Earlier this year, Rohit Sharma made headlines when he opted out of the fifth and final Border-Gavaskar Trophy Test in Sydney, having already missed the opening game due to personal reasons.
His performances in the intervening matches were underwhelming, culminating in a paltry tournament average of just 6.20—prompting widespread scrutiny and raising doubts about whether he should still be in India’s Test XI.
Irfan Pathan, speaking on Lallantop, didn’t hold back in his criticism. He argued that a player — especially the captain — must stand firm and fight to retain the spot, rather than strategically opting out.
“When you’re in the team, part of the team, the captain… you can’t pick and choose. You simply can’t,” Pathan emphasized, asserting that the responsibility ultimately lies with the coaching staff, captain, and selectors to make bold choices, not the player to self-select participation.
Captaincy as the Deciding Factor in Selection
Pathan also addressed a candid interview moment in Sydney, acknowledging that despite his polite conduct on air, the truth behind Rohit’s continued presence was not sugar-coated. He noted that Rohit’s Test average for the year was abysmally low—around 6. Despite his prowess in white-ball cricket, Pathan said it would have been unlikely for Rohit to remain in the XI had he not been the captain.
Reiterating his stance, Pathan reaffirmed that selectors were essentially compelled to back Rohit because of the leadership tag, not performance merit. Without captaincy, his place in the team would have been in serious jeopardy.
Media Facade vs. Ground Realities
Delving deeper into the interview dynamics, Pathan reflected on the broadcasting side of things. He pointed out that as hosts, they naturally had to treat Rohit with respect and support—a courtesy extended to all guests. However, that polite front shouldn’t obscure the harsher reality: had Rohit not been the captain, his poor form would likely have led to his exclusion from the team.
His critique highlights a tension between media decorum and the merit-based evaluation of player performance. It also sparks discussion about whether leadership status sometimes undeservedly inflates a player’s standing, despite lacklustre results at critical moments.
Get the latest cricket news here, like us on Facebook, and follow us on Twitter and Instagram for more such updates.
