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.

Let Them Be Children

Writer: Ruddhi Phadke
Ruddhi Phadke
Jul 17, 2025
4 min read

Relationships, emotions, sexual curiosity, jealousy, and much more—the terms sound very complex, and we would mostly associate them with teenagers who are just starting college. Interestingly, experts point out that this age bracket is shifting. While open conversations between parents and children have made parenting easier, they’ve also brought new challenges. With early exposure and easy access to all sorts of entertainment, the dynamics of adolescence are changing. In an interview with ‘The Perfect Voice’, Dr. Sachi Pandya, a psychologist at NH SRCC Children’s Hospital, shared her observations on how and why innocence among children is shrinking. Excerpts…


Adolescence is changing: from hiding relationships to confronting them openly, even in school. Your thoughts?

Adolescence has always been a period of exploration, identity formation, and boundary-testing. What’s changing is not the emotional intensity of adolescence, but the context in which it's unfolding. With increased exposure to social media, digital influences, and pop culture, relationships—especially romantic ones—have become more visible, performative, and accessible. What might earlier have been whispered among close friends is now discussed openly, even brought into institutional spaces like school. While this reflects growing confidence and openness in young people, it also illustrates the importance of deeper emotional literacy. Beneath the drama, there are still vulnerable teens learning about love, attachment, jealousy, and communication, often without the emotional tools to do so.


Girls as young as 7 years old are wearing heavy makeup, backless dresses, etc., for parties. Are we losing innocence among children too early? What factors are responsible?

What we’re seeing isn’t just a fashion trend but a deeper shift in how children see themselves and are seen. Today, appearance is often tied to value. The loss of innocence isn’t because children have changed—it’s because the world around them has sped up. Body awareness begins as early as age 3 to 5, and by age 6 or 7, children are increasingly conscious of how they look and how others respond. By middle childhood, they’re not only aware of body shape, skin tone, height, or weight—they also begin forming ideas about what’s “good,” “acceptable,” or “beautiful.” This is a sensitive stage, where comments from adults, peers, or media can shape self-esteem. Offhand remarks like “you’ve grown so big,” or “you should smile more”, or comparisons with others, can affect how children see themselves. Without protective, affirming messages, they may internalise narrow, unrealistic beauty ideals and feel inadequate. Media, influencers, beauty filters, ads, and even parenting styles can fuel this pressure, often before a child truly knows who they are. Rather than placing blame, we must ask: Are we giving children the space to be children? Are we letting them grow slowly, explore their inner worlds, and feel safe in their bodies, free from pressure to perform or impress?


Children are more open with their parents now about their relationships. Are there any adverse psychological impacts of such openness?

This openness is undoubtedly a positive shift. Adolescents today are more willing to share feelings, talk about crushes or relationships, and seek guidance from parents—something earlier generations often hid out of fear or shame. This reflects not just changing children, but evolving parenting styles. Parents are increasingly becoming safe spaces, and that’s a gift. But with openness comes responsibility: parents must now offer sound guidance, emotional support, and age-appropriate boundaries. It’s not enough to be open—we must also be wise. Adolescents are still developing emotionally and cognitively. Their understanding of romance, intimacy, loyalty, or heartbreak is still taking shape. They may not yet grasp the weight of certain situations or the emotional fallout of early exposure to adult dynamics. That’s why it’s vital to teach the difference between safe and unsafe behaviours. Children must know they can say no to touch, pressure, or anything uncomfortable. They need the language and confidence to make healthy, informed choices. Today, dating terms like "breadcrumbing", "ghosting", and "orbiting" often normalise ambiguous or unhealthy behaviours, turning emotionally distressing patterns into casual trends. From a psychological lens, this can desensitise adolescents to emotional hurt, reduce empathy, and disrupt the development of truly intimate, respectful connections. Earlier generations may have been more secretive, but there was also a sense of maryada—a cultural emphasis on dignity and boundaries. While we need not return to silence or shame, we can revive that spirit of sanctity. Love and relationships are beautiful, but they also call for readiness, responsibility, and self-awareness.


Are children missing out on childhood fun by being overboard with romance due to media influence?

Yes, children today often bear the burden of early emotional complexity. When the media glorifies romance as central to growing up, it can overshadow the simple joys of friendship, curiosity, silliness, and imaginative play. Romantic ideals, heartbreak, or pressure to “have someone” can crowd out tree climbing, doodling, or silly games. Children deserve the chance to grow up slowly, to linger in innocence before navigating emotional intimacy. The answer isn’t restriction but re-enchantment—reviving play, nature, creativity, and spaces where children can simply be. As adults, caregivers, and professionals, our role is to honour both the reality of the times and the timeless need of childhood for room to breathe.

Comments

bottom of page