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.

‘Now, political defections possible without losing seat’

Quaid Najmi
Jan 10
3 min read

The recent ‘experiments’ in Ambernath and Akot civic bodies have created a political storm. Renowned legal expert, Barrister Vinod Tiwari, President of Council for Protection of Rights (CPR), gives a perspective to the row while interacting with Quaid Najmi. Excerpts...

What is the Anti-Defection Law under the Indian Constitution?

The Anti-Defection Law is part of the Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution. It was introduced through the 52nd Constitutional Amendment in 1985. The main purpose is to stop elected representatives – MPs and MLAs - from switching political parties after elections for personal/political gain.


It aims to ensure political stability, respect the mandate of voters, and prevent unethical political practices. Under this law, an elected representative can be disqualified if he/she voluntarily gives up the party membership or vote against their party’s official direction (whip). There are limited exceptions, like when two-thirds of a party’s members agree to merge with another party. The Speaker or Chairman decides disqualification cases, but their decisions can be reviewed by courts.

 

Is there a similar Anti-Defection law for local bodies in Maharashtra?

Keeping in mind the spirit of the Tenth Schedule, Maharashtra enacted the Maharashtra Local Authority Members’ Disqualification Act, 1986 (enforced in 1987). It applies to Municipal Councils and other local bodies and was meant to stop the elected councillors from hopping across parties post-elections, and preserve the voters’ mandate at the local level.

 

Why is there so much unrest in the 2025-2026 civic bodies elections?

The root cause lies in post-poll alliances, which have been made legally easier through amendments to Section 63 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils Act, 1965. They allow political parties and/or councillors to form post-election fronts or groups. Over time, political parties have collectively and deliberately weakened the 1986 Disqualification Act, and it is now what I would call a “toothless tiger.” Hence, the strange and opportunistic post-elections alliances witnessed in Ambernath (Thane) and Akot (Akola), and some others after the December 20 municipal council elections.

 

How exactly was the Anti-Defection law diluted?

It was through a quietly crafted amendment to Section 63 of the Municipal Councils Act, 1965, which was implemented after the 2016 local bodies elections, although the Disqualification Act remained on paper. It allows councillors and political parties - within one month of election results - to form a post-poll group or alliance, even if they contested elections separately. Once registered, this newly-formed group is treated as if it were a pre-poll alliance, and the Anti-Defection law applies only after that point. This effectively ‘legalised defections disguised as alliances’.

 

What were the repercussions?

Another major blow came when the State Government amended the law to give itself appellate powers in Anti-Defection cases involving local bodies. Earlier, decisions were taken by Commissioners or Collectors. Now, any aggrieved councillor can appeal to the State Government, which becomes the final authority.


This has given huge relief to defectors, especially when the ruling party controls the state government. Now elected representatives brazenly switch sides, aware they may not face serious consequences.

 

What is the long-term fallout of this trend?

These amendments have made post-poll “marriages of convenience” the new political norm. The ruling party always has an unfair advantage, often forming governments without securing a clear electoral majority. This completely undermines democracy and voter trust, besides going contrary to the original purpose of the Anti-Defection Law.

Comments

bottom of page