The unceremonious ouster of former captain Rahul Dravid from India's one-day team continues to evoke sharp criticism. Former players Sandeep Patil and Sanjay Manjrekar have slammed chief selector Dilip Vengsarkar and demanded that Board of Control for Cricket in India chief Sharad Pawar intervene in the matter.
"I had earlier supported the idea that Sharad Pawar, as BCCI president, should not interfere in selection matters. I would revise my decision now and recall how once N K P Salve, as then BCCI president, had intervened and influenced the selectors to include Sunil Gavaskar after he had been dropped," Patil said.
Patil said the latest development was perhaps linked with why Dravid relinquished the captaincy without giving any reasons after a successful England tour and looked out of sorts during the recent ODI series against Australia.
"The National selectors have played a 'planned game'. The manner in which they have dumped a devoted cricketer like Rahul Dravid only reflects the degeneration that has come to dominate Indian cricket on and off the field," Patil said.
"I feel very sad at the treatment given to Rahul. Captain of the team a few months ago, he relinquished the responsibility for reasons he has not disclosed but it is not difficult to understand the game now," he was quoted as saying by cricketnext.
"Now I can understand why Rahul appeared so different during the series against Australia. He was under tremendous pressure and I suspect he is a victim of conspiracy," Patil said.
He, however, did not put the full blame on Vengsarkar and said the other four selectors are equally responsible for the "illogical" decision.
"What is worse is that this ugly episode involves a dear friend of mine. I fail to understand how come a batsman who always played with a straight bat is now indulging in cross-batted stuff. It will be wrong to blame Dilip Vengsarkar alone for the decision because four others also have agreed to this illogical step," he added.
Manjrekar said it is unfortunate that a "selfless" cricketer like Dravid had been given such a raw deal when he needed the support most.
"If Dravid has indeed been dropped, it is unfortunate. Dravid has been the most selfless Indian cricketer that I have seen for the last ten years," he was quoted as saying by the cricinfo.
"If anybody deserved a life jacket in troubled waters it was Dravid. But if his exclusion from the one-day squad is part of a process with a clear vision, then it will make some sense, for it is critical that the process must continue without compromise. Otherwise, Dravid would have got a very raw deal he least deserved," he said.
Manjrekar also lambasted the selectors for not having courage to accept that they had "dropped" the senior player and not "rested" him.
"If Rahul Dravid has been 'rested' after a three-week break, then he has been dropped. 'Rested' has become an interesting term in world cricket these days, especially in Indian cricket. If S Badrinath or Ajit Agarkar is left out of the Indian squad, he has been 'dropped'. But if a heavyweight has been omitted, he is said to have been 'rested'," opined Manjrekar.
"The straight-forward interpretation of the word 'rested' is that the selectors don't have the courage to deal with the heat that comes with dropping a big player. Strong decisions will inevitably invite strong reactions, and if, as a selector, you can't take the heat, then you are in the wrong business," Manjrekar wrote in his strongly worded column in Cricinfo.com.
"If all you want to do is hang on to your job as a selector for another four years, then you are unlikely to make a difference to Indian cricket. The game will carry on in its usual way and your role as a selector will only be incidental to it," he said.