Those partial to lazy elegance and handsome drives will rue the absence of VVS Laxman in India's World Cup squad, but only mildly. Laxman is the kind of player about whom it's easy to get sentimental but, in the light of cold reason, it is difficult to disagree vehemently with his non-selection. True, he was consistent against West Indies. Also true that he wasn't the only batsman whose technique was found wanting on New Zealand's excessively seam-and-bounce-laden wickets. But of all the Indian batsmen who have failed in New Zealand, Laxman is least suited for the one-day game, because his feet fail to move both within the crease and between the wickets. With Laxman at one end, the sharp single becomes an improbability and a run-out is only a few steps away.

He is as safe a catcher at first slip as any India have, but in the World Cup he might often be required to stop a single or cut a three to two, jobs that ill suit him. Admittedly, he is one among the many slow movers in the Indian team, but surely he was less indispensable than Sourav Ganguly and Javagal Srinath, who are expected to open the batting and bowling for India.

Dinesh Mongia, Laxman's replacement, would have been a marginal choice for the selectors. He is the only player to be selected from outside the squad that is currently in New Zealand and it can be argued that his not being in New Zealand has actually worked in his favour.

Mongia is as leaden-footed a batsman as Laxman – if not more – and it is unlikely that he would have had less difficulty in overcoming the conditions. But the wickets in South Africa are expected to be easier on the batsmen than the ones in New Zealand and Mongia, who is jostling for the seventh batting slot with Sanjay Bangar, is a sharper fielder and a better runner between the wickets.

It is unfortunate that Murali Kartik had to miss out again, but his fate was sealed when the selectors decided to bring him back home after the Tests against New Zealand. He was outstanding in India's last one-day series, against West Indies, in which bowlers were flogged as if they were slaves to the will of the batsmen.

But once Anil Kumble took the second spinner's spot for the one-day leg of the New Zealand tour, Kartik was always going to be out. Kumble over Kartik is a pragmatic cop-out over imagination and flair and it is a great pity. It is easy to understand the logic: Kumble's experience nudged him ahead for a important tournament like the World Cup, but the selectors would have done better to use the same ruthlessness they used against Laxman.

It is obvious that they were swayed by Kumble's impressive career record. But had they chosen to focus on the recent past instead, they could have seen the real picture. In the last 18 months, he has managed a mere 26 wickets in 28 matches at an average of almost 44 with only one three-wicket haul – against Kenya. In his last one-day series against West Indies, he seemed out of sorts and completely out of ideas, prompting the same selectors to replace him with Kartik. By falling back on him, the selectors have taken the easy way out instead of gambling on an exciting talent who could have been a matchwinner.

Sanjay Bangar is a man a of limited talent, but is a committed team man and a wholehearted trier, and it's perhaps the faith of the team management that kept him in the team. South Africa will be a big test for his gentle medium pacers and all-dour-or-all-attack batting.

The logic of selecting a second wicketkeeper is a sound one, but is Parthiv Patel the right choice? The selectors had already limited their options by not picking Ajay Ratra or Vijay Dahiya, two legitimate contenders for the stand-by wicketkeeper's job, in the first 30, and when the time came to crunch it to 15, they had only Deep Dasgupta as an alternative. It can be argued that Parthiv is one for the future, but pray, if Rahul Dravid gets injured, is he the right man to bat at number 7 in the World Cup?

Sambit Bal is editor of Wisden.com in India.

© Wisden CricInfo Ltd