Seaming (ly) Awry?

A mumbling Srinath has terrorized me for a few months now, espeically given that there is so little sensible mumble coming out of someone who has played so much international cricket. Like the proverbial flash in the pan however, Srinath's comments on the third Indian seamer finally add some serious value to what should be a more hotly debated issue.

To paraphrase what he said - Indian selectors must stop playing musical chairs with the position of the third seamer. This role has been fulfilled by Munaf, Praveen, Ganguly, Sreesanth and Ajit over the past few years in the Indian version of the rotation policy. If we accept that batsmen require a longish noose from which to hang themselves, why does the same logic not apply to bowlers, life for whom has anyway been made tougher by pitches that are getting slower and slower? Has Praveen done badly in the recent past to merit an exclusion? Didnt Sreesanth do enough in the little domestic cricket that he played?

I fail to understand how the allegedly best swing bowlers in the country are not on this tour (Zak excluded). Sreesanth and Praveen have been picked to play in India, Australia and South Africa (as the case may be), for their ability to swing the new ball and reverse swing the old one. Yet, when we go to a country which demands swing bowling expertise, we prefer the Soooparrstarr (Balaji, who hasnt played in a long long time and bowls only slightly faster than John) over these two? While I am all for one of them missing out for Ranji's highest wicket taker (preference for youth and all that), selections like Balajis' make one wonder whether the selectors are not suffering from some permanent brain damage received during their playing days.

As an aside, my prediction on the test series is a 2-1 victory to India, weather permitting. What say?