Rahul Dravid, Rohit Sharma, BCCI: The Big 3 that failed to end India’s ICC trophy jinx

After yet another ICC event went without a triumph, Indian cricket needs to answer a couple of tough questions if it dares to embark on a bold transition process: Should their coach Rahul Dravid remain unscathed? Does future-proofing Indian cricket involve his continuing presence?To further complicate matters, those in the BCCI who will be in-charge to enforce that change, have their own excesses and ill-conceived whims to reckon with. Another interesting activity would be to take a peek at the self-appraisal form of captain Rohit Sharma. Together, astonishingly despite their obvious merits, earnest intent, intelligence and capabilities, all three – Dravid, Rohit and BCCI – haven’t yet set in motion what they were brought in for.One of the key features of the captaincy reigns of Sourav Ganguly and MS Dhoni was that they built a team, made careers of youngsters. There can be argument over their capabilities – Dhoni’s curious reluctance in leading a Test team, and his tactical & leadership failures especially overseas, and Ganguly’s political machinations within the team – but the lingering memory of their tenures was about youthful vigour, promise delivered, and triumphs.
In the post-Dhoni era, Ravi Shastri and Virat Kohli extended that legacy: they were willing to poke the bear inside the team, provoke their performers, spoke boldly about winning overseas and seeded that desire to eye glory at the world stage.
But India is still thirsting for ICC trophies. The humiliating defeat to Australia in the World Test Championship (WTC) final under Rohit and Dravid hurts more. It’s not just the empty cabinet that’s glaring, but the path they have taken is uninspiring too.

Kohli and Shastri had their faults. They made a few glaring makes – the failure to find a No. 4 for the 2019 World Cup, playing two spinners after rain washed out the opening day of the last WTC final, an outdated style in T20Is, and the surrender on the last lap of an ICC Trophy campaign. Rohit and Dravid were supposed to erase the occasional whimsicalness seen in the earlier regime.
Dravid came with a remarkable hands-on coaching experience through the system, from U-19s to India A. Him putting himself through that organic path was admirable. Rohit came through a stellar captaincy stint in the Indian Premier League, and showed the dare and discipline needed in converting himself into a Test opener to kickstart a late resurgence. Together, much was expected. In simplic terms, it was felt that Dravid would shape the Test team, and Rohit could mould the white-ball team.
Flattering to deceive
The team selections leading up to the last T20 World Cup were puzzling. Kohli’s spark of genius for two balls off Pakan pacer Haris Rauf triggered a nationalic outpouring of hope, but it was a jaded campaign. The problems were plenty. There was a sameness at the top of the batting order, the inexplicable faith in death-overs special Harshal Patel in alien conditions, the lack of trust in Mohammed Shami, the failure to replace Axar Patel with the attacking gamble of leg-spinner Yuzvendra Chahal, the inability to find clarity in Rishabh Pant’s role.
Not many “risks’ were taken this team management. It was couched as ‘consency’ in team selection, but that’s just flimsy dressing. For a while, they had Deepak Hooda floating at the top, and when he hit a hundred, they pushed him down and eventually out.
In Tests, Dravid, stirred WTC urges, began to push for rank turners. Not the wholesome approach one had envisioned from him, but it was accepted as surprising real-politicking an old diplomatic hand. But when the batsmen struggled at home and overseas, he would say “there have been tough pitches; averages have fallen for all batsmen”. Irony gasped.

Shastri is often credited with an attitudinal change, the easiest factor to credit or discredit him, but his tactical nous was appreciable. The tactic of the middle-stump line in Australia, converting their strength into weakness, the inclusion of Ravindra Jadeja in the lower middle-order in 2018, the elevation of Rohit as opener, the dare to make the team believe in overseas performances.
It needs a strength of character to push, tug, and drag the team forward. It also needs a skilful support staff that is aligned with the head coach. Shastri had bowling coach Bharat Arun. Dravid’s choice of support staff has also come into question. One of the carry-overs from Shastri’s stint is batting coach Vikram Rathour. Despite him being part of the dressing room for long, nothing has visibly changed in the approach of the Indian top order. All the old errors have generally remained.
Tactics and man-management
There was one interesting thought that former India player and coach who worked with Dravid in the U-19 set up, WV Raman, wrote in this newspaper when Dravid became the India coach.
“Can he take what he gives? Ravi could. Ravi would probably heavily lean on you as a player at a certain stage if he felt it was required. Say the strong stuff. But he could also take it if the player was to give it back, provided there was enough justification for that. The question would be can Rahul handle that. Does he like to be challenged a younger boy? That’s what it is all going to boil down to … Would Dravid be comfortable with the fact that it’s okay to lose, in trying to win,” Raman had written.
That psychological terrain was expected, but what was not has been the planning errors, tactical slip-ups, misreading of pitches, and lack of persuasion. During the IPL, there was talk that all the India team bowlers would practice with Dukes balls, but that didn’t quite happen. Injuries to Jasprit Bumrah and Pant – two key factors in the Test success of the previous regime – didn’t help, but the sense of drift seen in the team wasn’t expected.
There has been criticism that the debacle at the WTC final shows that the Indian team are “chokers”. That isn’t quite true; with ‘choking’, there is an element of expectation of the team doing well, having prepared extensively and yet folding at the final lap. That isn’t the case here.
This disaster was a foretold debacle, and unsurprising. Of the Indian board that is more twitchy than its players about ICC trophies but doesn’t have the dare to prioritise performance and preparation over commerce. Of the Indian team management that has sighed about external barriers, but not been honest enough in reflecting, upgrading, planning, and raising their standards. A disaster foretold is the worst kind of debacle for a management and board that has the money, structure and desire but not the discipline, will, and imagination.