It’s an unfortunate reality in Indian cricket, where age often becomes a barrier for selection despite a player’s form or talent. The focus tends to be on younger cricketers, who are seen as the future of the team even if experienced players continue to perform consistently. In Indian cricket, there’s a perception that a cricketer’s prime is before 30, and once they hit that milestone, making a comeback can be a herculean task, no matter how many runs or wickets they accumulate.
The situation is rather frustrating and somewhat controversial approach to selection in Indian cricket. Karun Nair, who is 33, despite being in form and having a solid domestic record, found himself sidelined largely due to the perception that he’s past his prime. This is a clear example of how age plays a disproportionate role in selection decisions, even when a player like Nair is in the midst of a strong run.
“The fact that the selection process for something as high-profile as the Champions Trophy was delayed because of intense discussions about Nair’s inclusion only further reveals the underlying tension. Some selectors, it seems, think bringing back Nair into the ODIs will be an encouragement for getting Cheteshwar Pujara and Ajinkya Rahane into the Test team. In other words, a player like Nair is reduced to a joke. It has no value that he is scoring runs and most importantly he is in good form,” a BCCI source told CricBlogger.
It’s interesting how cricket selection often becomes a battle between youth and experience, where the selectors have to strike a balance between the two. While young players bring energy and long-term potential, experienced ones like Pujara and Rahane offer stability and the know-how to handle pressure situations. The crux of the matter, however, is whether selectors should prioritize the form of a player in domestic cricket over age or previous credentials. When it’s about a player like Nair, who has consistently performed well, it seems unfair to dismiss his chances purely on the basis of age.