Selections are always controversial

Bengaluru: Cricket team selections in India are never devoid of drama. And the team picked for the Asia Cup is no different. The exclusion of Shreyas Iyer, Washington Sundar and Yashasvi Jaiswal has triggered sharp reactions from a few former players and experts.

Their criticism is understandable, for all three have put up performances worthy of recognition. Yet, while it is easy to call out the selectors for omissions, it would also be fair if those voicing concern suggested who, among the chosen 15, ought to have been left out.

One legitimate argument is the inclusion of Iyer instead of Rinku Singh who, after a golden start to his India career, has endured a modest run in his last two T20I series against England and South Africa. His returns don't inspire great confidence, and on that count, the selectors could have leaned towards Iyer.

The Mumbai batter, with his proven record in the middle order, particularly in stabilising situations and tackling spin, does merit a place. But the bigger question is whether Iyer would have actually fitted into the playing XI. Shubman Gill’s return to the side has already put Sanju Samson’s spot in jeopardy, and adding Iyer into that mix would have further complicated the team management's task of arriving at the final XI.

Would it have been fair then to carry a batter of Iyer’s stature only for him to warm the benches? Because, in all probability, Rinku himself may not find a place in the first-choice XI.

The only realistic way to accommodate Iyer in the starting line-up would have been to leave out Tilak Varma, who, since his promotion to No. 3, has made an instant impression. Tilak has shown the ability to adapt to match situations and the temperament to bat deep. While he is no Virat Kohli yet in his chosen position, he is worth every investment in him. Dropping him at this stage, when he has been doing little wrong, would have been unjust. That is the catch-22 situation the selectors found themselves in.

Iyer’s form and recent record certainly cry for inclusion. He has worked his way back from injury, answered questions about his fitness and proved that he remains one of India’s most reliable middle-order batters across formats. But selection in a cricket-mad country like India is often about timing. Right man but wrong time.  

Washington Sundar, too, finds himself in an unfortunate position. Over the past year, his batting has come a long way, adding substance to his more-than-handy bowling. Yet, with three spinners -- Kuldeep Yadav, Varun Chakravarthy and all-rounder Axar Patel -- being certain starters, it was always going to be a toss-up between him and Shivam Dube. While the Tamil Nadu player brings more to the table, Dube seems to have edged him out as he is seen as a back-up for Hardik Pandya, who is more prone to breaking down a spin all-rounder like Axar.

Then there is Jaiswal, whose exclusion will sting equally, if not the most. The young opener is in the form of his life, piling up runs across formats consistently without compromising on strike rates. To deny him a place again, despite the weight of his runs, will no doubt hurt him, but handing him a berth would have meant nudging someone else aside, and that would have carried its own sense of injustice. With Gill assured to open and Abhishek Sharma unshakable at the top at the moment, there was little room to manoeuvre to accommodate Jaiswal.

But then, this is going to be the eternal dilemma of Indian cricket. The sheer depth of talent ensures that selections aren't without controversy. Every inclusion has its counterpoint and every exclusion has its justification. There are always going to be two or three worthy players missing out and that's not because they lack ability but because of combination compulsions. No matter which 15 are picked, someone deserving will always be left behind and criticism doesn't come as a surprise.