Cinema in Transition: Marketing Myopia, Technology, and the Shifting Cultural Core

The term Marketing Myopia was coined by Theodore Levitt in his seminal 1960 Harvard Business Review article. It refers to the short-sightedness and inward-looking approach of companies focusing on their products rather than the needs and wants of their customers.

The case of American railroads is a classic example of marketing myopia, where companies focus narrowly on their products rather than the broader needs they serve. Railroads saw themselves in the railroad business instead of the transportation business, ignoring the rise of cars, trucks, and airplanes that better met customer needs for convenience and flexibility. As a result, they failed to adapt and lost market share. This same short-sightedness affected Kodak, which clung to film even as digital photography emerged, and Blockbuster, which stuck to physical rentals while streaming services like Netflix redefined home entertainment. These examples highlight how companies that define themselves by their product rather than the value they provide risk becoming irrelevant.

1^st wave of transformation

In 1990s India, single-screen theatres were still the primary venues for film viewing, but they stood at the crossroads of transition just as India was liberalizing and audience tastes were shifting. Post the 1991 liberalization, India saw a media boom, with cable television entering middle-class homes through networks like Star TV, Zee TV, Sony, and DD Metro. This gave rise to 24/7 entertainment—daily soaps, music videos, international movies, cricket, and later, Bollywood movie premieres—at home and at no additional cost beyond the monthly cable fee. Audiences flocked to colorful, dynamic private channels offering soaps, movies, and music, reducing DD viewership. This exposed Doordarshan’s inability to pivot quickly in a rapidly changing entertainment economy.

The 1990s piracy boom dealt a critical blow to single-screen theatres, disrupting their economic model.  With the spread of VCRs (Video Cassette Recorders) and video parlours, pirated VHS tapes of new films became widely available, often within days of theatrical release. By the mid-1990s, CDs and VCDs replaced VHS, further lowering cost and increasing piracy’s reach. Pirated content was cheap (₹10–₹30 per CD), easily accessible through street vendors, and didn’t require audiences to visit a theatre.

The late 1990s saw spiraling budgets and digital projection becoming essential. Multiplexes could recoup by charging premium ticket prices (₹500–700 versus ₹30–40 on single-screens). Rising costs meant fewer producers made films suited to single screens; distributors also avoided them due to poor economics and additional digital screening fees

2^nd wave of transformation

The recognition of film as an industry by the NDA government in 2001, under Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, marked a turning point in the Indian cinema landscape. This moves formalized Bollywood and regional cinema as a legitimate sector of the economy, opening the gates for corporate investment, institutional financing, and structured business practices.

Media and entertainment arms of companies like Reliance, UTV (later acquired by Disney), Viacom18, and Balaji Telefilms began producing and distributing films. Inspired by Hollywood, corporate culture was adapted in Bollywood. Corporatization encouraged an export-oriented approach, tapping into NRI and overseas markets with subtitled and dubbed versions.

There was rise of multiplex chains like PVR and INOX during early 2000s. Policy changes—such as tax incentives, 100% FDI in exhibition, and entertainment tax waivers—favoured multiplex investment and expansion due to economic liberalization policies of the government. There was emergence of urban, low- to mid-budget, niche films that catered to a young, English-speaking, multiplex-going audience. Films like Jhankaar Beats and Joggers’ Park were products of the multiplex revolution, which enabled a new kind of Indian cinema—urban, experimental, dialogue-heavy, and targeted.  

Traditionally, films were distributed using bulky physical reels, which were expensive to transport and delayed releases in smaller towns. With the advent of digital cinema technologies like UFO Moviez and Qube, films could now be delivered instantly via satellite or hard drives, enabling simultaneous pan-India releases and faster revenue recovery for producers. While multiplexes quickly adapted to this model with multiple screens and upgraded digital infrastructure, most single-screen theatres could not afford the necessary technological upgrades. This shift in audience taste hastened the decline of single-screen theaters, which could no longer compete on experience, cost, or content viability.

Yet, PVR and INOX found themselves squeezed between rising operational costs and shifting consumer attention, highlighting how entertainment consumption evolved faster than the cinema exhibition business could adapt.  Multiplexes promise to support smaller-budget content alongside mainstream blockbusters—but the reality diverged significantly.  Since multiplexes were investing heavily in premium infrastructure—multiple screens, luxury seating, parking, food courts, and digital projection—all of which required high ticket prices and limiting their focus among urban, middle-class viewers.

There was parallel exponential growth of television entertainment in the 2000s, driven by daily soaps, reality shows, and movie premieres on satellite channels, offered families a convenient and cost-free alternative to cinemas. The boom of D2H happened in the mid-2000s to early 2010s, as it transformed television access in both urban and rural India. This trend deepened with the advent of IPL in 2008, which combined cricket with celebrity culture and prime-time entertainment. IPL became a cultural phenomenon, drawing massive viewership away from theatres during its season—leading to a noticeable dip in footfalls at multiplexes.

Multiplexes did initially open space for art and parallel cinema, in line with their stated goals—but over time, urban market preferences, financial incentives, and rising production and exhibition costs shifted their focus toward mainstream, premium content.  PVR and INOX largely have defined themselves as cinema experience providers, focusing on the premium in-theatre model. Their initial premium model, once a strength, became a vulnerability in a fragmented media landscape. PVR now depends on big hit movies to earn good profits, as smaller films don’t bring in enough money. To reduce losses, PVR is selling off parts of the business that aren’t essential, closing theaters that aren’t doing well, and trying to lower rent costs. While PVR makes money from tickets, food, ads, and events, it only works if people actually come to the theaters — and that’s happening less and less.

3^rd wave of transformation

In the early 2000s, as internet speeds improved, audiences wanted instant, affordable access to music, movies, and TV shows. However, legal distribution channels were slow, expensive, or unavailable in many regions. This gave rise to peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing platforms like LimeWire, and BitTorrent, which enabled users to download and share media globally. Sites like Torrentz, KickassTorrents, and 1337x became gateways to Bollywood, Hollywood, and even TV shows not aired in India.  In engineering colleges and hostels, tools like DC++, LANShare, and Torrents over LAN enabled students to share movies, games, and TV shows without internet. As broadband spread post-2005 (thanks to BSNL, Airtel, etc.), Indians embraced BitTorrent clients like uTorrent and BitComet.

The 2010s saw a shift from downloading to streaming, with the emergence of platforms like YouTube, Netflix, and Hotstar. Legal streaming reduced piracy temporarily by offering affordable, on-demand access.  Jio launched its 5G services (Jio True 5G) in October 2022, followed by Airtel 5G Plus. The networks lead to buffer-free streaming of HD and 4K content on mobile devices.

Meanwhile, OTT platforms like Netflix, Amazon Prime, and JioCinema recognized the shift in consumer behavior—demand for on-demand, affordable, and home-based entertainment. OTT Platforms like Netflix and Prime Video have also highlighted films giving visibility to world cinema & TV series that traditional Bollywood ignored. For instance, a global push behind shows like Nanette turned them into cultural events through sheer network effect.  

Netflix’s success is a clear example of how technology can drive both customer acquisition and content delivery backed by a strong risk-taking culture. One of its first major innovations was the Cinematch algorithm, a collaborative filtering system designed to predict whether a customer would enjoy a particular movie based on past viewing habits. To refine recommendations further, Netflix introduced the Queue Add Confirmation Layer (QUACL), which suggested similar titles when a user added a movie to their watchlist. This system also served as a testing ground for Netflix's initial machine learning experiments.

Film production and consumption

In contrast to the early 1990s, the Indian film industry today sees fewer independent producers, largely due to the escalation in film production budgets. In the 1990s, films were often made on modest budgets with manageable risks, allowing a wide range of individual producers to participate, including regional backers and small-scale financiers. However, with the corporatization of Bollywood, rising star fees, expensive marketing campaigns, and reliance on high-end technology, the cost of making and marketing a mainstream film has skyrocketed.

Bollywood’s box office failures today are less about audience disinterest and more about the industry's inability to evolve with changing tastes, especially ignoring India’s linguistic, cultural, and literary diversity. As regional films (e.g., Kantara, KGF, RRR) thrive by staying rooted in local ethos with fresh narratives, Bollywood is being challenged to reinvent itself beyond the Mumbai-centric, star-driven template. Today’s mainstream Indian cinema, especially Bombay-centric filmmaking, is increasingly shaped by corporate interference. Films are often pre-sold based on star power, with legal and finance teams influencing scripts, leaving little room for creative risk or originality. End credits are crowded with corporate names unrelated to the storytelling.  

Historically, producers held the creative power in Indian cinema, but today, OTT platforms are increasingly dictating what kind of content gets made. Bollywood, after being stagnant for nearly a decade, has lost a large part of its audience—some have shifted to Hollywood and global content, while others now prefer masala-heavy South Indian films.

High ticket prices, inflated star fees, and weak storytelling have pushed viewers away from theatres. The rise of OTT coincided with a decline in the middle class’s disposable income, making on-demand, affordable streaming more appealing. Moreover, rising ticket prices, especially in multiplexes, have pushed audiences to wait for digital releases rather than spend ₹300–₹500 on an average theatrical experience

The high cost of tickets and food at multiplexes is not just about pricing—it reflects a deeper disconnect between theatre chains and film production houses and the changing entertainment habits of their audiences. By not making films for these smaller centres or not giving them films, film industry is driving audiences to OTT platforms. Corporates and studios prioritize profits and early returns, often by inflating ticket prices, even if it means losing the broader audience. The content audiences get at such high prices often doesn’t justify the cost, which further alienates viewers.

The statement “Films don’t fail, their budgets fail” underscores a crucial insight into the economics of modern filmmaking. There has been lot of commercial failure of films in Bollywood. This is often less about the quality of the content and more about misaligned expectations, overestimated revenues, or poor budgeting decisions. Meanwhile, rising ticket prices due to inflated film production and marketing budgets have created a growing disconnect with audiences—something clearly visible when theatres are packed on discount days like World Cinema Day. This proves that pricing, not just content, is a major barrier.

Conclusion

What started as an affordable and accessible alternative to cable TV and cinemas is now becoming expensive, with viewers often needing to subscribe to multiple platforms—such as Netflix, Amazon Prime, Disney+ Hotstar, Zee5, Sony Live, and JioCinema Premium—to access diverse content.  As the subscription costs of OTT rose, content got fragmented, and paywalls increased, many users have reverted to pirated streaming sites and Telegram channels offering movies, series, and even live sports for free.  The OTT fragmentation not only raises overall entertainment costs but also leads to confusion and frustration as content is scattered across services. Free or ad-supported access is shrinking, making quality content less accessible to budget-conscious or rural users, thereby deepening digital inequality. Moreover, the overload of options behind paywalls is causing content fatigue, while poor content discovery algorithms often push mainstream titles over niche or regional ones.

However, there’s growing concern that OTTs—especially international ones—are dumbing down content to gain subscribers and avoiding culturally rooted risks due to limited understanding of Indian diversity. Cinema should challenge us and spark dialogue, but today’s ecosystem often prioritizes reach over depth. Instead of offering easier access to our cinematic heritage, streaming has made it tougher than ever to find and watch classic Indian films in their original form.

The future of OTT platforms is increasingly shifting toward paywalls across all content, moving away from the earlier "freemium" or ad-supported models. The battle continues, but until content becomes more inclusive and accessible, piracy will remain a parallel—and powerful—force in media consumption. The direction OTT takes will shape whether content remains a tool of democratization or becomes a commodity of privilege.

Marketing myopia teaches us that cinema stakeholders must see themselves not just as filmmakers, distributors, or exhibitors, but as part of the broader experience economy. Those who focus on customer preferences, accessibility, and evolving viewing behavior will survive this evolutionary tale. Those who cling to outdated models or prestige assumptions may become irrelevant—just like railways, Kodak, or Blockbuster in their industries.

Search for Lost Stories

I am turning 40 in next few months. So much has been lost in the debris of time and yet inscribed in the memories.  It is a travesty that we remember milestones yet forgot the simpler times of the childhood. I am suddenly experiencing mixture of melancholy and nostalgia of the old DD serials, movies and cartoons.  Rooted in memory, these shows have evoked in me the warmth of simpler times.

For adults who fondly remember the golden age of Doordarshan (DD) in the 1990s, the program lineup was a delightful mix of intellect, comedy, and adventure.  I was seeing the world through the eyes of a child alive to its sensations yet protected from the reality. I will mention few DD programs forgotten or less remembered among people nowadays. 

 

One such gem was Gucchhe, which, contrary to popular belief, wasn't an original Indian drama but rather the Hindi-dubbed version of Stories from My Childhood—a beautifully animated anthology of global fairy tales originally produced by Soviet studios. Another animation series, Superbook Classic captivated me with reimagining of Bible stories, where young protagonists traveled through time to witness key events in Christian scripture. And finally, the ever-popular Sindbad the Sailor kept imaginations alight with tales of treasure, monsters, and magical voyages. This was the Hindi-dubbed adaptation of the Japanese anime Arabian Nights: Sinbad's Adventures (1975). These animations weren’t just cartoons — they were gentle stories, subtly weaving morals, ethics, and culture into lessons that has stayed with me. 

I had started watching obscure TV movies on the DD in childhood. One such movie, Papeeha (1993) was aired in December 1994. I searched for the movie in vain on the digital landscape and found the print only today. 

I once watched a movie about two elephants, but for the longest time, I couldn’t remember its name. It stayed in my memory, vivid yet unnamed, for nearly 30 years. The eureka moment came when I realized the elephant duo weren't mother and son, but father and son — and that cracked the code. Memory often eludes us, and over time, what we remember can become distorted, blending fiction with reality. Then, after all that time, I finally discovered its title: Kala Parvat (original title: Chyornaya Gora), a 1971 Soviet Indian co-production directed by Aleksandr Zguridi and M.S. Sathyu. It was a surreal moment—like reuniting with a long-lost piece of my childhood.  It took me years of searching the internet, countless Google queries, and even taking help from AI tools to finally uncover its title two week back.  Overjoyed, I announced the discovery to my mother and excitedly asked my son to watch the movie with me on YouTube. It was a beautiful moment that bridged three generations through a single, long-lost memory.

There was a serial named 'Prayas' creating awareness on environmental protection, but I can't find any digital footprint of the show now.  I also liked to watch 'Ank Ajoobe'—hosted by Benjamin Gilani— where school teams competed in solving math challenges on national television, making numbers both fun and competitive. 'Ek Tha Rusty', based on Ruskin Bond's semi-autobiographical stories, transported viewers to the serene hills of Dehradun, where a boy named Rusty came of age in warm, slice-of-life episodes full of charm and simplicity. Meanwhile, 'Ek Se Badkar Ek' brought laughter into our life with its comic setup. 

Beyond fiction, I was amazed to watch natural world in a serial: Secrets of the Sea, led by the legendary Jacques Cousteau, offered gripping undersea adventures with awe-inspiring visuals. This show was aired long before the widespread adoption of the internet, so online archiving wasn't a standard practice. Today, I can remember only the name and a memory. 

I was in Class 9 when I started watching Ralph Bousfield: Uncharted Africa, aired as part of Discovery Hour on DD Metro, in which I followed the intrepid explorer through the forests, deserts and savannahs capturing wildlife and tribal customs. For the past few years, I had been trying to recall the name of this series from my memory and validate it on Google — often stumbling through the fog of forgotten details and failed searches — until finally, I recalled, and it felt like rediscovering a long-lost piece of the puzzle from my past.

DD itself has a vast archive, but only a fraction of its content, especially older niche shows, has been digitized and made publicly available online. A lot of the serials that are part of the childhood memories of millions have been lost during the analog to digital transformation. Together, these shows defined a generation of television that was wholesome, thoughtful, and quietly magical.

To share common experience and memory is the spirituality that DD has offered to 80's and 90's children. They were once source of joy in a life but now these memories seem far away. I was happy with the beauty of growing up in a time where life moved slower and hearts stayed open.  It is a lesson in the inaccessibility of the past that was woven into the rhythm of my life, with theme music of DD that marked the hours like temple bells.  

Thanks to Google Video — now rechristened as YouTube — and the many digital companions along the way like Google, AltaVista, Orkut, Facebook, and now Gemini and ChatGPT, my scattered memories slowly came together. Each search felt like a time capsule, until at last, I rediscovered that elusive piece of my past. As I write this blog post, I can’t help but feel a little old, stirred by the slow resurrection of emotions long buried in memory and heart.

India’s Cricketing Woes: A Deep Dive into the BGT & New Zealand Debacle

India’s cricketing contrasts are stark: a powerhouse at home yet vulnerable in challenging conditions. The recent losses are a reminder that success requires not just talent but humility, preparation, and adaptability. India’s recent cricketing struggles have spotlighted long-standing issues, ranging from batting inconsistencies to questionable strategies. While the Indian cricket juggernaut has often been celebrated for its dominance, particularly on home soil, recent results have raised serious concerns about the team’s direction. 1-3 outcome in Australia is far from surprising; any astute cricket lover who closely followed the New Zealand series could have seen this coming.

Tactical Failures

Pat Cummins and the Australian team have been successful against India's lineup, it's a testament to their strategic planning and effective execution. One of the most debated aspects of India’s performance was their team selection. The Indian think tank's decision to field 5-6 bowlers on paper, despite having only two effective bowlers, highlights a tactical misstep. The injury to the main bowler exacerbates the problem, leaving the team with limited options.

The Lower-Order Conundrum

India’s lower-order batsmen frequently end up as top scorers, a trend symptomatic of a broader problem: an unreliable top order. Home conditions, when overexploited to favor bowlers, can poison a team’s batting just as effectively as it does the opposition. Playing on pitches overly tailored to assist bowlers has often backfired, hampering India’s own batting lineup as much as it troubles the opposition. This recurring issue came into sharp focus during the 2024 Test series against New Zealand.

New Zealand’s Historic Triumph

New Zealand’s men’s team, with only two Test wins in India since 1955, stunned the cricketing world by achieving a historic 3-0 clean sweep. The victory was a testament to their adaptability to spinning pitches and India’s complacency post their T20 World Cup triumph. While players like Washington Sundar, Rishabh Pant, Shubman Gill, and Yashasvi Jaiswal performed admirably, the underwhelming contributions from senior batsmen Rohit Sharma (91 runs) and Virat Kohli (93 runs) proved costly.

Rohit and Kohli: A Question of Legacy

Once the cornerstones of Indian cricket, Rohit Sharma and Virat Kohli now seem to struggle with familiar patterns of failure. As time catches up with them, their waning form has become a burden on the team. A critical question arises: should these stalwarts retire on a high note, leaving fans asking, “Why now?” rather than “Why not now?” Their consistent underperformance has left the batting lineup vulnerable throughout both series, inevitably leading to an adverse result. 

Change of Leadership

India has failed to retain the Border-Gavaskar Trophy, and scrutiny of Rohit Sharma’s captaincy is set to intensify, especially following five defeats in the last six matches. Leadership in cricket is as much about man-management as it is about on-field strategies, and Rohit’s tenure has ended.

Over-Reliance on All-Rounders

India’s strategy of relying on all-rounders to mask the failures of its top order has its pitfalls. While players like Nitish Reddy, Ravindra Jadeja & Washington Sundar have produced tough performances, this approach often hides a lack of consistency in the top order. Selecting “half-bowlers who can bat” neither ensures wickets nor guarantees economical spells, as seen in the team’s struggles despite Jasprit Bumrah’s heroic efforts.

Road to Failure

No team can succeed when senior players are out of form, and young players fail to rise to the occasion. The core issue with the senior players isn’t just their underperformance—it’s their approach to the game. Given the chance to sharpen their skills in the Duleep Trophy, they chose to opt-out, missing a valuable opportunity to regain form. India’s decision to skip practice matches ahead of the Border-Gavaskar Trophy 2024-25 has raised questions about their preparation and approach. In a high-stakes series, such a move could impact their ability to adapt to Australian conditions, putting additional pressure on the team from the outset. This decision speaks volumes about their priorities, leaving them with no one but themselves to blame. 

The Need for Grit and Simplicity

No team can carry so many mediocre or out-of-form batters and expect to win against a side with 4 great bowlers. Cricket’s timeless wisdom is that success often demands grit and simplicity over flashy heroics. India’s young players encouraged to “express themselves” with aggressive intent, must learn the value of resilience. The team’s conveyor belt of talent continues to produce promising players, but a lack of foundational stability in batting, captaincy, and selection strategies undermines their potential.

The Broader Lessons

As the cricketing world debates the causes of India’s slump, the focus must shift to fixing the basics. From addressing batting woes to ensuring sound leadership and selection policies, India has the resources to bounce back—but only if it learns from its failures.

The path forward requires more than cosmetic changes; it demands a cultural shift within the team. After all, cricket is as much about reinvention as it is about tradition—a lesson India must embrace if it hopes to reclaim its lost glory. 

New face of Indian Cricket - 6

Fantastic performance of the series by the Black Caps. Abysmal India has hit rock bottom as attitudes and defensive techniques stand badly exposed. The recent series against New Zealand culminated in a dominant display by the Black Caps and raised genuine fears of a possible 5-0 whitewash in the upcoming tour of Australia.  The Indian management must make tough, possibly transformative decisions if the team is to regain consistency and success on the international stage.  

The Indian cricket think tank appears to have adopted a narrow focus, concentrating heavily on the Border-Gavaskar Trophy (BGT) while overlooking the importance of the New Zealand tour.  Senior players like Rohit Sharma, Virat Kohli, Ravichandran Ashwin, and Jasprit Bumrah chose not to participate in the Duleep Trophy, and Ravindra Jadeja opted out due to niggle. Even the pitches in the Duleep Trophy were customized for seam rather than spin, leaving Indian Test batters underprepared. Despite India's celebrated depth of talent, it means little when key players are unavailable or not utilized effectively.

The series highlighted the shortcomings of Rohit Sharma and Virat Kohli as leading batsmen. Players like Mayank Agarwal, KL Rahul, Karun Nair, Shreyas Iyer, and Hanuma Vihari have faded away due to a combination of factors such as form, injuries, and shifts in team strategy. Meanwhile, Sarfaraz Khan and Yashasvi Jaiswal represent the new generation of talent making their mark in Indian cricket. Additionally, B. Sai Sudharsan, Devdutt Padikkal, and Abhimanyu Easwaran are promising cricketers whose consistent domestic performances have brought them closer to the national Test team. Integrating these younger, in-form players who have refined their skills in domestic cricket would be the most effective approach to replacing Rohit and Virat.

As India moves toward the next World Test Championship (WTC) cycle, it’s reasonable to speculate that the team might start transitioning away from veteran spinners like Ravichandran Ashwin and Ravindra Jadeja. Including Axar Patel, Kuldeep Yadav, and Washington Sundar as a spin-bowling trio could greatly enhance the strength of India’s Test squad.  While the transition may not be immediate, giving these younger spinners opportunities to lead the attack will be essential for their development.

The transition for any coach into the international arena is rarely smooth, especially when they bring their own philosophy and tactics. A 3-0 series loss to New Zealand is a humiliation, placing Gautam Gambhir’s role as coach squarely under the radar. This has invited criticism not only of his strategies but also his ability to inspire and manage players under pressure. For Gambhir, this could serve as an important learning phase to reassess game plans, strengthen mental resilience in the squad, and recalibrate for future series.  

Cricket is still and will always be about scoring runs and equally about bowling out the opposition. The upcoming Test series for India against England and Australia, both overseas, will be a "baptism by fire."  These tours will offer a chance for emerging talents to cement their place.  These high-stakes tours will demand an adaptable approach, as both teams bring unique styles—Australia’s aggressive, fast-paced game and England’s renewed focus on “Bazball,” their brand of attacking, high-scoring Test cricket.

Individuals declining in a team is normal, but the question remains: Are the backups ready? A lot of Test cricket is about physical and mental endurance, about concentrating when it is easy for the mind to wander.  The transition will be painful for the fans as well as players.  Jasprit Bumrah, Shubman Gill, and Rishabh Pant are set to become the new generation of senior players in the evolving Indian Test cricket team. As Kipling once said, they’ll need to "keep their heads when all around them are losing theirs and blaming it on them."

New face of Indian Cricket - 5

This blog doesn't often dabble in technical cricket analysis, because my credentials in the field of technical cricket analysis are somewhat lacking. And I am writing this blog post in a series of posts 7 years after the New face of Indian Cricket - 4. The Indian cricket team is on the verge of playing the ODI World Cup, the Test series with England, and then the T20 World Cup,

What lies ahead for India as their Test /ODI/T20 side enters a transitional phase? Indian team under Rohit and Dravid has been into a spiral loop of learning in every series and every game. Winning is a habit, as England discovered on their march to the summit, and confidence begets confidence along the way. Losing for the sake of learning, on the other hand, tends to become known simply as losing as the team gets too used to the feeling.

Test Team: Retirement is a natural conclusion to a sportsman’s career, even if occasionally the inevitable is delayed.  Rohit, Virat, Che Pujara, and Ajinkya Rahane are perhaps at the far end of his career in the batting. Shreyas Iyer will be VVS for the future test team, playing at 5 & competing with Sarfaraz Khan for the spot. Poor XI selection in the test matches and Dust Bowl pitches in India have also expedited the process of the bad patch of batters. Cheteshwar Pujara and Virat Kohli both averaged 29.69 in Test cricket since the start of 2020. Yet, while the former has been dropped, the latter continues holding onto his spot.  This is the time to blood new talent Abhimanyu Easwaran, and Sarfaraz Khan and give prolonged chances to Shreyas Iyer, Shubman Gill, and Yashasvi Jaiswal. 

The real strength of the Indian bowling attack is the ability to take 20 wickets with fantastic spin all-rounders and genuine fast bowlers. Five-bowler theory has been working in abroad tours as there is a reliable batting line-up against good teams. Ashwin and Jadeja are allrounders in the legacy of Kapil Dev & Vinoo Mankad.  New bowlers like Kuldeep Yadav,  Axar Patel, and Saurabh Kumar will be hopeful to carry on this legacy shortly.  

It's difficult enough to solve problems in Test-match cricket, but infinitely more challenging when the existence of those problems is never acknowledged. India is producing sub-standard cricket pitches for the test matches, and they are alien to our own cricketers as well. This is not because they never get a chance to play much domestic first-class cricket but because the standard of pitches in the Ranji trophy is much better than test match pitches in India. This legacy from Kohli-Shahstri & Rohit-Dravid has to be discarded as the substandard pitches also nullify the strength of the Indian spin attack. Lower order has bailed out in Indian conditions, but SENA countries require batsmen to play out of their skin to win games. 

ODI Team:  Dhoni and Kirsten had a clear frame of mind and hardly experimented in the lead-up to the 2011 World Cup. Everything was built with core players forming a cohesive unit and sorting out their positions over time. The anti-thesis of 2011 is currently being practiced for the 2023 World Cup. Rahul Dravid and Rohit have kept on experimenting which has led to an unsettled squad leading lack of cohesion in the team much needed to win games under challenging situations. There has been too much rotation of the players from the ODI squad.  With this strategy, mistakes spill over & have a domino effect. 

India has been a very very ordinary limited-overs side for some time now. The chances of winning the ODI World Cup seem bleak as of now.  This is the time to rebuild the core batting and bowling group of 15-18 players by making tough decisions. Rahul Dravid has turned out to be a disappointment as a senior team coach and must be shown outside. Fitness, endurance, intensity, and skill are the four pillars of cricket.  And the fitness of Captain Rohit Sharma is fragile in nature. The pragmatism of the separate ODI captain must reflect the realities of the hectic schedule of world cricket. 

Individuals facing injury and declining form are normal, but the shocking thing is there are no backups remotely ready for the batting positions 4 and 5. Even then, the main problem is not the team composition but the lack of match time together.   Hoping to create a team worth talking about!

T20 Team:  Top-order conservatism in T20s is a high-risk strategy. At its best, it reduces the game for your batting unit from a 20-over match to a 14-over one, ensuring that even if you don't win many games in the batting powerplay.  The ability to design and implement a strategy was ranked as the top perceived risk.  A reasonable strike rate from the beginning is the only way to counter the planning and tempo of opposition bowlers. Loss should neither be accepted with a phlegmatic shrug nor should low-risk low-reward cricket. 

When it comes to executing strategy, the old saying "the devil is in the details" holds true for many professional human resources setup that identifies performers through the risk-reward process. There should be a reward for good work and backup for the odd initiative gone awry. No player, not even Captain Hardik has to play the role of the grafter and stick to the part of the adventure cricket. Ravi Bishnoi and Kuldeep Yadav be playing faster T20 World Cup in 2024. India will need a fresh set of bowlers with X-factor and a lot of potential. Avesh Khan, Umar Malik, Arshdeep Singh, Ruturaj Gaikwad, Tilak Varma, Sai Sudharsan, and Jitesh Sharma are the future stars.

The new impact player substitution is a dangerous idea that has exacerbated the tendency to play with specialist bowlers/batsmen. And, further eroding the growth of the Indian allrounders in IPL. Too much IPL without exposure to international T20/T10 leagues will always come to hurt India.  Young prospects in the wings can't be confined due to the exclusivity of IPL. Giving exposure to future superstars among these emerging talents is always an intriguing task.

Enduring great teams prosper not because of a single great leader, but because they can consistently produce great performances from within the team. Great teams become pioneers in producing match-winning performances.  Let us hope for better cricket from Team India.