India have a conundrum that will go unanswered irrespective of the outcome of the Headingley Test match.
The story began in Melbourne in 2020/21. When Virat Kohli after that Test, India replaced him with not a specialist batter but an all-rounder, Ravindra Jadeja. This, despite the horrors of 36 all out in the previous Test match.
To get back into the series, India had to take 20 wickets. So, they bolstered their bowling. Their two spinners, Jadeja and R Ashwin, both batted, so the tail would begin at nine.
India won at Melbourne and drew at Sydney, but over the course of the SCG Test, they lost both Ashwin and Jadeja (along with a few others) to injury. For the decider at Brisbane, they fielded an XI that would become their template in ‘SENA’ countries for years to come.
Four fast bowlers. Of them, one with some batting ability. Among the spinners, the best batter. It was a move out of necessity, but also a conscious decision – for they left out Kuldeep Yadav.
For this Test, they had Mohammed Siraj, Navdeep Saini, T Natarajan, and… Shardul Thakur and Washington Sundar. Thakur had played one Test before the tour. The others had not.
India famously won the Test to clinch the series. Both Jadeja and Ashwin were available for their next “SENA” Test – the World Test Championship 2021-2023 final against New Zealand. India picked both and lost.
That decided the matter. In 2018, Ishant Sharma and Mohammed Shami were joined by Jasprit Bumrah. That year, the trio shared 130 Test wickets away from home, equalling the legendary trio of Michael Holding, Joel Garner, and Malcolm Marshall in 1984. And now, from 2021, they were joined by Siraj.
However, there was a problem. Since all four were genuine tail-enders, it meant that India’s batting virtually ended at seven. This was not something they were prepared to risk, more so because their No.7 was an all-rounder.
So in came Thakur. He was not one of the best four fast bowlers, but he had some batting credentials.
India took a 2-1 lead in England. Cheteshwar Pujara and Ajinkya Rahane were not getting runs, and Virat Kohli was in the midst of a particularly dry phase. The batting needed to be bolstered. Thakur stayed put.
India replicated the combination from their home Tests. There, they played Ashwin and Jadeja together. When Axar Patel joined them, they batted all the way down to nine. When he did not, they still batted to eight while having five bowlers.
Several teams use a wicketkeeper (or a batter, if the keeper bats up the order) at No.7. India use an all-rounder. As a result, their No.7 has not made as many runs as that of some other sides. The last three batters have been unable to make up for that deficit. Time and again their lower order caved in as they did at Headingley.
To compensate for that, they had to count on their No.8. As is evident from the data, it has worked.
The entire thing seems like a good combination, but it comes at a cost.
The flaw in the plan
At home, India have their all-rounders. There is no Ashwin, but they can still pick Jadeja and one or both of Axar and Sundar.
If the conditions offer something to the seamers, Thakur is a reasonable fourth seamer (and fifth bowler) to have. He does get the odd wicket. His bowling average is below 30 at the time of writing. Among Indian seamers with as many Test wickets, only Bumrah (42) has a better strike rate than Thakur (48).
Of Thakur’s 247.3 overs, 238.5 have been in “SENA” countries and another seven in the West Indies. India pick him for specific conditions and leave him out for the rest. He can move the ball around.
As Rahul Iyer pointed out, 28 of Thakur’s 35 wickets in the last Ranji season came in either the first 20 overs or between overs 80 and 100 – in other words, with the new ball. For India, Thakur does not get the new ball and probably never will.
He is a bowler bowling “out of position” – unless the ball does a bit even after the initial overs. But as we have discussed in these pages, England have stopped offering “English pitches” since 2022. Seamers have roughly been as effective in India as they have been in England over this period.
In England, Thakur is expected to get neither the new ball nor seaming conditions.
Is there a solution?
They can drop Thakur for another fast bowler. Arshdeep Singh brings the left-hander’s angle. Kuldeep is a world-class wrist-spinner. But that will take away the No.8 cushion that – as we have seen – makes up for a frail bottom three.
India may swap Thakur for Nitish Kumar Reddy. But as the Australia tour revealed, while Reddy is the superior batter, Reddy is not quite the fourth seamer: he bowled fewer than nine overs a Test. If he plays Test cricket, it will be as one of the batters, not as one of the seamers.
Of course, replacing Jadeja with Reddy will not increase India’s seam-bowling depth in any way.
Another option is to drop one of Siraj and Prasidh Krishna for Kuldeep. Two spinners look good on paper, but it will force India to bowl Thakur first-change. That is closer to his comfort zone, but he looked radarless and insipid in the first innings at Headingley. It may end up being the ideal release for England after Jasprit Bumrah’s first spell.
At this point on this tour, India can merely switch from one sub-optimal combination to another.
