For the first time in six years, an Indian cricket team will be without a single representative from Mumbai. The exclusion of Ajit Agarkar, on form, and Sachin Tendulkar, through injury, from the team for the tri-series in Sri Lanka later this month is the first such occasion since the LG Cup in Kenya in 1999.Not so long ago a Bombay cap was the three-quarter-mark in any cricketer’s quest for the India cap. Times certainly have changed but Mumbai’s cricketing circle is not exactly buzzing with outrage.Disappointed yes; surprised, not really, they say. Thankfully, there are fewer blaming the selectors and more pointing to the Mumbaikar’s inability to push hard enough for selection - and posing the corollary: ‘‘Who could have made it, really ?’’Nari Contractor says he is sad but can’t conjure up a reason convincing enough to complain in the absence of what he calls an ‘‘eye-opening performance’’ from a Mumbai cricketer. ‘‘The Mumbai team have done decently but there have been no individuals who’ve been consistently outstanding. Try matching them up player-to-position, and tell me who amongst those named can they replace ?’’It’s a phenomenon difficult to explain in a team that has clinched the Ranji Trophy twice in the last three years, and reached the semis in the third. But not unfathomable. Chandrakant Pandit, who guided the ship during the consecutive successes in 2003 and 2004, is phlegmatic. ‘‘It’s unfortunate and hard to know how selectors think but, I guess, these boys have not been able to live up to the high expectations demanded of a Mumbai cricketer.’’‘‘lso there haven’t been enough opportunities, and players like Bahutule, Powar and Nilesh have been under tremendous pressure to prove themselves during the limited openings,’’ he says.The former Mumbai coach adds that it will be a while before anyone else can stake a similar claim to the India cap.Ashok Mankad, who coached the team to the Ranji title in 2000, puts a different spin on things. ‘‘We have to admit that other states and teams have raised their own bar and worked harder. As a Mumbaikar there is a tinge of sadness, but there is no denying that others have improved.’’Nehra or Agarkar?While no reason has been given for Ajit Agarkar’s exclusion from the Indian team, there are several reasons — based on his performance since the 2003 World Cup — why he should have been in the squad. Going purely by stats — admittedly not the sole criterion — Agarkar’s exclusion is a mystery, as is the selectors’ decision to include Ashish Nehra ahead of him.The Agarkar-Nehra comparison shows how the Mumbai pacer is head and shoulders above the Delhi bowler.More points the selectors failed to notice:• He is the second most successful Indian bowler since the World Cup after Irfan Pathan, who has taken 47 wickets, playing in four matches more than Agarkar• His average is the best among the regular bowlers (who’ve taken at least 5 wickets in this period) and so is his strike rate• His economy rate, though not as impressive as one would like, is the best among the Indian pacers (who have played at least 5 matches)• His 6/42 against Australia in VB Series match is the best performance by an Indian bowler in this period• He is the only Indian pacer to take two four-wicket hauls (Sachin is the only other bowler)— Stats by Rajneesh Gupta
