back icon

News

In wake of stinging Edgbaston loss, India have plenty to ponder

article_imageSELECTION CONUNDRUMS
Last updated on 05 Jul 2022 | 04:41 PM
Follow Us
In wake of stinging Edgbaston loss, India have plenty to ponder

We look at the tricky selection questions facing the management, going forward

Does Pujara slot back into the starting XI permanently?Having earned the right to feature in the starting XI again by scoring heaps of runs in County Cricket, Cheteshwar Pujara impressed in the one-off Test at Edgbaston: outside of Pant and Jadeja, he was the only Indian batter to pass fifty. 

Pujara convincingly out-batting the man who kept him out of the side in the Sri Lanka series, Hanuma Vihari, has now created a new headache for the management: what now happens to Pujara, Vihari and the No.3 slot?

Vihari has been long-earmarked as Pujara’s long-term successor, and the Sri Lanka series seemed like the beginning of an extended run for the 28-year-old at No.3. 

But now, all of a sudden, thanks to his twin failures at Edgbaston, and thanks to Pujara outperforming him, Vihari’s place looks anything but secure. 

Come the Bangladesh series, then, the management will have a very big decision to make. 

Do they keep Vihari at No.3 because he is the future, and treat Pujara as a mere backup? Do they lay faith in Pujara and hand him back the No.3 spot again, in the hope that he has a second wind left in him? Or will they accommodate both batters in the XI and merely push Vihari to either No.5 or No.6?

Who plays at No.6?Assuming Rishabh Pant is locked in as the team’s long-term No.5 — each of his last 5 innings have come at No.5 — who does the management see as the team’s permanent No.6?

Shreyas Iyer is the incumbent, but the management might very well be tempted to try others out. Because there are no paucity of quality options.

The first obvious candidate is  Vihari, who has plenty of experience batting in this position, particularly away from home. Vihari, mind you, was the one who slotted into the middle-order against South Africa when Virat Kohli missed the Johannesburg Test with injury. But there is every chance that the management see Vihari as a long-term No.3 — where he batted against Sri Lanka — and not a No.5 or No.6.

Shubman Gill has exclusively played as an opener for India, but he is no stranger to batting in the middle-order at the first-class level — he’s scored 603 runs @ 150.5 across No.4 and No.5 in FC cricket. There is also a train of thought that Gill’s style of batting might just be better suited against the old ball, given just how much he has struggled against the new ball in the embryonic stages of his career - since the Australia tour, he’s averaged 13.55 versus the quicks and was also dismissed twice by Anderson at Edgbaston.

The management have also entertained this idea previously: multiple reports suggested that Gill was set to bat at No.5 in the two-Test series against New Zealand in 2021 before an injury to KL Rahul left India with no option but to slot in Gill at the top.

Then there is Sarfaraz Khan, who has really left the selectors with no option but calling him up, thanks to the sheer weight of runs he’s scored — 1995 runs at an average of 133 since the start of the 2019/20 Ranji season. What works against Sarfaraz is that he’s not played too much ‘A’ cricket, but when you score these many runs, you warrant selection. 

As things stand, though, it feels like Shreyas Iyer might still be the favorite. He’s already proven himself at home (sort of, at least) and it is unlikely that he will be written off and chucked out on the basis of one Test. If there’s one thing we’ve learned about this Dravid-led management, it’s that they prefer giving players extended runs. 

Should Shardul Thakur continue to be an automatic pick in away Tests?Let us make something clear: Shardul Thakur the Test cricketer has exceeded expectations, that too by some distance, and has played key roles in multiple major victories away from home. His numbers — avg 24.44 with the ball and 19.53 with the bat — are quite frankly ridiculous.

But there are occasions where it feels like Thakur neither strengthens the batting nor the bowling. Case in point this Edgbaston Test, where he scored 1 and 4 with the bat (which is okay, because it’s not his primary skill) and then was completely innocuous with the ball. ‘Cannon-fodder’ was what Ravi Shastri, on air on Day 5, described Thakur’s bowling as.

Thakur not being potent with the ball becomes a problem in away matches because it essentially means the team is left with only three wicket-taking threats (Jadeja, either way, is only used as a defensive option). It becomes an even bigger problem on days when one of the three frontline seamers misfire (case in point Siraj at Edgbaston).

Given India have now failed to take 20 wickets in three consecutive away games — they’ve taken 9 wickets across their last three away Tests in the fourth innings — there is perhaps merit in the argument that the fourth seamer should also be an out-and-out frontline bowler. Maybe someone like a Prasidh Krishna, who with his height can also provide a point of difference. 

India also always have the option of going back to Ravichandran Ashwin, trusting the veteran to serve as a potent attacking threat. Ashwin will also add valuable batting depth, one of the main reasons Thakur gets picked in the XI.

England, this summer under McCullum, have sacrificed batting depth to bolster their bowling and the result has been evident: they’ve taken 20 wickets in all 4 Tests they’ve played. Maybe India should take a leaf out of Baz’s rulebook and burden their batters with a bit more responsibility. 

Related Article

Loader