. India needs a transparent selection policy that clearly establishes when a player is expected to return to domestic cricket, what performance benchmarks will be considered and under what circumstances an exemption may be granted. Without such consistency, selection risks appearing subjective. Different standards could be applied to established stars and those waiting for their first international opportunity. When a Test cricketer is dropped for poor form, returning to domestic cricket should be the natural next step. A few net sessions cannot replicate the pressure of a four-day or five-day contest. A batter needs to spend hours at the crease and negotiate different bowling spells. The player must also convert starts into substantial scores. A bowler needs to demonstrate rhythm, control and stamina, as well as the ability to sustain pressure across long spells. Domestic cricket provides evidence of improvement rather than merely an assurance that a player has been working on his game. Selection should therefore be linked to demonstrated form and readiness, rather than an automatic recall based on past achievements. There is an equally strong case for regular Test players to represent their state teams whenever the international calendar permits. Those who are rested or have a break between two Test series should consider domestic matches an opportunity, not an inconvenience. Red-ball cricket demands a temperament different from that required in shorter formats. The ability to leave deliveries, bat through difficult sessions and negotiate reverse swing cannot be developed entirely in the nets. Players must also learn to maintain concentration over several hours. The selection policy must distinguish between a player who is rested for workload management and one who is dropped for poor performance. A rested player should follow an appropriate preparation and match-readiness plan, while a dropped player should have a clear route back through competitive cricket. Injury-related exemptions must be based on medical advice. International commitments should also be accommodated through sensible scheduling. Most importantly, exemptions should not become privileges reserved for marquee players. If a young cricketer must score consistently in domestic cricket to earn a place, an established international should not be assured selection merely because he has delivered in the past. Seniority deserves respect, but it cannot guarantee a place in the playing XI. The Board of Control for Cricket in India and the selectors should establish clear expectations for participation in domestic red-ball competitions. Workload management, injury rehabilitation and national duty should be recognised as legitimate grounds for exemption. Such a policy would improve accountability, strengthen the Ranji Trophy and give selectors a more reliable basis for assessing form. Domestic cricket also benefits from the participation of international players. It allows younger cricketers to test themselves against experienced opponents and learn the demands of elite competition. Ultimately, domestic cricket should be neither a punishment for failure nor a ceremonial obligation. It must be an integral part of a cricketer’s professional life. Team India selection must be a merit-based process, not a privilege earned through reputation. For newcomers, domestic cricket is the route to recognition; for dropped players, it is the path to redemption; and for established stars, it is an opportunity to demonstrate that they remain worthy of the national colours.

Charity Contested

Correspondent
Oct 28, 2025
2 min read

When commerce collides with faith, it often leaves behind a trail of acrimony. Nothing illustrates this more clearly than the storm over the 3.5-acre plot in Pune’s Model Colony, a property belonging to the Seth Hirachand Nemchand Smarak Trust. What began as a Rs 311 crore redevelopment deal between the trust and Gokhale Landmarks LLP, a local construction firm, has now unravelled under the weight of religious sensitivities, political intrigue and public suspicion. On Sunday, the developer formally withdrew from the agreement, asking for the return of the Rs 230 crore it had already paid.


The trust’s land, housing a Jain hostel and the Shri Bhagwan Mahavir Digambar Jain Temple, is no ordinary real estate. It embodies the legacy of community philanthropy dating back to 1958, when the trust was established to serve students and pilgrims. Yet, like many urban charities sitting on valuable plots in India’s booming cities, it found itself tempted by the promise of redevelopment, which ostensibly designed to fund modern facilities but interpreted by critics as a sell-out.


Gokhale Landmarks insists it did everything by the book, securing the charity commissioner’s approval and following procedural norms. But compliance did not protect it from outrage.


The moral dimension is precisely what complicates the matter. Charitable land carries obligations beyond legal paperwork as it is held in trust for the public good. To many Jains, selling it to a developer, however well-intentioned, amounted to desecrating a sacred site. Their agitation grew after reports surfaced linking Union Minister Murlidhar Mohol to the deal. Though Mohol claims he exited the firm before any transaction occurred, the perception of impropriety stuck. Shiv Sena leader Ravindra Dhangekar, seized the issue to accuse his own ally - the BJP - of meddling in charitable affairs for private gain.


The controversy has since tested the uneasy camaraderie within Maharashtra’s ruling Mahayuti alliance. Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde had to step in, warning Dhangekar against public sniping that could hand ammunition to the Opposition. Shinde’s intervention underscored how fragile coalition etiquette becomes when religion and property intersect.


The Charity Commissioner of Mumbai has ordered a status quo on the deal and will decide whether Gokhale Landmarks will recover its payment. But the broader question is how should India govern the redevelopment of charitable and religious properties sitting atop valuable urban land? Cases like this are hardly rare. From church lands in Kerala to temple properties in Tamil Nadu, trusts find themselves caught between their founding missions and the lure - or necessity - of monetising real estate.


Urban expansion has turned pious holdings into prime assets, inviting scrutiny and scandal in equal measure. The state’s regulatory apparatus, often opaque and politicised, is ill-equipped to navigate the delicate balance between preserving heritage and enabling growth. The Jain hostel affair, with its mix of religious sentiment, bureaucratic oversight and political theatre, is only the latest reminder of that dysfunction.

Comments

bottom of page