Ravindra Jadeja is one of the greatest to have played Test cricket, but he needs a magnum opus to leave a lasting memory.
Shubman Gill’s overnight declaration at Ahmedabad halted Jadeja’s innings at 104 not out – and his Test aggregate at 3,990. Jadeja can take partial responsibility for being denied a second outing in the Test: his third-innings 4-54 was instrumental in the West Indies succumbing to an innings defeat.
The ten runs – undoubtedly a matter of time – will put Jadeja in a group of four cricketers (along with Kapil Dev, Ian Botham, and Daniel Vettori) who have done the 4,000 run-300 wicket double in Test cricket. In this group of four, Jadeja has the best batting (38.73) and bowling averages (25.07).
But Jadeja’s stature is not restricted to merely dominating this quartet. To understand his greatness, let us expand to cricketers with 1,500 runs and 150 wickets in Test cricket.
For these cricketers, let us calculate the ratio between the two averages (the difference is often skewed towards batting all-rounders like Garry Sobers and Jacques Kallis).
The parameter puts Jadeja at fifth place. He is very close to Miller, while the top three – bona-fide legends – are not far away.
Yet, the ratio cannot be the sole determinant of greatness. A cricketer might have bowled less or batted low down the order. Their incredible record in one department might have pulled up their ratio, but there is no guarantee that they have contributed consistently in both departments.
Thus, we need to evaluate how much of the workload they have borne for their sides in not one but both departments. Kallis, for example, had 1.76 wickets per Test while Cummins scored 22 runs. While both feature in this list, they have not been among the best in the side in the other department.
It is evident that no one is above Jadeja in both departments, which makes him one of the most “rounded” all-rounders in Test history. In every Test, he has scored 46.4 runs (Imran had 43.3) and taken 3.88 wickets (Broad had 3.62).
Can one combine the two parameters? While crude, a product of runs per Test and wickets per Test can give a fair estimate. Over time, that determines how consistently the cricketer has been important in both departments.
Shakib topping the list is unsurprising, given the workload he bore: for a long time, he was Bangladesh’s best bowler and one of their best batters.
Apart from Sobers, Jadeja is the only one to feature in the top six in both charts. Not only has he scored runs and taken wickets, he has been consistently needed by India in both departments.
Jadeja is a legend of Test cricket. He belongs to the top bracket of cricketers who have taken the field in the past century and half – despite never being the best batter or bowler of the Indian Test XI. And even at 36, he is getting better with time.
Yet, he is seldom perceived as one.
What makes a legendary cricketer?
The outcome of every cricket match is determined by numbers, but “impact is beyond data” is a common phrase used for legends of the sport.
Unfair. Unfortunate. Cruel, even – for we are diBut it is what it is.
Such impact can broadly be classified in two categories – aesthetics and fan memory. And despite his phenomenal numbers, Jadeja falls short on both counts.
Jadeja does not have the charisma one associates with Sobers and Imran, Miller and Botham, Kapil and Stokes. His most famous moments involve fielding in the circle (or in the deep), but these positions are not the most important in this format.
As a bowler, Jadeja’s strength lies in his consistency. He neither has the loop that evokes romanticism, nor does he generate massive turn. If anything, he is often accused of being a one-dimensional accurate bowler.
Nothing can be further from the truth, of course. Once he assesses the conditions and figures out how much assistance he is going to get, Jadeja is a master at using the angles and the length. Once rapid through the air, he now varies pace like few others. He does something or the other unless the wicket offers absolutely nothing to spinners.
Yet, while fascinating to watch, none of this inspires poetry. The batting adds to it, for he is as orthodox as any Test batter in 2025. Like pre-DRS batters, he sticks his pad alongside the bat while playing spin, perfectly aware of the risk. He may score a double hundred full of boundaries and you may not remember a single shot a week later. Despite playing all three formats, his strongest shots were all in vogue in Test cricket fifty years ago. He is a 20th-century batter quietly rising up the batting order in a 21st-century XI.
The other aspect, of course, is fan memories. Jadeja’s illustrious career lacks that one performance that will put his place firmly in cricket’s folklore.
Sobers’ maiden hundred was a world record 365 not out; he also had, among other peaks, the 1966 tour of England. Nearly six years after his famous 12-wicket haul at Sydney, Imran rocked India with five wickets for three runs in an astonishing early demonstration of reverse swing. Even if one restricts his feats to Test cricket, Stokes will always have Headingley 2019 on his CV. Botham had his summer of 1981, Flintoff his 2005, Hadlee the 1985/86 tour of Australia, Benaud the 1961 Ashes, Kapil the Madras Test of 1979/80… and so on.
Jadeja? The Lord’s Test of 2025 could have been a lasting legacy, but it was not to be. His closest shot came in 2022/23, when Australia came to India with Border-Gavaskar Trophy aspirations. Two Tests into the series, these hopes had disappeared… and Jadeja was Player of the Match in both. In the second innings at Delhi, he bowled five batters – the first to do so since Shoaib Akhtar in 2002.
But that is not a story eyewitnesses will tell their grandchildren a few decades later. Jadeja is a cricketing legend, but that one defining moment, one memory, one epic saga is what will strengthen that belief.
The numbers do tell the story of Jadeja’s greatness, as they do for everyone. But for a cricketer of his stature, the history of cricket perhaps expects that additional bit.
