The Yo-Yo test for cricketers has been the topic of debate among administrators and former players for quite sometime now. The selection committee ended up dropping three players – Mohammad Shami, Ambati Rayudu and Sanju Samson – from the senior national team and India ‘A’ squad that is touring England and Ireland after they failed to achieve the base standard of 16.1.
Now test inventor Dr Jens Bangsho has added to the debate by saying the test results should be used to optimise training and improve endurance and not for selection purpose. He, however, insists that the standard set by the Indian team is pretty low compared to footballers who hit more than 20-21, the Indian Express reported on Tuesday.
Bangsho, the Danish Sports Scientist, devised the test in late 90s to test the fitness levels of those playing intermittent sports like football or basketball where players stop and run a lot.
While many top cricket teams have been using the Yo-Yo tests to determine the fitness of their players, India adopted the system only a few years ago. Now as things stand, the selectors are dropping players from the squad who fail to reach the minimum mark.
Coach Ravi Shastri was very categorical about how the management views the results during the team’s pre-departure press conference saying, “The Yo-Yo Test is here to stay. If you can pass it, well and good. If not, you can take a walk. There is no room for error. The captain is leading from the front.”
The Committee of Administrators have also now joined the debate with reports coming in that they will seek a second opinion from experts about the feasibility of the test as the primary parameter for fitness-based selection. Dr Bangsho’s views in this regard could be worth considering.
“You have to be careful about using this as the sole test for selection. You have to be always careful in using it as a selection criteria in sports like cricket. It’s not bad, though, to have a lower level (16.1 is lower spectrum) as everybody needs to have a minimum level of fitness. But whether you should use this for selection criteria is up to the federations but I would say you have to be careful; as there are other qualities that one seeks in a sportsman,” he was quoted as saying.
He insists that the constructive way is to use the test as a tool to measure fitness and find out training methods to improve the fitness of players.
“Since the level (16.1) isn’t that high, I can sense that they are expecting a minimum fitness level in their players. You may say that a player can perform well despite not reaching that level but as a team if it wants a certain minimum fitness level as part of its culture, 16.1 isn’t tough.” added the former assistant coach of Juventus FC and Danish national team.
Limited-time offer: Big stories, small price. Keep independent media alive. Become a Scroll member today!
Our journalism is for everyone. But you can get special privileges by buying an annual Scroll Membership. Sign up today!