Should Rohit, Virat play T20 World Cup?
Setting aside sentimental considerations, the decision to entrust Rohit Sharma and Virat Kohli with a potential final opportunity to clinch the T20 World Cup is rooted in their undeniable credentials. Kohli’s remarkable performance as the leading run-scorer in the previous tournament, coupled with an extraordinary T20 innings, showcases his enduring prowess. Although he hasn’t participated in a T20I since India’s 2022 World Cup semifinal exit, his stellar IPL performance, amassing 639 runs at a strike rate just shy of 140, underscores a rejuvenated T20 form.
While Rohit Sharma’s recent T20I performances may not have grabbed headlines, his demonstrated freedom and excellence in the ODI World Cup provide a reliable gauge of his mindset and approach. Evaluating a player of Rohit’s caliber goes beyond mere numerical statistics in a specific format, considering his overall recent form, even across different formats. Undoubtedly, Rohit played a pivotal role as India’s tempo-setter in the 50-over World Cup, embodying the team’s aggressive style. Despite emerging openers like Sai Sudharsan showcasing promise in recent T20Is, Rohit’s extensive body of work places him and Kohli at the forefront.
Opting for both may attract accusations of conservatism, but the T20 World Cup has historically rewarded experienced squads. The 2021 World Cup-winning Australian team, labeled as aging, exemplifies the impact of wisdom and experience during crucial moments. While youthful and dynamic teams may thrive in bilateral series, the significance of seasoned veterans in major tournaments cannot be overlooked. These stalwarts, motivated to make a substantial impact before potentially bowing out, bring a level of gravitas indispensable for success on the grand stage.
Should India send a large Olympics contingent?
At the Tokyo Olympics, only two Indian athletes, Neeraj Chopra and discus thrower Kamalpreet Kaur, advanced to the finals among the 26 participants, excluding the race walk events where only direct finals are standard. While these numbers might cast a shadow on Indian athletics, it’s essential to recognize that sports go beyond mere statistics. National record-breaking performances, such as Avinash Sable’s in the steeplechase, fell short of securing a spot in the finals. Similarly, the 4x400m men’s quartet set an Asian record but missed out on the finale.
Headlines like “Fastest in Asia but not quick enough” capture the paradox these athletes faced. However, dismissing their solid performances because they didn’t reach the finals would be unjust. Sports isn’t solely about outcomes; it’s also about the journey and the effort invested.
Attempting to predict outcomes in sports is often futile, and many experts didn’t foresee Neeraj Chopra, a debutant at the Olympics, clinching a podium finish. Qualifying for the Olympics in a measurable sport like athletics is a remarkable achievement in itself.
The two-tier system of qualification guidelines and rankings in athletics minimizes the role of luck or external factors. Every athlete truly earns their spot, and denying them based on speculative potential seems unfair. Competing on such a grand stage provides invaluable experience that cannot be replicated in training conditions.
While exceptions might be considered for injuries or fitness issues, it’s crucial for the federation to ensure that athletes are genuinely fit and not hiding injuries merely to secure a spot at the Games and the coveted title of Olympian. Nevertheless, every athlete in track and field who has earned a spot at the Olympics deserves the opportunity to compete in Paris.
Shooting trial: Current form or proven performers?
Heading into the Paris Olympics, India is gearing up to host four Olympic trials, a proposal put forth by former national rifle coach Joydeep Karmakar. Karmakar envisions these trials as a crucial step, suggesting that elevating their significance above the Olympics itself could produce shooters better equipped to handle the challenges, an area where India has faced setbacks in the last two editions.
The proposed trials would incorporate a points system, giving bonus points to athletes who secured quota places and achieved victories at World Championships. However, the emphasis on percentages and bonuses would be less stringent than before. Essentially, excelling in three out of the four trials would guarantee an Olympic spot, while failure in May could mean missing out on the opportunity to compete in Paris in July/August.
Prioritizing a shooter’s form in May over quota winners makes sense, provided the quota wasn’t secured at a World Championship. Take, for instance, the case of Rudrankshh Patil. It would be unjust if a World Championship gold medalist in the current Olympic cycle is denied a spot on the team due to the challenging circumstances of winning a gold that rivals the Olympics in competitiveness and intensity. In such unique cases, there might be an argument to exempt them from the form consideration.
However, given the depth in India’s rifle team and the potential in its pistol team, embracing a system that values current form seems reasonable, especially considering the subpar performances in Rio and Tokyo. Providing an opportunity for athletes in good form could be a strategic move for India to enhance its prospects in Paris.
Should Lakshya Sen switch to an attacking game?
Lakshya Sen is facing a formidable challenge in Olympic qualification after a season marked by 11 first-round exits in 22 international meets, culminating in an unexpected loss at the Nationals to a relatively unknown opponent. While his defense-centric style, embellished with impressive dives and reflex pickups, has been punishing on his body, the question arises: does he need to transition to a more aggressive game?
Critics argue that some of Sen’s shots have become predictable, allowing opponents to read him easily. His seemingly casual body language is attributed to a lack of attacking variations from the back, indicating a technical issue rather than a temperamental one. To stay competitive, Sen must incorporate offensive weapons to shorten rallies and avoid running out of patience, a tendency he is known for.
However, switching to a more attacking style presents challenges. A shoulder injury has affected the timing on his smashes, making it difficult to close out points and leading to prolonged exchanges. While coach Anup Sridhar is diligently working on improvements, Vimal Kumar recognizes the urgency of Sen’s qualification campaign, prompting him to resume traveling for events in Malaysia, India, and Indonesia.
Qualifying for the Paris Games adds pressure, as Sen needs to secure a Top 16 spot in the next four months. The upcoming tournaments in Canada and Japan hold crucial significance for Sen, whose lead-up to qualification appears chaotic. The sense of worry within his team is palpable.
Despite the setbacks, Sen has displayed fearless performances in significant matches, such as the Asiad team finals against China, where he excelled against Shi Yuqi. His victory at Canada, defeating world champion Kunlavut and top Chinese youngster Li Shifeng with a confident attacking game, offers hope for a style shift yielding positive results. Sen has proven himself as a player capable of rising to the occasion on the big stage, and the prospect of a dazzling run in Paris is within reach—if only he qualifies.
Should India hire foreign coaches for wrestling?
Beyond the evident Olympic medals, Sushil Kumar, Yogeshwar Dutt, Bajrang Punia, and Ravi Dahiya share a common link—the revered Chhatrasal Stadium, where each honed their wrestling skills. However, another noteworthy connection unites them: their journeys to the Olympic podium were guided by foreign expertise. An exception to this trend is Sakshi Malik, who, since Sushil’s groundbreaking success in 2008, stands as the sole medal-winning wrestler not reliant on external support.
For Sushil and Yogeshwar, extensive training with Georgian coach Vladimir Merstervishvili before the London Games played a pivotal role. Bajrang worked closely with Shako Bendinitis from Georgia, while Ravi had Russia’s Kamal Malikov in his corner during the Tokyo Olympics.
Amidst controversies involving former president Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh, the wrestling community’s needs have seemingly been overlooked. Wrestlers with Olympic aspirations have voiced their plea for professional assistance from foreign experts, emphasizing its potential to enhance both qualification prospects and medal contention, as history has demonstrated.
Foreign coaches bring a wealth of knowledge on modern techniques, expose wrestlers to sports science advancements, and excel in devising in-match strategies while effectively communicating from the sidelines. Wrestlers argue that Indian trainers have not matched this proficiency.
Notably, Deepak Punia, a consistent performer in recent years, benefits from a foreign personal coach—Russia’s Kamal Malikov, who also coached Ravi in Tokyo. Bajrang is reportedly set to engage the services of another Russia-born wrestler, Ali Shabanov, independently arranged through their sponsors, not facilitated by the federation or government.
The majority of wrestlers, however, find themselves navigating their paths without such external support. Wrestling stands as the only sport this century to secure at least one medal at each of the last four Games. It would be unfortunate if administrative mismanagement jeopardizes this commendable streak.
Sreejesh or Krishan: Who should get the nod?
The Tokyo Olympics marked the end of a long wait for Indian hockey, as the men’s team returned to the podium after 41 years, clinching a bronze medal. A pivotal moment in this achievement is etched in Indian hockey folklore—a remarkable save by goalkeeper PR Sreejesh during a penalty corner with just 6.4 seconds left on the clock. Sreejesh not only stopped the well-struck shot but also deftly palmed it away, ensuring no rebound and realizing the dream not just for the team but for himself. He considers this save as one of the most crucial in his career.
Fast forward three years, and the 35-year-old Sreejesh is still a strong contender. However, securing his position as India’s No. 1 goalkeeper will not be a straightforward task this time. The emergence of Krishan Bahadur Pathak, nearly a decade younger than Sreejesh, adds complexity to the decision for the Indian management.
Under coaches Craig Fulton and previously Graham Reid, India has consistently rotated its two main goalkeepers each quarter, regardless of the match’s magnitude. This strategy has kept Sreejesh alert and, more significantly, allowed Pathak to gain confidence. While Pathak was part of the Tokyo squad, he wasn’t in the playing list, and the decision to trust Sreejesh was evident.
Pathak has showcased his skills in recent opportunities, particularly standing out for his ability to make reflex saves with the stick in the Pro League. It is presumed that the Pro League will once again provide him with opportunities to stake his claim.
Sreejesh maintained high standards in India’s Tokyo campaign, culminating in iconic images of him perched on top of the goalposts. Despite his consistent performance, whether he will continue to guard the posts in Paris is a thought-provoking decision awaiting the coaching staff led by Fulton.
