“Being the captain, Rohit Sharma was a little tired,” says Sunil Gavaskar, defending Hardik Pandya’s selection.

Surprisingly, the Mumbai Indians have named Hardik Pandya to replace Rohit Sharma as captain for the 2024 Indian Premier League. Within the cricket community, this decision has generated a range of responses. Renowned athlete Sunil Gavaskar endorsed the Mumbai Indians’ decision, implying that the administration had probably given it much thought and went for a new angle.

Former MI coach and current Global Head of Performance Mahela Jayawardene called the change a “significant leadership transition” and highlighted how it will help the squad in the long run. With Rohit Sharma leading the Mumbai Indians and India’s squads in many formats since the beginning of 2022, Sunil Gavaskar alluded to his possible weariness. He implied that this action might be a deliberate attempt to lighten Sharma’s load and reenergize the team under Pandya’s leadership.

However, we missed witnessing Rohit Sharma’s mojo from a few years ago.

“Let’s avoid delving into morality. However, the team is benefiting from the decision they made. Rohit’s output has decreased slightly over the past two years, even when he is using the bat. Although he used to score a lot, they ended No. 9 or No. 10 the year before last year and made the playoffs the last year, Sunil Gavaskar remarked in an interview with Star Sports. Perhaps his weariness stemmed from playing cricket nonstop and from his leadership, which involved guiding both India and the team,” he continued.

Simon Doull, Sanjay Manjrekar, and Irfan Pathan have opinions.

Since the incredible trading deal that brought back Hardik Pandya before the IPL 2024 auction, the Mumbai Indians have been considering a leadership change. Pandya’s time with the Gujarat Titans demonstrated his leadership abilities, helping MI win in 2022 and earn a spot in the finals in 2023. Ahead of the IPL 2022 mega auction, MI first made him available.

As one considers this change in captaincy and the ongoing Hardik-Rohit story, opinions from Simon Doull, Sanjay Manjrekar, and Irfan Pathan have emerged, each providing their own viewpoint. Pathan, Manjrekar, and Doull present a variety of viewpoints on this notable change in the Mumbai Indians’ leadership dynamics.

Irfan Pathan:

“Rohit Sharma is on the same level as CSK’s MS Dhoni. As a captain, Rohit has sacrificed a lot and developed the squad almost entirely. He is heavily involved in team meetings and has made a huge contribution. He is a bowler’s captain, in my opinion, having been an outstanding skipper. There is no denying that he didn’t have a terrific year. Regarding Hardik Pandya, the lineup already had Suryakumar and Bumrah, who have led India as captains. He’ll undoubtedly find it difficult to lead these mainstays, and management will find it difficult as well,” Irfan Pathan stated.

Sanjay Manjrekar:

“We shouldn’t be reflecting on Rohit Sharma in an emotional or nostalgic way. I believe that it’s a wise decision to name Hardik Pandya as your informed T20 captain and player. He is a successful player and an experienced leader. There is a lengthy history with Rohit Sharma. Thus, having a player like Hardik Pandya makes a lot of sense in cricket. I only hope he doesn’t feel too much pressure given the circumstances of the transfer and the Mumbai Indians’ strong support. Rohit Sharma is still going to be the same batter that he was when he was captain. So in my opinion, there should be no change in leadership,” Sanjay Manjrekar remarked.

Simon Doull:

Coming back to the franchise he loves and sort of helping construct a winning approach yet is a change, and I think it’s challenging from both Rohit’s and Hardik’s points of view. He presumably learned a lot from a captain, or he learned a lot from a franchise. However, this is also a clever franchise, and they aren’t just five-time winners. They are professionals at what they do, and I find it unbelievable that Rohit Sharma and I never discussed the possibility of getting Hardik back,” Simon Doull remarked.

“They are businesspeople, not ruthless, and he is a franchise man, so he had to be in that conversation. Thus, a discussion and a chat were necessary. And in my opinion, there would have been a consensus. He continued, “We want you to stay there for at least the first year to see what happens.