Here's why Omar Abdullah wasn't wrong in backing Parvez Rasool

[caption id=“attachment_1010365” align=“alignleft” width=“380”]  Rasool (R) is the only player who didn’t get a game in Zimbabwe. AP[/caption] Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah’s Twitter rant against the non-selection of Parvez Rasool in the playing XI of the Indian team on the tour of Zimbabwe has attracted a lot of attention, unfortunately, for all the wrong reasons. People have alleged Abdullah’s comments were politically motivated with others naively adding that lobbying does not help get into the playing XI. But was there anything really wrong with what Abdullah did? For those who didn’t see Abdullah’s twitter remarks, see the tweets below: 

More from First Cricket News

Dada returns: Sourav Ganguly set to take charge as Bengal Cricket head unopposed IND vs PAK rivalry: Once cricket’s golden goose, now a white elephant

  Now, here’s the point. Many turned around and said that Rasool getting into the Indian team was a big step in itself and if he continues performing his chance will come. Some cited the fact that Ajinkya Rahane carried drinks in 16 Test matches before making his debut against Australia earlier this year. Rohit Sharma made his ODI debut six years ago, but is yet to make his Test debut. There are still others who have never made it to the Indian team at all despite good performances in the Ranji Trophy. So in that sense, Rasool is lucky. But then once you’ve taken that step forward – you want a chance to test yourself in international cricket. When India selected the team for Zimbabwe, the thinking was that the youngsters would be given a chance. But for the first three matches, India went in with a full strength squad – this despite Zimbabwe looking like a really weak squad. Cheteshwar Pujara wasn’t given a go, neither was Ajinkya Rahane. Mohit Sharma warmed the bench in the dressing room too, as did Rasool. The opportunity to try these guys and get a good look at them was lost. Then after the series was won, Pujara and Mohit were given a chance. And finally Rahane got a game in the last match. Rasool remained on the bench throughout the series – it must have been pretty off-putting. After winning the fifth match of the series, India skipper Virat Kohli said: “It’s very hard to leave someone like Jadeja out because he’s the kind of bowler who can get you wickets at any point in time.” “We didn’t want to take any game lightly and I didn’t want to change too much in the bowling department. Mishra has been sitting out for a while so we wanted to give him four or five games.” “Parvez is going to South Africa now for the India A tour and he’s going to play a lot of games there and pick up more experience. He could have been given a chance but I just didn’t want to take a chance with the bowling line-up, leaving someone like Jadeja out,” he added. But then again, it can be asked whether ODI cricket’s top bowler Jadeja really needed to play against Zimbabwe once the series was won. With 38 wickets, Jadeja is the most successful bowler in international cricket this year, so couldn’t India afford to rest him in a dead rubber? In the 90s, several hundred cricket lovers, led by former India stars based in Bombay, marched in procession from Eros Cinema to the Cricket Club of India, to protest against what they believed was deliberate discrimination against Bombay players on the part of the national selection committee. If you speak to any selector since, they will tell you how you have to lobby to get your man in the team. It isn’t always about the numbers, sometimes it’s also about the zone you come from. In his book ‘India Summer’, John Wright had also spoken about the zonal bias. “The first six or seven selections were straight forward. But when it got down to the marginal selections, those last three or four spots that determine the balance of the team and your ability to develop new players, the zonal factor kicked in and things would get interesting. It was easy to tell when selectors had come to a meeting with an agenda i.e. to their damnedest to get one or two players for their zones into the team. If their boys weren’t picked, they tended to cross their arms, clam up and take no further part in the meeting.” As recently as 2010, Praveen Amre was removed from his job as India ‘A’ coach because he did not allow a certain bowler to play in the team. Those days may be long gone – we have professional selectors now, but how many of us think N Srinivasan has nothing to do with the team selection? With so many players from Tamil Nadu making their debut recently, the talk was that the BCCI president was allegedly doing his bit for the state. So by putting his weight behind a player from his state, Abdullah hasn’t done Rasool a dis-service. Rather he’s has shown that he is ready to back him when even others won’t. Others have been doing it for a while while being part of the system, so why can’t he do it from the outside?