The Unfair Singling Out of Sanju Samson: A Tale of Talent, Inconsistency, and Selective Memory
There’s something deeply unsettling about how cricket’s narrative machine chews up and spits out its stars. Take Sanju Samson, for instance. One minute, he’s the hero of India’s T20 World Cup triumph, the next, he’s dropped from the squad for the Zimbabwe series. What makes this particularly fascinating is how quickly the cricketing world forgets its heroes. Personally, I think this isn’t just about form or performance—it’s about a pattern of selective memory and unfair scrutiny that plagues the sport.
The World Cup Hero Turned Scapegoat
Sanju Samson’s omission from the Zimbabwe series feels like a slap in the face, not just for him but for anyone who values consistency in selection. Here’s a player who single-handedly turned India’s fortunes around in the World Cup, scoring 97 not out, 89, and 89 in three consecutive matches. Yet, three low scores in Ireland and England were enough to bench him. What many people don’t realize is that cricket, especially T20s, is a game of highs and lows. Even the greatest struggle with consistency, but few are scrutinized as harshly as Samson.
From my perspective, this isn’t just about his recent failures—it’s about a system that seems to hold him to a different standard. His childhood coach, Biju George, rightly pointed out that Samson wasn’t the only one who failed. Yet, he’s the one being singled out. This raises a deeper question: Why do we expect perfection from certain players while others are given a free pass?
The Pattern of Injustice
One thing that immediately stands out is the recurring pattern in Samson’s career. From being overlooked in his junior days to being dropped after match-winning performances, it’s as if he’s constantly fighting an uphill battle. What this really suggests is that talent alone isn’t enough in cricket—you need the right backing, the right timing, and perhaps a bit of luck.
Take his Under-19 days, for example. Despite scoring runs, he was overlooked in favor of others. Even his World Cup heroics haven’t earned him a stable spot in the squad. If you take a step back and think about it, this isn’t just about Samson—it’s about how cricket treats its players, especially those who don’t fit the mold of the ‘established star.’
The Broader Implications
This isn’t just a story about Sanju Samson; it’s a reflection of a larger trend in cricket. Players like Suryakumar Yadav, who captained India to a World Cup win, are also being dropped without a second thought. Meanwhile, others seem to slot into the team effortlessly, regardless of form. A detail that I find especially interesting is how quickly the narrative shifts from ‘hero’ to ‘liability.’
In my opinion, this speaks to a deeper issue in cricket’s selection process. It’s not just about performance—it’s about politics, favoritism, and a lack of long-term vision. Samson’s case is a symptom of a system that values short-term results over player development.
What’s Next for Samson?
The omission from the Zimbabwe series isn’t just a setback for Samson—it’s a missed opportunity for Indian cricket. By sidelining him, the selectors are not only undermining his confidence but also sending a message to other players: perform or perish. Personally, I think this approach is shortsighted. Cricket is a game of comebacks, and Samson has proven time and again that he has the talent to bounce back.
But here’s the thing: cricket shouldn’t be about constantly proving oneself. It should be about nurturing talent, giving players the space to grow, and recognizing that form is cyclical. Samson’s story is a reminder that the sport needs to rethink how it treats its players, especially those who have delivered when it mattered most.
Final Thoughts
Sanju Samson’s omission from the Zimbabwe series is more than just a selection decision—it’s a commentary on the state of cricket today. It’s about how we value players, how we remember their contributions, and how quickly we’re willing to discard them. From my perspective, this isn’t just unfair to Samson; it’s unfair to the sport itself.
If there’s one takeaway from this saga, it’s that cricket needs to do better. Better for its players, better for its fans, and better for its future. Because if we keep treating our stars like disposable assets, we’ll lose more than just matches—we’ll lose the essence of the game.
