Opinion: Why Virat Kohli and Rohit Sharma Should Have Played Warm-Up Games Before Facing Australia
In the wake of India’s nail-biting contest against Australia, cricket analysts are dissecting every detail, attempting to understand what went right and what went wrong. Among the loudest voices is former cricketer and commentator Sanjay Manjrekar, who recently stirred controversy by suggesting that Virat Kohli and Rohit Sharma should have played warm-up matches before taking on Australia. His argument has merit, but it also invites a deeper discussion on the readiness of India’s top players for a series of this magnitude.
Manjrekar’s call for more preparation was not unwarranted. He pointed out that Australia’s preparation routine generally includes thorough warm-up games, and, statistically, this approach often translates into stronger performances. Historically, warm-up games allow players to adjust to foreign conditions, get a feel for the pitch, and tune their skills against local opponents. Kohli and Sharma, arguably two of the greatest batsmen of their generation, are no exceptions to this rule. Their immense talent is indisputable, but even seasoned players benefit from time on the pitch to sharpen form, adapt to nuances, and mentally acclimatize.
But why are we overlooking this? Should we assume that Kohli and Sharma can just walk into any series, switch on their “game face,” and deliver miracles without warm-up? Relying on their past heroics, while ignoring real-time preparation, seems more wishful than rational. In a high-stakes environment like a Test series against Australia, where every run counts, it’s baffling that India would take this risk.
Critics argue that Kohli and Sharma’s recent schedules were packed, and they deserved a breather. But should rest take priority over preparation? Kohli himself has openly admitted in the past that mental and physical preparation is crucial for him to perform at his best. Given this, why did the management allow our two best batsmen to skip warm-up games when the stakes were so high?
Furthermore, the impact of this decision extends beyond their individual performances. In a team sport, especially one as collective as cricket, every player’s readiness affects the entire lineup. With Kohli and Sharma as role models for younger players, opting out of warm-up games could inadvertently set a tone of complacency for the rest of the squad.
Let’s not forget Australia’s strength in conditioning, practice, and preparation. Their philosophy is one of relentless fine-tuning, an approach that has repeatedly given them the edge over their opponents. The Indian team’s reputation as “slow starters” is also not a coincidence; it’s a byproduct of inadequate adjustment periods, which warm-up games could significantly alleviate.
Manjrekar’s perspective, though unpopular, sheds light on a larger issue facing Indian cricket: the assumption that star power can compensate for preparation. There’s no doubt that Kohli and Sharma are giants of the sport, but their legacy is not an excuse to sidestep meticulous preparation. If we aim to consistently outdo teams like Australia, it’s time to prioritize preparation over rest and ensure that our champions—no matter how decorated—enter the field fully primed for battle.
In an era where cricket has become as much about strategic planning as it is about natural skill, the omission of warm-up games seems not only a misjudgment but an uncharacteristic lapse in the rigorous culture that Indian cricket has strived to build.
