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.

Political Pantomime

Correspondent
Oct 30, 2025
2 min read

The spectacle on Nagpur’s outskirts this week had all the trappings of rural discontent with tractors clogging highways, angry farmers waving placards and a fiery leader - Bachchu Kadu, the mercurial chief of the Prahar Janshakti Party – vowing to court arrest. Kadu and other leaders led a ‘Maha Elgar Morcha’ that paralysed National Highway 44 for nearly twenty kilometres, causing commuters much distress. The ostensible demand was a complete waiver of farm loans. Yet the choreography of the protest with respect to its timing – just ahead of the civic polls - and the government’s conspicuous inaction raises a different question. Is this dissent, or a display staged for electoral effect?


The High Court had ordered the highway cleared by 6 p.m. on Wednesday. By then, Kadu declared that his followers would obey the order. There was no lathi charge, no arrests, no water cannons; only patient police and cameras capturing the ‘defiance.’ Even Raju Shetti, the veteran farmer leader, joined the agitation, as did other familiar faces from Maharashtra’s small party circuit. Yet the Mahayuti government, otherwise swift to crush unruly demonstrations, remained curiously indulgent. For a ruling dispensation led by Devendra Fadnavis, known for his administrative discipline, such tolerance seems uncharacteristic. 


The CM, for his part, sounded almost conciliatory. He reminded reporters that his government was already considering a loan waiver, had announced a Rs. 32,000-crore relief package, and was transferring funds directly to farmers’ accounts. He urged the protesters to talk, not block roads. Yet, his tone lacked the sharpness one might expect when a national highway lies paralysed. 


The leniency invites speculation. Maharashtra’s civic polls are approaching, and Kadu’s base in Vidarbha could prove decisive in a few pockets where the ruling alliance is vulnerable. A noisy protest that stops short of violence but projects populist empathy might serve multiple purposes: allowing Kadu to refurbish his image as a rustic rebel while letting the government appear sensitive to agrarian distress. Both sides gain visibility and neither loses face. 


If that is indeed the subtext, the protest becomes less a cry of anger than a managed performance. In Indian politics, ‘scripted agitations’ are not rare. They offer the illusion of confrontation while keeping the actors within the same tent. For the public, however, the spectacle blurs accountability while causing needless commuting hassle.


Kadu’s insistence on immediate waiver by bypassing discussion seems designed to dramatize impatience rather than seek negotiation.


Yet, if the government truly wished to stop the disruption, it could have. Instead, it chose indulgence, allowing the protest to unfold. In an election season, outrage can be a convenient currency. 


Whatever the motive, the real losers remain the farmers themselves. Each wave of agitation raises expectations that the State will simply write off debt, discouraging reform of the credit system that perpetuates rural distress. Loan waivers offer temporary relief but little structural change. Maharashtra’s treasury, already strained, can scarcely sustain populism as policy. 

Comments

bottom of page