Nepotism has become the most significant talking point in the Indian Twitter community. After the unfortunate death of the 34-year-old Bollywood star Sushant Singh Rajput, the fans have voiced their opinions against nepotism. They feel that the kids of well-established stars receive more opportunities than the outsiders.
Some cricket fans feel that the same problem was cropping up in the Indian cricket team. Although all the nepotism products have not lived up to the expectations, the cricket universe feels that they received a few more opportunities than they would have had if they did not belong to cricketers’ families. However, Aakash Chopra has clarified that nepotism would not work in cricket.
He explained his statement and said:
“No, mate! If you see the bigger picture, Sunil Gavaskar’s son was Rohan Gavaskar. Just because he was Sunil Gavaskar’s son, he should have played a lot of cricket, many ODIs, and Test matches. But that did not happen. And when he played for India, it was because he was consistently doing very well for Bengal. In fact, forget all that; he was even not playing his son in the Mumbai Ranji team. He was not getting a place in the Mumbai team even though he had the surname as Gavaskar.”
Like Rohan Gavaskar, Roger Binny’s son Stuart Binny also followed the footsteps of his father. However, even Binny failed to cement his place in the team. The last name from this club to appear on the cricket field is Arjun Tendulkar. Chopra discussed his development and stated:
“You can say the same thing about Arjun Tendulkar. Because he is Tendulkar’s son, nothing was given to him on a platter. He didn’t get an easy access to the Indian cricket team. There were no such useless selections even in the India under-19 team.”
Looking at the above three examples, one can conclude that there is no scope for nepotism in the cricket field.
