
Let8217;s get a few things straight. Fast bowlers getting injured isn8217;t new, it isn8217;t news. But one fast bowler having to return home 10 times count that! in four years while on tour is a shocker. Again, players claiming their full fitness in their eagerness to play is as old as organised sport; but an apparent breakdown of the system meant to prevent that from happening deserves some sort of investigation.
This paper8217;s reportage of the Zaheer Khan injury issue is not prompted by the bowler8217;s injury alone, but by the wider implications of that injury. Zaheer Khan has a fitness test on Thursday; for all we know, he may pass it, play on Sunday and end the tournament as its leading wicket-taker. That8217;s not the point.
The point is this: Why is India8217;s fast-bowling attack, universally described as its best ever, held hostage by the fragility of one bowler8217;s fitness. It8217;s an unnecessary domino effect: If Zaheer is injured, the pressure falls on Irfan and Balaji; Nehra 8212; himself wrapped in cotton-wool 8212; is pressed into action, Agarkar, in Middlesex, is put on standby.
The best attack, the worst management.
There are two issues involved here. First, the intrigue surrounding the injury 8212; and every other injury in the past five-odd years; second, the apparent lack of accountability for the alarming injury rate.
The lack of openness is well known; the BCCI has an army of spin doctors whose job it is to obfuscate, obstruct, deny and, when the truth comes out, promise action on a report that is to be filed. When the BCCI eventually moves to a permanent home, it should set aside a room just for the reports on injuries. That is, if reports are indeed filed 8212; because not one has ever been made public.
Which brings us to the second issue: Who is accountable if a player coming back from injury breaks down during his comeback series? Is it the player himself someone who will obviously hardsell his own case, the selector whose zone he plays for, the physio who signs his fitness certificate, the captain and coach who push for his inclusion? The logical answer would be physio, because this is his area of core competence.
In that case, will someone please explain why Zaheer Khan was picked for the Third Test against Australia at Melbourne last year after missing the second with a hamstring injury, then aggravated that same injury and missed the ODI series? And why Harbhajan was taken to Australia with a finger injury 8212; which he8217;d claimed to have had treated? If, as BCCI secretary SK Nair told this paper on Tuesday, Andrew Leipus is responsible, who8217;s keeping track of how many times he8217;s got it wrong in the past four years?
What is alarming is the response, to the news of Zaheer8217;s injury, of someone closely involved with the coaching staff: We weren8217;t sure whether he8217;d make it through the Asia Cup. That8217;s responsibility for you!
Unfortunately, there is no one to provide answers. Mr Dalmiya, professional in so many other ways, has perpetuated the Soviet-like Iron Curtain system he inherited, so he must 8212; in the absence of anyone else stepping forward 8212; take the flak.
This November, the BCCI will celebrate, with much fanfare, the 75th anniversary of its formation. It8217;s come a long way since to be the richest body in world cricket. Most of the credit for this is due to Dalmiya 8212; but while his focus has been on the money, he8217;s taken his eye off the game8217;s overall development.
The BCCI holds its elections this September; tragically, no one will be talking reforms. That8217;s why Zaheer Khan8217;s hamstring will always be a cause for concern.