There have been a lot of questions asked of whether Rohit Sharma should stay away from one of the Test matches for personal reasons when he is captain. More so with a lot on the line for Indian cricket. Some have given the examples of Sunil Gavaskar, Sourav Ganguly and MS Dhoni, and said that Rohit should have followed their template and been with the team.
The truth is there is no right or wrong in this. Rohit can’t be judged by anyone else’s standards. It is entirely his personal decision and he is very much entitled to it. A moral judgment is entirely misplaced, and prioritising family duties doesn’t make Rohit any less committed to the national cause.
Compared to earlier times, this is a more gender-equal world. At least, the consciousness is more. Paternity leave is a reality, and rightly so. If someone wants to be with family, he is very much entitled to do so. Yes, the Test match is important, but it should never be either or. You can’t be judged by this, and no one else has the right to question this call.
In fact, the counter-argument is that by doing what he is, Rohit is setting an example. There is still a lot of gender disparity in India and Rohit, a role model to many, is making a statement. If Rohit is, many others also will, and that can only make India a better society going forward.
Someone said to me the other day that Sunny bhai had to wait for months to see the face of his child. Dhoni was the same boat, though advances in communication had at least made video calls possible by then. While such acts were indeed tough, they were a matter of individual choice. Gavaskar did what he felt was right. Rohit is doing what he thinks is the correct thing to do. The matter ends there.
If I were asked what I would do, I’d have no hesitation in saying I’d be there with family. Again, such a call wouldn’t make me any less committed to my work. These are sensitive issues, and individual choices need to be respected.
Coming to the more difficult issue at hand, if Rohit isn’t there for the first Test, what could be India’s team combination? With some days still left, the team management will surely wait to see who is shaping up well in practice. But one thing is for certain. Dhruv Jurel, by doing what he did in the India A game in Melbourne, has indeed made a case for himself in the middle order. Also, with Jurel there, Rishabh Pant could be played purely as a batter and that would greatly help with his workload. In a five-Test series, it could be decisive, for Pant is currently India’s go-to man in red-ball cricket.
What has stood out in Jurel is his temperament. He wasn’t afraid to leave balls and has shown the penchant for a fight. At no point was he in a hurry to get some runs and play the “release shot” as many others did. That’s what makes him a very good candidate for a middle-order batting slot.
In fact, I’d say the less we focus on trying to judge Rohit, the better. Instead, there should be a lot more debate on the possible opening combination and the likely middle-order choices that India will make for the all-important Perth Test.
Also Read: KL Rahul could be answer to India’s opening dilemma, if he gets his mind right