Two of the big questions for 2024: Rohit Sharma and Virat Kohli for T20 World Cup? PR Sreejesh or Krishna Pathak for Paris?

Should Rohit, Virat play T20 World Cup?

It’s not about sentiments, to give Rohit Sharma and Virat Kohli potentially one last shot at winning the T20 World Cup. But there is no reason to look beyond them. Kohli was the tournament’s highest run-getter and played one of the all-time great T20 knocks by an Indian batsman. He hasn’t played another T20I since India’s semifinal exit in the 2022 World Cup, but enjoyed a prosperous IPL. The tally of 639 runs is his second-best run-haul ever, so is the strike rate that is a nudge below 140. If any, he has only reinvigorated his T20 game and looks in no mood to slow down.

Rohit’s recent T20I outings have not been quite eye-catching. but the freedom he displayed in the ODI World Cup is a reliable indicator of his mindset and method. A cricketer like him should not be valued merely through the prism of numbers in a particular format, but his recent form, even if it be in other formats. Little doubt that Rohit was India’s tempo-setter in the 50-over World Cup, the pin-up boy of their gung-ho approach. Though a spate of openers have performed in recent T20Is—Sai Sudharsan the most promising of them—Rohit towers above them all with his body of work, as it is with Kohli.

Picking both risks being labelled conservative. But has not conservatism bore fruits in the T20 World Cup? A perfect case study is Australia’s squad that won the 2021 World Cup in UAE. It was a supposedly old and worn-out group, but when the big moments came, their wisdom and experience made a telling difference. A young, dynamic-looking team might win you bilateral series, give you fleeting thrills, but for the big tournaments, you need the big names, the past masters, inspired to make a big splash before their sneak into the sunset.

Sandip G

Should India send a large Olympics contingent?

At the Tokyo Olympics, just two Indian athletes, Neeraj Chopra and discus thrower Kamalpreet Kaur, reached the finals of their events among the 26 participants. This is not counting the race walk events where only direct finals are the norm. This may paint a dismal picture of Indian athletics and would naturally add muscle to the argument whether every qualified athlete should be sent to the Games in the first place.

But sports isn’t always about stats and data. Steeplechaser Avinash Sable’s national record-breaking effort wasn’t good enough for a spot in the finals. Likewise, the 4x400m men’s quartet couldn’t make the cut for the finale despite running their hearts out to rewrite an Asian record. “Fastest in Asia but not quick enough” read the The Indian Express headline, summing up the situation. Since these athletes did not make it to the finals can their solid performances just be binned? Of course not.

Crystal ball gazing is the most futile activity that “sports experts” engage in. Don’t recall even a single athletics preview that backed Neeraj Chopra, an Olympics debutant, to finish on the podium. Qualifying for the Olympics in a measurable sport like athletics is no mean feat.

The two-tier system- qualification guidelines and rankings – in athletics leaves little room for luck or any outside interference. Every athlete truly earns a spot and to deny them on the basis of their predictive potential is unfair. The experience athletes gain in such big-ticket events cannot be replicated in any training conditions.

The only exception that should be made is in the case of injuries or fitness issues. The federation has the complete right to ascertain if an athlete is fully fit and not hiding injuries just to make it to the Games and earn the tag of an Olympian. That being said, every athlete in track and field who has qualified for the Olympics deserves to be on the flight to Paris.

Andrew Amsan

Shooting trial: Current form or proven performers?

After two successive Olympics with not a medal in sight, the question over form or pedigree is bound to pop up. At the Tokyo Olympics, India had a vaunted set of shooters, all in their youth and none touched by failure. What followed next was a capitulation of a 15-member team touted for multiple medals.

Going into Paris, India is set to host four Olympics trials, something suggested by former national rifle coach Joydeep Karmakar. When Karmakar spoke of what his vision of the trials would be to The Indian Express, he felt that to treat the trials for the Olympics at a higher plane than the Olympics itself would yield a degree of shooter that could face the rigours of a tournament where India has wilted over the past two editions.

Yes there would still be the points system where certain athletes who had won quota places and had victories at World Championships would get bonus points, but the percentages and bonus would not be as damning as earlier. Effectively, perform well at three of the four trials and an Olympic spot is yours. Fail in May, and watch an Indian in your event vie for a medal in Paris in July/August.

Prioritising the form of a shooter in May over quota winners makes sense as long as the quota wasn’t won at a World Championship. Take the case of Rudrankshh Patil. It would be a travesty if a World Championship gold medallist in the current Olympic cycle is denied a spot on the team, mainly due to the tough circumstances of winning a gold that is only topped in its competitiveness and competition by the Olympics. There could be an argument that this particular circumstance allows for form to not be a consideration.

But barring that, does a country that has such depth in its rifle team, and potential in its pistol team, have anything to lose giving form a chance, considering just how poorly Rio and Tokyo went?

Shashank Nair

Should Lakshya Sen switch to an attacking game?

A season with 11 first round exits from 22 international meets, and ending with a loss to an unheralded opponent at the Nationals means Lakshya Sen is staring at an uphill challenge in qualifying for the Olympics. His defense-heavy style, though dazzling with dives and reflex pickups, was always going to be punishing on the body in the long run. But are things so dire that he needs to switch to an attacking game?

Some of Sen’s shots have gotten predictable, and opponents are reading him rather easily. His body language is misunderstood as being casual, when it is in fact his lack of attacking variations from the back that make it a technical issue more than a temperamental one. It is evident that he will need to find offensive weapons to cut short the interminable rallies before he runs out of patience as is his wont.

The trouble with the switch is that the shoulder injury has seen him lose timing on his smashes, and he has been unable to kill the bird getting drawn into endless exchanges. Anup Sridhar is working earnestly, though Vimal Kumar has sensed the urgency of his flailing qualification campaign and will resume travelling for Malaysia, India and Indonesia events.

The sheer pressure and procedure to qualify for Paris Games – he needs to be Top 16 in next 4 months – can prove daunting. Just a few good results at Canada and Japan – mean Sen’s lead-up is one right mess, and his team is understandably worried.

He was at his fearless best against Shi Yuqi in the Asiad team finals against China. The title at Canada where he defeated world champ Kunlavut and top Chinese youngster Li Shifeng with a confident attacking game, raises hopes of that style, yielding returns. And he is a certified big occasion player, capable of stitching up a dazzling run at Paris. If only he qualifies.

Shivani Naik

Should India hire foreign coaches for wrestling?

What’s the one thing other than the obvious Olympic medals that links Sushil Kumar, Yogeshwar Dutt, Bajrang Punia and Ravi Dahiya?

The fabled Chhatrasal Stadium, where each of them mastered their art, yes. But there’s another link that ties them all – their march to the Olympic podium was overseen by a foreign expert. Sakshi Malik remains an outlier in that she’s the only medal-winning wrestler since Sushil triggered the unprecedented spree in 2008 to stand on the podium without having to rely on outside support.

For the rest, the foreign hand proved to be the ultimate difference. Sushil and Yogeshwar spent months together with Georgian Vladimir Merstervishvili before the London Games. Bajrang had Shako Bendinitis, also from Georgia, and Ravi had Russia’s Kamal Malikov in their corners at Tokyo.

As Indian wrestling grappled with controversies on multiple fronts – with former president Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh at the centre of them all – the needs of the wrestlers seem to have gone unnoticed. The Olympic hopefuls have been crying for professional help from abroad which will not just improve their qualification chances but, as history has proven, also be a key factor in challenging for a medal.

Foreign coaches open the wrestlers’ eyes to modern techniques, expose them to the world of sports science and are better at improvising strategies during a bout and communicating them effectively from the side of the mat. It’s something, wrestlers say, their Indian trainers haven’t been able to do so well.

Only Deepak Punia, one of the most consistent performers over the last four years, has a foreign personal coach – Russia’s Kamal Malikov, who was Ravi’s coach in Tokyo. And it is learnt Bajrang will soon avail the services of another Russia-born wrestler, Ali Shabanov. Their arrangements have been done independently through their backers, not by the federation or the government.

The rest have been left to fend for themselves. Wrestling is the only sport this century to win at least one medal at the last four Games. It’ll be a shame if all the administrative mismanagement ends this fine run.

Mihir Vasavda

Sreejesh or Krishna: Who should get the nod?

At the Tokyo Olympics, a long wait for Indian hockey came to an end. After 41 years, the Indian men’s team returned to the podium. And crucial to that bronze medal was a moment that will go down in Indian hockey folklore. With barely any time left on the clock – 6.4 seconds to be precise – Germany got a penalty corner while trailing 4-5. The shot on goal was well struck, but Sreejesh got his left hand out in time and not just saved it, but palmed it away far enough to ensure there was no rebound. In those milliseconds, he ensured India’s dream – his dream – was realised. He regards that as perhaps the most important save of his career.

Fast forward three years, and the 35-year-old is still very much in contention. But his position as India’s No 1 goalkeeper won’t be straightforward this time around. The rise of Krishan Bahadur Pathak, nearly a decade younger than Sreejesh, is going to make that decision tricky for the Indian management.

Under Craig Fulton, as we saw under Graham Reid, India have continued to rotate their two main goalkeepers each quarter irrespective of the magnitude of the match they are playing. That constant rotation has kept Sreejesh on his toes, but more importantly, has allowed Pathak to grow in confidence. The youngster was part of the Tokyo squad but wasn’t in the playing list and it was an obvious decision for the think-tank to trust Sreejesh.

Pathak has impressed in the chances he has received in recent times, with his ability to make reflex saves with the stick standing out in the Pro League. It will be the Pro League where once again presumably he will be given the chances to stake his claim.

India’s Tokyo campaign ended with iconic images of Sreejesh perched on top of the posts. He has maintained his high standards since too but whether he will be present in the posts between Paris is an interesting decision that awaits Fulton and Co.

Vinayakk Mohanarangan

Disclaimer: The copyright of this article belongs to the original author. Reposting this article is solely for the purpose of information dissemination and does not constitute any investment advice. If there is any infringement, please contact us immediately. We will make corrections or deletions as necessary. Thank you.