Selection bias: Are cricketers treated differently?

As Virat Kohli reluctantly trudged back with a million thoughts swarming his mind after gloving Kagiso Rabada to a short fine-leg off his hip, one couldn't help but feel for the struggling batter. After another failure, this time on Friday against Punjab Kings, he looked skywards and screamed, as if telling the invisible force, 'What else do you want me to do…?' Having broken several records and threatened to rewrite many more, the batting virtuoso has been reduced to a walking wicket. While his slump has been prolonged, never has it been more glaring than in the last month and a half. Runs have dried up as alarmingly as his on-field theatrics, though the ubiquitous "Kohli Cam" continues to remain conspicuously operational.

The 33-year-old’s sustained poor form could stand between Royal Challengers Bangalore and an elusive IPL title, but it's unlikely that Kohli will be benched -- unless he opts out on his own. Even in the high-stakes franchise league, where team owners have little time for sentiment and stature, it's difficult to ignore Kohli's standing. He is cricketing royalty, so he continues to be in RCB’s scheme of things.

Chennai Super Kings seem to believe they can't do without the 40-year-old MS Dhoni, who had to reassume captaincy responsibilities after Ravindra Jadeja "decided" to step down following a string of losses in his maiden stint at the helm. And with due respect to Rohit Sharma's successes as both captain and batter in the league over the years with Mumbai Indians, would any other skipper have survived after the kind of personal dip in form he has endured in the ongoing edition and after presiding over the team's plummeting fortunes?

This question is particularly pertinent following Chris Gayle's claims that he wasn't given the respect he deserved in the last couple of years of his IPL career. The greatest batter of the T20 format cited this slight as the reason for his decision to opt-out of the last IPL auction, though whether he would have found any takers is another matter altogether. While it's true that Gayle had overstayed his welcome in a tournament he lit up with his ferocious batsmanship, is it easier for franchises and team managements to ignore the past credentials of foreign superstars in selectoral matters compared to India's? It’s a theory firmed up by Mumbai Indians dropping the struggling Kieron Pollard for Thursday's match against Chennai Super Kings, though Rohit was quick to add that it was a Trinidadian himself who had offered to sit out.

The IPL's short history is replete with myriad examples of foreign players either being forced to leave the franchise, dropped or opting to sit out. From Kumar Sangakkara (Deccan Chargers) to David Warner (Sunrisers Hyderabad) and from Steven Smith (Rajasthan Royals and Delhi Capitals) to Pat Cummins (Kolkata Knight Riders) to Ricky Ponting (Mumbai Indians), the big guns of international cricket have had to face the ignominy of being benched while their Indian counterparts were/are treated more kindly. Yes, Rahul Dravid (RCB), Sourav Ganguly (KKR) and Dhoni (with Rising Pune Supergiant) didn't enjoy the best of relationships with their franchise owners and all three had to give up the captaincy. But the backlash of the fans did dent the popularity of those teams.

Dravid received more cheers from Bengaluru fans than some of RCB's big players and RPSG (where Ganguly had moved to after the KKR stint) got equal, if not more, support at the Eden Gardens than the local team. The less said the better about the negative impact of Dhoni's ouster. And mind you, Ganguly by then was done with his India career while Dravid's white-ball future was all but over.

While the fans' ire could be one of the obvious reasons why franchises go soft on the Indian biggies, team composition plays an equally crucial role. With no more than four foreign players mandated to be in the playing XI, the room for manoeuvre is a lot less when it comes to a Pollard or a Ponting. It is easier to ‘carry’ one non-performing asset among seven Indian players than accommodate a misfiring overseas star who constitutes 25% of the available quota.

"It's a demand and supply phenomenon," says former India player Vijay Bharadwaj, who was part of the RCB set-up in the initial years, after which has been commentating on the league for the host broadcaster. "If you have four foreign players in the 11, chances are all of them will be superstars in their own right. That's not the case with the Indians. All 10 teams put together we may have 8-10 cricketers of that stature. They are needed for the success of the league and the popularity of franchises. So, it becomes that much more difficult to drop them. You can't replace Kohli with another player of his standing, but you can drop a foreign player without worrying about its negative impact," he explains.

This is one of the primary reasons why franchises are increasingly opting for captains who are Indians - only two (RCB and SRH) of the 10 teams have foreign players as captains. And Faf du Plessis’ appointment as RCB skipper only came about after plenty of deliberations and because Kohli stepped down at the end of last season. While the South African has pulled his weight with the bat and kept his team in playoff contention, the same can't be said of SRH skipper Kane Williamson, whose lack of runs at the top of the order, coupled with his team's inconsistencies, has queered the pitch for the 2016 champions.

Twice in the past, the Hyderabad franchise has been in the thick of the captaincy conundrum with Sangakkara (Deccan Chargers) sitting out voluntarily and Warner being sacked as captain last season. History is unlikely to repeat itself this season with so much at stake going into the business end of things. Then again, Kohli continued to rule the roost as RCB captain despite not delivering a single title in almost eight years at the helm.

Clearly, different yardsticks are in play for Indian and overseas superstars but then again, not without reason is it the Indian Premier League.