These days, India are billed favourites wherever they play, in any format. They won every series at home before flying out to New Zealand to play five T20s, three ODIs and two Tests.
Skipper Virat Kohli and his boys may not be all happy at having to leave for Auckland a day after winning a tough ODI series against Australia, five days before the first match against New Zealand. At the same time, he also understands the rigours of schedules.
From the Indian winter to the summer in the Antipodes should not pose an acclimatization problem. Before coming to India, Australia beat New Zealand 3-0 in Tests. The Black Caps are back in familiar environs and want to start afresh. There is debate in New Zealand whether Kane Williamson should continue as captain after the washout. He is keen and wants to lead in all three formats.
Like India, New Zealand are also beset with injuries. Three of their key bowlers — Trent Boult, Matt Henry and Lockie Ferguson — are under medical care and rehabilitation. They are also struggling to manage the workload of players who play in all three formats, just as the Indians are worried about their own fast bowlers.
Like Sourav Ganguly forced Rahul Dravid to keep wickets so that he could go in with seven batters in the 2003 World Cup, Kohli wants to go in with six bowlers, including an all-rounder, by asking KL Rahul to come in for regular wicketkeeper Rishabh Pant in the shorter formats. Ganguly’s eleven had nine who could bowl, including himself, and eight bowled in the final against Australia!
Pant was unsettled by a Pat Cummins bouncer in the first ODI, the ball ricocheting off his bat onto the helmet before being caught. After precautionary scans cleared him for the remaining two matches, he did not return to the eleven as Rahul kept wickets in Pant’s absence and that allowed Kohli to play Manish Pandey at No 6 in the last two games.
Pandey’s fielding had been an added qualification. The problem is where Rahul should bat as a keeper, more so in ODIs, if India are chasing. In the second match, he batted at No 5 and was instrumental in winning the game. He had to open in the third match in place of the injured Shikhar Dhawan.
Rahul could keep wickets confidently because he had done it for Karnataka and he is a better bet than Dravid with the gloves. Strangely, it was argued that Dravid could have got into the side only as a keeper, whereas a case is being made for Pant’s inclusion as a batsman, so that he could also keep wickets, by dropping an all-rounder.
A furious debate is on over Pant’s omission to accommodate an extra batsman. Two former India wicketkeepers, Syed Kirmani and Kiran More, both former national selectors, got into a heated debate. They were joined by their contemporaries and other commentators.
Kirmani has always been a purist and never been in favour of a part-time wicketkeeper. But More thinks Rahul is technically sound and he should stay as keeper. The point being raised is shouldn’t Pant be given the job back once he is fit? Why should places be given back only if top batsmen and bowlers return from injuries? Would this not affect his morale?
There is another strong lobby which is pitching for Sanju Samson. He is in the T20 squad, but doesn’t appear to have a chance of getting into the team either as a keeper or batsman. The state associations of Rahul and Samson should also be blamed for not persisting with them.
The stat selectors might have thought that Rahul and Samson should concentrate on their batting to help the side better than burdening them with the additional workload. Every time a national squad or the playing eleven is picked, there will be varying opinions, which are academic in nature. One can only have a good laugh at the memes on social media.
(The writer is a veteran commentator. Views expressed are personal. He can be contacted at sveturi@gmail.com).