Ajit Agarkar’s Absence at BCCI Mumbai Meeting Sparks Speculation
In a room full of power brokers and decision-makers at the BCCI’s high-profile review meeting in Mumbai on Thursday, the most talked-about figure was the one who wasn’t there.
Ajit Agarkar, chairman of the senior selection committee and a son of this city, stayed firmly on the outside of the narrative the board tried to script. His absence, though explained in detail, refused to leave the room.
BCCI secretary Devajit Saikia went out of his way to shut down the noise.
“Today, he was out of station, so he could not be a part of the meeting. The meeting was called at very short notice, and our chairman of the selection committee, Ajit, was not in town. So he could not join the meeting, and he was in an area where he could not join online either, despite our best efforts,” Saikia said.
The message was clear: nothing to see here.
The reaction was the opposite.
Social media lit up almost instantly, sensing a story where the board insisted there wasn’t one. Timelines filled with theories about Agarkar’s future, some accounts going as far as to claim that the former India pacer was on his way out as chief selector.
Saikia tried to slam that door shut as well.
“Today, we did not have any selection meeting. There was no such discussion in today’s meeting,” he said, stressing that the agenda did not touch on selection or selectors.
The words were firm, but the curiosity refused to die down. Part of that stems from recent history.
The so-called Rohit Sharma episode still hangs over this selection committee. Reports suggested that the selectors had told the former captain to retire, only for the BCCI to step in and override that stance. Since then, every move — or no-show — involving Agarkar has been viewed through a sharper, more suspicious lens.
This time, the optics hurt. A few days earlier, Agarkar had chaired an online selection committee meeting to pick the T20I squad for the three-match series against Afghanistan. He was very much available then, fully connected, running proceedings virtually.
On Thursday, when the board’s top brass assembled in his hometown for a key review, he could not even be patched in.
That contrast fuelled the speculation. The BCCI’s explanation was detailed but not enough to silence the chatter.
Currently, Agarkar is said to be overseas. Multiple sources maintain that no changes are expected in the selection committee and that he will complete his term, which runs until July next year. There is even talk that he could receive an extension up to the 2027 World Cup, scheduled for October-November of that year, though that possibility has not been independently verified.
Saikia, for his part, refused to feed the rumour mill.
“I do not want to give any fodder to the speculators,” he said, drawing a line under the subject as far as the board was concerned.
The calendar, though, will drag Agarkar back into the public eye soon enough. He is expected to be in Chennai for the Duleep Trophy final starting September 6, a five-day red-ball fixture where he will be joined by a couple of his fellow selectors. Two other panel members are likely to be on duty in Delhi for the T20I series against Afghanistan.
If the past few weeks are any indication, he will not go unnoticed.
During the recently concluded Test series in Sri Lanka, television cameras repeatedly picked him out in the stands, his reactions dissected almost as closely as those of the players in the middle. He was a constant presence, a visible symbol of the selection regime.
On Thursday, he was just as central to the story — this time as a conspicuous absence that left an empty chair, a string of official denials, and a question that Indian cricket will keep asking until he walks back into view: what, if anything, is really changing behind those closed doors?
