0
0
Former Indian cricketer Surinder Khanna’s frustration is entirely understandable. Delhi’s loss to Saurashtra by 10 wickets within two days of play in the penultimate Ranji Trophy league match does raise eyebrows, especially for a team with Delhi’s rich cricketing legacy. Such a result not only reflects poorly on the team’s performance but also suggests lapses in planning, execution, and perhaps even mental toughness when facing challenging situations. To lose outright in a game that was effectively got over within two days emphasizes the lack of fight and resilience in Delhi’s approach.
Even if the first-innings total was below par, the contest should have provided an opportunity for the team to stage a comeback by taking calculated risks. That they couldn’t capitalize on this highlights deeper issues, such as poor preparation, weak decision-making under pressure, or a lack of adaptability to changing match scenarios.
“This is utterly disappointing,” Khanna, as a member of the DDCA Cricket Advisory Committee, likely sees this as a failure of both players and team management, said. For a state association like Delhi, with its wealth of talent and resources, such performances are unacceptable, especially against teams like Saurashtra, who, while strong, have fewer resources compared to Delhi. This result should prompt some serious introspection within the Delhi team. That is because DDCA is doing whatever it takes to do its best for the players.
This is probably the best team playing for Delhi and so there is no question of the players not getting selected on merit. Even the coaching staff instilling the right mindset and game plans. Still, there is an over-reliance on individual brilliance rather than collective team effort to reclaim its position as a powerhouse in Indian domestic cricket. Khanna, in fact, raised the issue of Rishabh Pant’s minimalistic contribution in the match. “If you are an Indian cricketer and playing for your state, you should contribute in some form. Playing domestic cricket can’t be formality,” Khanna said.
The issue of neutral curators offering pitches that still favour the home team is a serious one, and the Delhi-Saurashtra match seems to have brought this concern to the forefront once again. The very purpose of introducing neutral curators was to eliminate the advantage of tailor-made pitches for the home team, ensuring fair and competitive conditions for both sides. “However, if curators are still leaning toward preparing pitches that suit the home team’s strengths, it undermines the integrity of the system,” Khanna said.
This is not just a one-off issue but part of a larger trend in domestic cricket, where pitches continue to spark controversy. Whether it’s spin-friendly turners, flat batting tracks, or seaming green tops, the narrative often seems to revolve around how the home team gains an upper hand, despite the presence of neutral curators.
Such practices not only hurt the spirit of the game but also deprive teams of playing in varied conditions that test their adaptability — something critical for preparing players for international cricket. “The BCCI needs to step in and address this issue by ensuring greater accountability for curators, stricter monitoring of pitch preparation, and penalties for deviations from expected standards,” Khanna added.
I don’t think the title of your article matches the content lol. Just kidding, mainly because I had some doubts after reading the article.
Can you be more specific about the content of your article? After reading it, I still have some doubts. Hope you can help me.