“Do I love India?” Or do I love my state more? Are administrators thinking more about their own associations, their own grants, their own players? Inherently, a team cannot progress unless every constituent has the same objective. Gujarat, or Maharashtra, having three teams does not help India because it dilutes the stream in which young talent bathes. Not even Barbados in its prime could have possessed 45 first class standard cricketers in a year. But three teams from a state means three votes, three grants. So what then is the primary objective? Producing tough cricketers for India or protecting the vote and the grant? Yes, everybody loves India but it is conditional and that condition is hurting Indian cricket badly.

Read the entire piece by Harsha Bhogle in the Indian Express.

Ajit Wadekar hits out at critics who are baying for the seniors in the Indian team.

how can we go ahead and criticise somebody of the stature of Sourav Ganguly, the best captain India has ever produced? And Rahul Dravid? He is rated as the best batsman in any condition against any attack, on any wicket. How can we deny them their genius? How can we talk so irresponsibly? Do we really have to sacrifice these greats just because they are in their early thirties? If only a little attention was given to their fitness, by preserving their energy and not playing them in six-penny tournaments like the one in Malaysia or Timbuktu. Then you would have got a set of fit, nimble-footed, talented stars even now. Consider the average age of the team. Except maybe Bangladesh or the West Indies, India are much better off. Are the likes of Matthew Hayden, Glenn McGrath, Adam Gilchrist, Brian Lara, Stephen Fleming and Sanath Jayasuriya just out of their cots?