In the sun-drenched afternoon of what seemed like just another cricket press conference, former Indian pacer S. Sreesanth delivered a heartfelt appeal that immediately sent ripples through the cricketing world. With the passion that once characterized his bowling, Sreesanth urged India’s cricketing titans Virat Kohli and Rohit Sharma to extend their illustrious careers until the Los Angeles 2028 Olympics, where cricket is set to make its historic return to the Olympic arena after 128 years.
“Please keep playing,” Sreesanth implored, his voice carrying the weight of a nation’s collective wish, “India needs you both at LA 2028.”
As the cricket fraternity digests these words, the appeal raises profound questions about legacy, timing, and what truly constitutes the perfect endnote to a legendary career. It forces us to consider whether the conventional retirement wisdom applies to extraordinary talents who might still have significant contributions to make on cricket’s newest and perhaps most prestigious stage.
Cricket’s Olympic Resurrection and Its Significance
The announcement of cricket’s inclusion in the LA 2028 Olympics represents a watershed moment for a sport that has spent over a century knocking on the Olympic door. For context, cricket’s only previous Olympic appearance was at the 1900 Paris Games, where Great Britain defeated France in what was essentially an exhibition match that most participants didn’t even realize was part of the Olympics.
This time around, the stage is dramatically different. Cricket enters the Olympic fold as a global powerhouse sport with billions of followers, commercial clout that rivals any sport on the planet, and a T20 format perfectly tailored for Olympic consumption—compact, explosive, and accessible to new audiences.
For India, cricket’s Olympic debut carries additional significance. Despite being the sport’s financial epicenter and home to the world’s most passionate fan base, India’s Olympic medal tally has traditionally been modest. Cricket presents a genuine gold medal opportunity on the world’s most prestigious sporting stage.
“This isn’t just another tournament,” remarked a BCCI official who preferred anonymity. “It’s about etching cricket—and potentially India—into Olympic folklore. Having our greatest players there would make an incalculable difference.”
The Twilight Years: Where Virat Kohli and Rogut Sharma Stand Now
Both Kohli and Sharma have entered what conventional wisdom considers the twilight phase of their careers. Kohli, now 36, recently announced his retirement from T20 Internationals following India’s triumph in the 2024 T20 World Cup, while continuing to represent the country in ODIs and Test cricket. Sharma, has maintained his presence across formats while carefully managing his workload.
Their recent performances, however, defy the narrative of decline that typically accompanies athletes approaching 40. In the past season, Kohli averaged 52.14 in Test cricket and maintained a strike rate of 147.12 in the IPL, numbers that would be exceptional for a player at any age. Sharma similarly continued to evolve, adding new dimensions to his batting while providing leadership that transformed India into the most formidable cricket team across formats.
“Age is truly just a number for these two,” observed former India coach Ravi Shastri during a recent commentary stint. “Their fitness regimens and adaptability have created a new paradigm for longevity in cricket. If they wanted to, they could absolutely compete at the highest level for several more years.”
This reality forms the foundation of Sreesanth’s appeal. Unlike previous generations of Indian cricketers who typically faced steep performance declines after 35, Kohli and Sharma represent a new breed of athletes whose career trajectories have been extended by revolutionary approaches to fitness, nutrition, and workload management.
The Case for Olympic Participation
Sreesanth’s appeal didn’t simply rest on sentiment. During his impassioned plea, he articulated several compelling reasons why Kohli and Sharma’s participation would be transformative for India’s Olympic campaign.
“The experience they bring is irreplaceable,” Sreesanth noted. “Olympic competition is unlike anything else—the pressure, the expectations, the knowledge that you’re making history with every ball. Having players who’ve performed under extreme pressure for years gives India an edge no other team would have.”
Beyond their on-field contributions, there’s the matter of mentorship. By 2028, India will likely field several young talents who would benefit immeasurably from sharing the Olympic journey with two of the game’s greatest minds. This intangible value might ultimately prove more significant than their statistical contributions.
“I remember how much it meant having senior players guide me through my first World Cup,” reflected current India player Shubman Gill in a recent interview unrelated to Sreesanth’s comments. “The small conversations, the reassurance during tense moments—those things don’t show up in statistics, but they’re often the difference between winning and losing.”
Then there’s the commercial and attention-generating aspect. Cricket at the Olympics will be competing for eyeballs with established Olympic sports. Having two of the most recognizable sports personalities on the planet participating would dramatically elevate cricket’s Olympic profile, potentially benefiting the sport’s global expansion efforts.
The Physical and Logistical Challenges
Despite the compelling case, significant obstacles stand in the way of Sreesanth’s vision becoming reality. The most obvious is physical. By 2028, Kohli would be 39 and Sharma 41—ages at which even the most exceptional cricketers have typically long retired from international competition, particularly in formats as physically demanding as T20.
“The physical toll isn’t just about match day,” explained sports physiologist Dr. Kavita Sharma (no relation to Rohit) when asked about longevity in T20 cricket. “It’s the constant travel, the training intensity needed to maintain explosive power, the recovery periods that inevitably lengthen with age. The human body, no matter how well maintained, has limitations.”
There are also opportunity costs to consider. Extending their careers would require Kohli and Sharma to continue prioritizing cricket over family commitments, business interests, and other life pursuits at an age when most of their contemporaries have moved on to their post-playing chapters.
“The commitment required would be enormous,” noted former England captain Nasser Hussain in his newspaper column recently. “It’s not just about staying fit for 2028; it’s about maintaining the hunger and drive through four more years of international cricket, with all the scrutiny and pressure that entails.”
The Legacy Question
Perhaps the most nuanced aspect of Sreesanth’s appeal concerns legacy. Both Kohli and Sharma have already secured their places among cricket’s immortals. Their trophy cabinets include World Cups, ICC trophies, and countless individual honors. The question becomes whether Olympic participation would meaningfully enhance legacies that are already complete by any conventional measure.
“There’s something poetic about closing the circle,” reflected cricket historian Ramachandra Guha when presented with Sreesanth’s comments. “Cricket began its journey as an Olympic sport in 1900, and having two of the modern game’s greatest exponents present for its return creates a beautiful historical symmetry.”
Others argue that the risk of underwhelming performances at an advanced age might actually diminish rather than enhance their legacies. “We remember athletes at their peak,” cautioned sports psychologist Dr. Neil Thompson. “There’s always the danger of final impressions overshadowing career-long excellence if the Olympic campaign doesn’t go as hoped.”
The Personal Choice
Ultimately, as with all matters of career longevity, the decision rests with Kohli and Sharma themselves. Neither has publicly responded to Sreesanth’s appeal, though both have previously expressed fascination with cricket’s Olympic inclusion.
“The Olympics has always been special,” Kohli remarked during the T20 World Cup when asked about cricket’s Olympic future. “As kids, we grew up watching Olympic champions and understanding what it meant to win for your country on that stage. Cricket at the Olympics opens a whole new dimension of possibilities.”
Sharma similarly expressed enthusiasm during an interview last year: “Cricket in the Olympics is something we’ve all wanted to see. It gives our sport the truly global platform it deserves. Whether I’m playing or watching, I’ll definitely be excited about it.”
These comments, while falling short of commitments, suggest openness to the possibility that aligns with Sreesanth’s vision.
The Road Ahead
Should Kohli and Sharma take up Sreesanth’s challenge, the path to LA 2028 would require careful planning and management. They would likely need to further reduce their cricket workloads, potentially specializing entirely in T20 cricket while stepping away from other formats.
The BCCI would need to create customized fitness and workload programs, perhaps looking to examples from other sports where athletes have extended careers well into their late 30s and early 40s. Tennis star Roger Federer’s latter-career tournament selectivity and NFL quarterback Tom Brady’s specialized training regimens offer potential templates.
There would also need to be transparent succession planning, ensuring that India doesn’t become overly reliant on players who might ultimately be unable to perform at the required level when 2028 arrives.
More Than Just a Game
Sreesanth’s appeal transcends cricket. It speaks to our collective reluctance to bid farewell to transcendent sporting talent. It addresses the universally relatable tension between knowing when to step away and seizing unique opportunities that arrive at inconvenient times.
For Kohli and Sharma, the LA Olympics represents a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to add an entirely new dimension to their already storied careers. No Indian cricketer has ever been an Olympian. None has ever experienced the unique crucible of Olympic competition or stood on the podium as their national anthem played and the tri-color rose.
As Sreesanth put it with characteristic emotional directness: “Think about that moment—standing on the Olympic podium with a gold medal while Jana Gana Mana plays. What greater gift could you give to a nation that has given you so much love?”
Whether they accept Sreesanth’s challenge or not, the very conversation highlights cricket’s evolving place in the global sporting landscape and the new horizons opening for the game’s greatest talents. As cricket prepares to embrace its Olympic future, having its most distinguished practitioners present would indeed provide a powerful bridge between the game’s storied past and its boundless future.
The ball, as it always has been throughout their illustrious careers, remains in Kohli and Sharma’s court.
