TV 'sting' row: Chetan Sharma’s position as chief selector is untenable

The last thing Indian cricket needed in the middle of a marquee series that holds the key to qualification for the final of the World Test Championship (WTC) is a distraction of any sort. The ‘sting’ operation conducted by a media house on Chetan Sharma, the chief selector, is, truth to tell, little more than a distraction and has mercifully only had minimal effect, but it brings to the fore several important questions that need to be answered swiftly and decisively.

If Chetan is guilty of anything, it’s of being naïve, silly, loose-tongued and trusting of an individual whom he barely knows. The ‘sting’ didn’t unearth any major revelations, no matter that the said media house has tried to go to town and embellished its operation with the dramatic hashtag #Gameover. It might be for Chetan, but not for anyone else drawn into a sordid episode that has done little to espouse the cause of ethical journalism.

Also read: Chetan Sharma TV sting row: ‘Indian cricketers take injections to play’

A desperate Chetan

Posing as someone else dangling a carrot to further loosen up an already loose tongue is no credit to the profession, especially when the issue can hardly be considered one of ‘national significance with the potential for life-altering consequences.’ Carried away by his own sense of self-importance, Chetan let slip details of conversations he had with personnel highly placed in the Indian cricketing firmament, including the current captain Rohit Sharma and his predecessor Virat Kohli.

The more one listened to the ‘chat’ between the reporter and Chetan, the deeper was the impression that this was a man desperately trying to showcase himself as the man most responsible for the future of Indian cricket because he is the chairman of the selection committee. It’s worth remembering that Chetan was among four selectors who formed the previous panel which was disbanded not long after India’s semifinal loss to England in the T20 World Cup last November, and was the only one to return to the next committee, again as chairman.

Also read: BCCI’s new selection committee named; Chetan Sharma remains chairman

Among other things, Chetan has spoken about how Kohli needed to be ousted as the One-Day International captain too once he had expressed his desire to step from the leadership role in T20Is. That’s hardly ‘news’; the same line had been touted by the same individual in the past, and while the BCCI president (Sourav Ganguly in this case) has the right to accept or reject the call, ultimately the onus of selecting a team, and its captain, largely rests with the selection panel. Chetan’s observation that Ganguly didn’t favour Rohit, but that he wasn’t happy with Kohli, is an open secret. All the former all-rounder has done is formalise a widely held belief, even if he didn’t do so in an official capacity on a public platform.

Damaging remarks

The reference to Jasprit Bumrah being less than fully fit, and being rushed into competitive play, is again public knowledge because Chetan had made the same remarks in a press conference late last year. He hasn’t covered himself in glory by referring to players taking painkilling injections to turn out for the country when less than fully fit. By also claiming that these injections did not contain substances not on the World Anti Doping Agency’s (WADA) list of banned drugs, Chetan has debunked his own ‘conspiracy theory’.

It must also not be forgotten that no international sportsperson is ever 100% fit and that if a team was to be formed only with those who are found 100% fit, it will be difficult to put even two or three performers on the park. Such is the nature of professional sport that niggles are a part and parcel of the ecosystem. Indeed, some of the greatest performances have come when players have battled on while combating injuries with the assistance of painkillers, like VVS Laxman in Mohali when he muscled India to an improbable win against Australia in 2010 while struggling with a terrible back, or like Hanuma Vihari and R Ashwin, more recently, in Sydney in 2021 when they defied hamstring and back injuries respectively to steer India to a memorable draw.

Also read: India vs Australia Test series schedule, squads, live TV, streaming, past results and more

Some of Chetan’s more damaging remarks are about his half-hour phone conversations with Rohit, or that Hardik Pandya, the T20I captain when Rohit is rested, spends a lot of time in Chetan’s home. Irrespective of whether he has taken liberty with the truth or not, it is unlikely that Chetan would not have lost the confidence of these two, and other members of the Indian team, management staff included. How will Rohit, for instance, be emboldened to speak his mind at the next selection committee meeting when it could so easily come to pass that his so-called remarks might be made available on a public platform by a gullible chairman? What will Pandya make of what Chetan has said about him?

‘Stings’ for TRP ratings

Once confidence and trust disappear at that level, it will be impossible for all the primary decision-makers to work cohesively, without friction or apprehensions. Chetan’s position as chief selector has become untenable following the developments in the lead-up to the second Test against Australia, starting at the Arun Jaitley Stadium in Delhi on Friday (February 17). The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) hasn’t yet officially reacted to the ‘sting’, but it can’t afford to maintain a studied silence for much longer. As things stand, the Indian team has only been announced for the first two of the four Tests, and the third Test is scheduled to start in Indore on March 1. Will it be realistic to expect Rohit to interact with Chetan without inhibition when it comes to discussing personnel and potential changes to the squad?

In the larger scheme of things, Chetan has done himself, more than anyone else, a great disservice by allowing his tongue and his desire to impress to get the better of him. If retribution comes in the form of a sack, that’s no more than he deserves. It need not have been this way, but this is another reality check to those in positions of responsibility not to speak unguardedly about sensitive issues to near-strangers, because the potential for damage is far greater than the possibility of gains of any nature when one weighs the risk against the rewards.

And oh, can we go easy on these so-called ‘stings’ please? The audience deserves a lot better than TRP ratings couched in the garb of ‘investigative reportage’.