Sanjay Manjrekar is convinced that while Vaibhav Sooryavanshi is a hugely promising batter, his fielding abilities are yet to be properly tested amid growing clamour for his India debut. Manjrekar was particularly critical of the Impact Player rule, which allows certain players to contribute solely as batters or bowlers without playing a fuller role in matches. Take Rohit Sharma, for instance. The former India captain, owing to injury concerns, was used purely as a batter, something Manjrekar does not believe should become the template for a young player like Sooryavanshi.
The Impact Player rule may work well in the IPL, but in top-level cricket – be it in ODIs or Tests – a player is ultimately judged by his all-round contribution on the field: the catches he takes, the runs he saves, and the pressure he handles in different situations.
“I was just thinking about this when I saw Rohit Sharma in the last game. He scored 22 runs off 15 balls. His entire contribution lasted 15 deliveries, yet he’ll still receive the full match fee or whatever comes with it. I’m not someone who likes focusing too much on money, but when there’s easy money to be made for very little effort, you have to start questioning that model. That can never be a sustainable, long-term formula for success. The more I think about it, the more I feel we need to do away with the Impact Player rule for this very reason. Is that really want to see about Vaibhav Sooryavanshi? To only see one side of his game? A cricketer should be someone who contributes across disciplines. Earlier, we admired players like Inzamam-ul-Haq not just for their batting, but because we also saw the other side of them in the field. That helped you properly assess and understand the player,” Manjrekar said on the Insight Edge podcast by Sportstar.
“Now, someone can come in, hit a few balls, and disappear. You never get to see the other dimensions of his game. We’re no longer expecting players to show all three facets of being a cricketer. The more I think about the Impact Player rule, the more I feel you want to see a player out there on the field, under pressure, reacting to situations. If he’s a great batter but slightly vulnerable in the field, I’d like to see teams exploit that too. That is part of the game. As fielders, we’ve all experienced the pressure that comes after dropping a catch, and then having to recover from it mentally while batting. That tension is part of elite sport. You don’t want the highest level of the game to become too easy.”
‘Hampering Sooryavanshi’s growth’
Manjrekar was among the few voices that weren’t convinced of Sooryavanshi’s fielding. Zubin Bharucha, the man responsible for scouting Sooryavanshi at 13, brushed away those concerns, backing the youngster’s strong arm and extremely agile field movements. Yet, Manjrekar reckons that as long as the Impact Player rule exists, players will get the opportunity to cover their flaws.
“Yes, absolutely,” Manjrekar said if ‘we are hampering Vaibhav Sooryavanshi’s development’. “India won the last two T20 World Cups despite the Impact Player rule. Yes, someone like Shivam Dube can contribute without bowling and still help the team succeed. Those things are happening. But for me, a cricketer shouldn’t just walk in, play a quick cameo, and then sit back and relax.
I want the game to test players more thoroughly. If someone is a good bowler, I don’t just want to see him bowl four overs. I want to see how he fields as well. The game should examine every aspect of a player, not just one skill in isolation.”
