No more goodbyes: Has Indian cricket finally learned to move on?

We are from the land of Vizzy. It is worth remembering that. A cricketer of mediocre abilities, he used his power and clout to become the captain of India during the 1936 tour to England. His appointment was entirely down to his social manoeuvring and deep pockets. He had issues with India's first ever captain CK Nayudu, kept him away, and even handed a Test cap to a bowler who had insulted Nayudu at the breakfast table. Vizzy's captaincy lasted exactly one tour, but the culture he embodied — power, sentiment, and clout over cold logic, took rather longer to leave Indian cricket. Read Full Story It is only now, nine decades later, that it truly might be leaving. The latest casualty is Suryakumar Yadav. Or rather, the latest symbol. The selectors have moved on from the T20I captain who won them the Asia Cup and, at home in Ahmedabad, successfully defended the T20 World Cup. He is 35, his numbers have curdled badly over the past two seasons, and there is a younger man waiting. That is the story on paper. But Indian cricket has never operated purely on paper, which is why this moment carries the weight it does. Suryakumar Yadav led India's successful defence of T20 World Cup in 2026 (PTI Photo) The backlash was swift, as it always is. Aakash Chopra, one of the sharper voices in the commentary box, put the dissenting case plainly. "You can't deal with a World Cup-winning captain like you kill a house fly," he said in his YouTube show. "He won a trophy. That must mean something. You ask him to exit instead of just dropping him. I feel he should have been given a couple more series." It is a reasonable argument, and it comes from a reasonable place: the idea that great service earns the right to a dignified farewell. Indian cricket has long believed this, often to its own detriment. THE PRECEDENTS Consider the precedents. Sunil Gavaskar, during India's 1986 tour of England, told Imran Khan he intended to retire at the end of the series. Imran persuaded him otherwise, telling him Pakistan was coming to India and he wanted to face him one last time. Gavaskar eventually retired from Test cricket after the Pakistan series of 1987. That extra year, granted on sentiment and the charm of a farewell rivalry, happened to produce one of cricket's most treasured milestones — the 10,000 Test runs. But the point stands: Gavaskar chose when to go. The system accommodated him. Sachin Tendulkar's case was even more illustrative. The wait for his hundredth international hundred stretched across years and extended his ODI career well past its natural end. He played 200 Tests. He played his final series at home, in Mumbai, to a standing ovation that lasted longer than some innings. He chose the door, the time, and the music. Sachin Tendulkar had a sea of fans throng his farewell Test (Reuters File Photo) MS Dhoni took it furthest of all. He was booed at Lord's in 2018, in an India shirt, by a partisan crowd that had lost patience. He played his last World Cup in 2019 and then vanished — no announcement, no retirement, no word. For over a year, the Indian dressing room held its breath. Every selection conversation circled back to the same question. Had he wanted to come back, the door would have been held open. He knew it. The country knew it. He finally retired in August 2020, on his own terms, in a sentence posted on Instagram at seven in the evening. This was how Indian cricket worked. The superstars were not managed; they were deferred to. FLIPPING THE SCRIPT Then came Gautam Gambhir as head coach and Ajit Agarkar as chief selector, and something shifted. Rohit Sharma and Virat Kohli between them represent the greatest batting partnership in the history of Indian cricket. Both sounded positive about playing the 2025-27 Test cycle. Both returned to the Ranji Trophy to demonstrate intent ahead of the England series. Both retired. The message, delivered not with malice but with a clarity that Indian cricket had rarely managed, was unmistakable. A poor home season in 2024 and a difficult Border-Gavaskar Trophy had told the selectors what they needed to know. Form, not legacy, was now the currency. Their ODI futures followed a similar script. Both Agarkar and Gambhir made it clear publicly: runs and form would determine selection as India prepared for the 2027 World Cup. No deference. No grace-and-favour berths. Suryakumar's case, then, is not an isolated decision. It is the latest data point in a pattern. Suryakumar Yadav's lack of form has worked against him (PTI Photo) The numbers that ended his captaincy are not flattering. In the year before his removal, he averaged 13.62 in T20Is at a strike rate of 130 — figures that belong, as someone in the press box observed recently, to a lower-order pinch-hitter, not a man who had spent the better part of two years ranked No. 1 in the world. The year before that he had averaged 26. In his last ten T20Is, he managed just two scores of fifty or above. IPL 2026 offered one final audition and