Am I the only one who struggles to understand the hoopla or smoke that has been blown about this issue?
Firstly, the lack of planning for replacements is something that has been present for a long, long time. The reason? We've certainly given in to too much player power over the previous decade. Remember MSD carrying on in the white ball formats way beyond his peak? This denied any chance for a proper replacement being groomed in the supposed transition period prior to his retirement as any such thing was taken as a perceived insult or threat to his spot in the side. And guess what? We've struggled to actually replace him in white ball cricket since. The most natural replacement in Pant still has question marks over his ODI spot and his T20I record is awful.
The second one? The supposed phasing out of our finger spinners in white ball cricket. We were told that they would no longer be a part as we would seek more attacking spin bowling options instead. Guess who got called up for the last white ball tournament of ours?
And finally the elephant in the room. Captaincy. Kohli's deputy for the longest of times in both the longer and shorter formats were players in his age bracket (who also happened to be actually better than him in their limited appearances). The next bloke in line was a certain Dhawan and he was even older! The other blokes like Ashwin and Bhuvi were never really given serious backing. It is also important to note that certain players like Vijay, Pandey, Raina and Nair were indeed earmarked as future leadership material but never really progressed to the point where they were considered serious leadership prospects in the case of Vijay or never really managed to break in the playing XI consistently like Nair or Pandey. Raina had his own demons to battle physically and mentally too. I'm not even sure if it's worth mentioning the fact that we had our veterans in Gambhir, Sehwag and Zaheer act as captains in the IPL in their twilight years which robbed us of even more captaincy options.
In a nutshell the first serious captaincy option we did eventually get was Shreyas Iyer when he got to lead Delhi Daredevils after his domestic stint with Mumbai's state team and we seem to have exploded in options over the last year or so. Which is the way it should have been over the past decade. Instead, we've had no proper grooming approach for taking over from Kohli just like we did with Dhoni. Was it again over it being perceived as a threat to his role in the side? We'll never know now. What I do know is that it is squarely the previous management's fault for not leaving behind a proper succession setup. And I do believe we're already on our way to rectify this in the IPL. Kohli's already stepped down from his role as RCB captain, Dhoni did give it a shot (quite unsuccessfully) and we learned that Jadeja is not captaincy material even for a transition period in the meantime. No worries though as it feels inevitable that Gaikwad will one day become captain at CSK. Rohit Sharma seems to have a padawan in Kishan already with a potential temporary leader in SKY if the need arises. Pant, Shreyas, Rahul, Mayank and Hardik are all in their supposed prime ages and are leading franchises themselves.
As for the decision to select Rohit Sharma, honestly who would have been your pick a few months ago when this decision was supposed to have been made? I know it has become a bit of a meme to mention it again but winning five IPL trophies does matter if a bloke like Pandya can get into contention on the back of winning just one with no other real previous domestic experience. Sharma's shown plenty of skills to be considered as an excellent white ball captain for one. His calculated risks have generally paid off which to me is a key and often underrated aspect of captaincy. He has been shown to be a more composed figure as a leader which suits our team's profile (although he has appeared anxious and angry quite often compared to his usual standards in Indian colours ever since becoming captain). It is a bit difficult to judge given the strength of the famed Mumbai lobby but he is well respected as a player and person which helps in player management. And finally, his tactics in white ball cricket have always been pretty good. I don't think he is as good as Dhoni is, especially when it comes extracting the maximum from a minimum but I don't think he needs to be when we've got a high quality squad that just needs some proper backing, coaching and tactical planning.
It also makes sense to go for the tried and tested approach because we do have two white ball tournaments back to back. The second of these happens to be held in India too. Given the fact that the last three ODI WC's have all been won by the host nation there will be no doubt that we will be regarded as the favourite in this one by the media and fans alike. Managing that sort of pressure and expectation is no mean task. Just read up the accounts of how difficult it was already back in 2011 with a squad full of legendary players and rising stars who all were well versed in managing that sort of pressure. We need our best man on it and is there any doubt as to it not being Rohit Sharma? I genuinely don't think throwing a new man into the helm with just one white ball tournament under his belt and a year's worth of international leadership experience where there'll already be heavy scrutiny to make up for the previous failure would be any wise. It could potentially derail an entire player's career if they are not capable of stepping up to it, not to mention the impact it'll have on the rest of the squad. In adddition, this is a certain set of players who'll mostly bow out after the 2023 WC or be phased out steadily by many accounts. It would be a lot better if we actually give the new man a fresh start without this baggage to shape a new team in his image with a new core.
The biggest criticism I've seen Sharma face is to do with his absence rather than presence funnily enough. The amount of cricket the Indian side plays is quite insane these days. We're third on the list of most matches played in the last three years (West Indies and England are the only ones higher) and like England we've sometimes played two series quite close to each other or concurrently which means multiple squads and more players and potentially more captains. I also find it funny that it is the same Indian fans who criticize our senior players for taking breaks or sitting out certain series' whilst also supporting other countries' players individual rights to represent themselves on the biggest stages as something that they should only decide. Think back to how much criticism CSA received for not bending to AbD's very own non-committal ideas, Faf and Tahir's phasing out and also how much everyone was in support of QDK's sudden test retirement without warning. Not to mention the flak the West Indies board received for attempting to rein in their T20 stars. I'm not suggesting that these boards were faultless, indeed some of their handling was questionable but it is funny how the players get criticized mercilessly in India and how the players are treated completely differently by these same fans? Pretty sure it has nothing to do with a certain Indian T20 league....
I do think his injury record is a concern and it will have to be managed but for what should be at max a year's stint if everything goes according to plan? I don't mind him sitting out the odd series versus West Indies or Ireland or even South Africa at times if it means he's fully fit for when it matters. As long as shows that he hasn't lost touch and appears to be in good form with the backing of his players, support staff with the results and right approach on the ground to his leadership, I think Rohit Sharma is our best bet until the 2023 WC. Him missing out on these smaller series' does also mean more experience for the next guy in line which helps even more with the inevitable transition as an unintended consequence. I do agree with him being on the teetering edge of slipping out being unavailable too often at the moment and it is good that the decision for him to return to the squad for the West Indies series is being considered.
The eighth captain in the eighth series' does feel like another meme worthy point but if you just dig deeper into it you'll find that a large part of it has been due to an injury pushing our first choice captain out of the side or his deputy. The only other time this has happened is when we've had two series' in close proximity to each other making it quite difficult logistically, physically and mentally to do the job concurrently. A bit of bad luck and coincidence has led to this situation and reading too much into it achieves no purpose. For comparison's sake, South Africa and Australia have had six captains in this decade. I do hope that all of this talk of wanting Rohit Sharma out is just frustration from him missing out on too many games and not something seriously considered as an actual plan.
Finally, notice how I've made no mention of Sharma the test captain? That is because I do think he should have never been the permanent test captain. We shouldn't be doing one captain for all formats given that none of the other six sides to have played the most number of matches this decade do so for one. I do understand that Rahane's terminal decline in form has necessitated this move but we should have phased the latter out earlier expecting this and tried to groom someone else for the leadership role even before that. I still think the wise move would be for Sharma to focus on white ball cricket and his leadership there. The wisest move with the current mess in place would be to give your potential captaincy options some Ranji Trophy experience and monitor their progress whilst Rohit Sharma gets done with the Aussie series at home as a temporary leader. We should ideally have decided on the next captain by then.