05 July,2026 09:25 AM IST | Mumbai | Sunil Gavaskar
Kane Williamson. Pic/AFP
New Zealand won another series overseas quietly and without any fuss. They were helped to a great extent by the incredible hype around the retirement announcement of the England skipper Ben Stokes. That seemed to have not only taken the England cricket loving public, but even the team by surprise as could be seen by the crazy manner in which they went on to play their second innings.
There is a big school of thought in modern cricket that it doesn't matter if you lose in trying to go for a win. Really? Sure, go for a win, but in cricket if you find that the win is not possible, but a draw can be achieved, then why not go for that option. Here it was not that England were 0-1 down. They were 1-1, so if the third and final Test was drawn then the series would have been shared and not lost. It was not even as if the points that the team got for winning the game would have made a difference to qualifying for the WTC final. So, the approach that was seen was simply mind-boggling, to say the least. Stokes opening the batting and storming down the pitch to the first ball, and then Harry Brook doing Harry Brook things just didn't make any sense whatsoever.
The only explanation is that they knew there would be no action taken for their irresponsible batting. Under the current regime, there's no accountability. You won't be dropped from the squad.
It's not just England, but a lot of teams get to be like a cosy club where new members aren't allowed easy entry. The non-performing members have other qualities like being the joker in the team that keeps the team laughing and that is often considered a must in the high-pressure situations of international cricket. So, even if the player isn't getting runs or wickets, he is kept in the squad to keep the rest laughing.
What this win has shown once again, if ever it needed to be shown, is that no one is indispensable in the game. Kane Williamson, undoubtedly one of the greats of the game retired after the first Test match which the Kiwis lost. That didn't upset the team as Henry Nicholls who replaced Kane Williamson batted well in both the Test matches which New Zealand went on to win.
This business of retiring in the middle of an overseas series is hard to understand. Yes, a player may feel unwanted by the team management, but he has signed a contract to be available for the whole tour and so should be held accountable for that. The selection committee too, while picking the touring squad, has taken the balance of the team into account and picked that player. So, for the player to retire midway through an overseas series can throw that entire balance into disarray. Whether the player thinks he can't make a significant contribution anymore or feels that he is reading from the wrong page than the team management, is no plausible reason to quit midway through an overseas series.
At least in a home series, there's no question of acclimatisation or long travel for the replacement player and in any case in a home series the squads are chosen match by match. There are no contracts involved except for match by match. So, retiring or not making yourself available during a home series is understandable. Playing for the country is a privilege and an honour, not to be taken lightly, even if the individual is a dollar millionaire. It's only when you are a runs and wickets millionaire will you be remembered with fondness and affection by the cricket lovers.
Kane Williamson and Ben Stokes have been giants of the game and will be remembered forever by the fans, but am sure even they will agree that they would have liked to leave the game with a victory for their team.
Professional Management Group
