Peak Player Power: Pandya Hits IPL's Auction Process For A Six

When the player retention/release names were announced one thought that in IPL many decisions defied reason. But a closer look revealed a smart method – no madness – except in some cases. In a way the entire exercise was HR at work where employers off load non-performers while holding on to assets. Teams need to reset, find players to strengthen their squad, fill gaps with replacements – all this within the ₹100 crore player purse.

- 

The Pandya switch-hit makes sense because Mumbai Indians wanted a multi skill set player (batsman/bowler/captain) and Pandya is the total package, also insurance in case Tim David doesn’t connect near the death. Pandya wants more money, which is okay in a corporate set-up because bright people will move if not rewarded adequately.

While MI and Pandya win big, Gujarat Titans are the losers, having lost their captain who was a prime asset. They are helpless victims because they can’t do much if a guy is firm on exiting. Also, why would GT or anyone else want an unhappy player. Prudence dictates that you mask your disappointment and issue a PR statement – totally insincere – wishing the departing player ‘good luck in future endeavours’.

While Pandya’s move is rational, some retentions/releases seem quite baffling. Kolkata Knight Riders have sacked the entire new-ball attack -- foreign talent (Lockie Fergusson, Tim Southee) and Indian quicks (Shardul Thakur, Umesh Yadav, Kulwant Khejroliya). It is difficult to figure out how Sam Curran escaped the axe, or the reason Cameron Green changed teams but kept his inflated ₹18 crore contract. That some big-ticket players (Wanindu Hasaranga, Harshal Patel, Shahrukh Khan, Harry Brook) will be subjected to market correction is not unexpected.

The real story, however, is hidden behind what one sees at first glance. But before that a quick rewind.