Monday, February 18, 2002 The day before India's last one-dayer against England at Mumbai, one of the national selectors stormed into the room of Nadeem Memon, the curator of the Wankhede Stadium who also happens to be an office-bearer of the Mumbai Cricket Association, and gave him an earful.

The selector had reason to be miffed. Earlier that day, Memon had, in full public view, banished him from the pitch area. The selector wasn't wearing spikes, so he couldn't have caused any damage to the playing area. To rub salt into the wound, a fellow selector was seen walking on the pitch a while later. Later that night, fortified with alcohol, the aggrieved selector was out to avenge his humiliation. "I will show you," he said to Memon. "Do whatever you want, I will make sure none of your Mumbai guys will ever come close to the Indian team."

The man might have been slightly drunk, but he wasn't completely out of his senses. He knew the implications of his words and knew he had the means to carry out his threat. India have a five-man selection panel, with a chairman whose only privilege is to defend the committee's decision before the press. In theory, all are equal with one vote each. In practice, some are more equal than others, because they can swing a few crucial votes during the BCCI elections. They are not on the panel because they are the best men for the job; they are there because favours either need to be accepted or returned.

Indian cricket today is a fully fledged commercial enterprise running into billions of rupees. Yet it is run like a village trust by a clutch of regional satraps. They demand professionalism from Indian cricketers while they themselves rule the game by the law of the jungle: power to the mightiest, the king is always right.

The selectors met earlier this week to pick the Indian captain. It was a charade. Their minds had already been made up. Or rather been made up for them by someone else, the Mighty One. And so Chandu Borde, the chairman, emerged from the meeting to enlighten reporters that they had indeed discussed the candidatures of Anil Kumble and Rahul Dravid, but not that of Sachin Tendulkar ... "because it was rumoured that he wasn't interested".

Poor souls, these selectors: so journalists aren't the only ones who can't get Tendulkar on the phone. Finally, Sourav Ganguly it was, because "his track record was good". It was of little consequence that Ganguly hardly deserves a place in the side as a batsman. Or that his attitude to fitness and the work ethic is a negative influence on the younger members of the Indian side.

It was a shocking dereliction of duty by a committee that has done many small things right. They have consistently picked young players and given them a run. Apart from a Nayan Mongia here and an Iqbal Siddiqui there, there have been no major slips. Given the pulls and pressures from the various zones, this is a significant achievement in itself. But by getting browbeaten into retaining a captain whose current form and disposition make him a liability to the team, they have done Indian cricket a colossal disservice.

Sambit Bal is editor of Wisden.com India and of Wisden Asia Cricket magazine. His column appears every Monday.

More Sambit Bal
Bending the rules?

Two into one

© Wisden CricInfo Ltd