18

Nov

Test Cricket: About Consistency and Hard Choices

image

As Indian girls stormed past fancied teams and lifted the One-day World Cup in cricket – a historic maiden triumph – one name that popped into the limelight was that of Amol Muzumdar, the coach, and justifiably so.

His cricket record popped up into discussion too – 171 first-class matches, 11000 plus runs at an average of 48 plus with 30 centuries and 60 fifties. But not a single Test match for India. Reason? He happened to have played cricket in the era of Tendulkars, Dravid, and Laxmans, who populated India’s middle order, shutting out other talented batters.

Amol is not the first one to have met such a fate – there is a long list of heavy performers in domestic cricket who did not make it to Test cricket or hardly made it to it.

Bishen Singh Bedi shut out several left-armers – like Padmakar Shivalkar and Rajinder Goel; Farokh Engineer shut out other keepers. Ramesh Saxena scored heavily for Bihar but hardly got a look in. In recent times, Dhoni’s success meant wicketkeepers like Dinesh Karthik or Wriddhiman Saha did not get opportunities.

One can imagine the choices the selectors had to make, but they showed great clarity of thought and then stuck to it consistently.

Which seems to be missing currently.

The Indian selectors do not have to look back that far – they can take a leaf out of the Australian selectors’ book, who have Cummins, Starc and Hazlewood as their frontline pace attack, and if any of them is unfit, Scot Boland is drafted in. But the moment the main bowler is fit again, he returns to the side regardless of the brilliant performances of Boland. That is clear and consistent thinking. And an example of making hard decisions.

India is arguably facing a problem of riches like never before, especially in white ball cricket, and the selectors have a much harder task to handle than yesteryears.

However, one could argue they are being paid much more than their predecessors, too!!!

India’s historic Women’s One-day World Cup win has brought coach Amol Muzumdar into the spotlight, highlighting his outstanding domestic record despite never playing a Test due to the dominance of legends like Tendulkar and Dravid. The article argues that Indian cricket has a long history of talented domestic players being overlooked and criticizes the current selectors for lacking clarity and consistency.
Front Foot Forward
By Anil Jauhri
Unlike Australia’s disciplined selection model, India is struggling with frequent changes, unclear batting positions, and an overemphasis on all-rounders at the cost of specialists. Confusion persists in selecting openers, middle-order batters, wicketkeepers, pacers, and spinners, with deserving players like Easwaran, Sudharshan, Sarfaraz, Kuldeep, and Shami often ignored. The piece urges selectors to adopt a stable, merit-based approach, give specialists longer opportunities, and make tough decisions to strengthen India’s Test team.

But are they showing the same clarity of thought and consistency?

Let us examine just the Test cricket squad, given that we have just slumped to yet another home defeat!

Yashaswi Jaiswal and KL Rahul have cemented themselves as openers – that leaves only the backup opener slot open to contenders. After having taken Easwaran to Australia in 2024-25 and then to England in the summer of 2025, he has now been discarded.

The no 3 slot seemed to have been taken by Shubman Gill, who was averaging 40 plus in that position until he became captain for the England tour and chose inexplicably to drop down to no 4, leaving the slot open and India vulnerable. It appeared that Sai Sudharshan was settling into the role, but suddenly, he was discarded, and Washington Sundar pitchforked into the slot. In England, the selectors seemed to prefer all-rounders to specialist bowlers, leaving out Kuldeep Yadav in the cold; now it seems they are replacing specialist batters with all-rounders too.

The fifth batter slot is also open, with Karun Nair not being given an extended run despite a fighting fifty in difficult conditions in the last Test in England. Now, disregarding the presence of regular batters like Sai and Padikkal in the squad, chosen by themselves, wicket-keeper Jurel is given the slot. Swayed by his recent batting rather than making a hard decision that once Pant is in, there is no room for Jurel.

 And whatever happened to Sarfaraz Khan with one century and 3 fifties in 6 Tests behind him? There are the likes of Ruturaj Gaikwad and Hanuma Vihari who are doing well in domestic cricket and could be considered for middle-order slots.

Is Pant our first choice wicket keeper? Yes, he is!

Is Jurel not the backup keeper? Yes, he is!

Which means the message to other aspiring keepers like Sanju Samson or Ishan Kishan, or Jitesh Sharma should be that there is no place for them in the Test side.

Let us now look at the pace department.

Jasprit Bumrah is a certainty – unless workload management is tried and he sits out.

Should Shami have been his regular partner, by the yardstick of performance, yes, but inexplicably, he is ignored even after he is fit.

The third seamer slot now belongs to Siraj.

At home, India is unlikely to play more than two seamers, and the selectors need to be clear in their minds who their best two seamers are and who is the third one, when needed. They are not.

In relation to backup seamers, especially on tours, the selectors are still showing confused thinking, picking and dropping Prasidh or Harshit or Akash Deep or Arshdeep in turns.

When it comes to spinners, the same confusion prevails. For years, Jadeja and Ashwin were the frontline spinners, and when the need overseas was only for one, Jadeja was preferred. In home or similar conditions, we could play three of them. Which should have been Kuldeep Yadav, but that was not the case!

Once Ashwin retired, by considerations of performance and variety, Kuldeep Yadav should have been a certainty and yet he is not despite performing whenever he is picked.

Keeping variety in view, the third spinner should be Washington Sundar since Axar is a left-arm left-armer like Jadeja. Another hard decision that the selectors seem unable to make. Instead, they play all four spinners, sacrificing a specialist batsman, and then Sundar gets to bowl just one over!!!

Ideally, we should be playing two seamers and two spinners in all Tests, with the fifth bowling slot being for a pacer abroad and a spinner at home.

Yet another situation is when in seam conditions abroad, we may play a lone spinner and a fourth pacer – preferably an all-rounder. We have experimented with Thakur and Nitish Reddy, but when they are played, they are hardly given the ball.

And are they Test class all-rounders – not yet proven!!

But this selection panel has shown a preference for all-rounders at the expense of specialists, which is going to ridiculous proportions.

It needs to seriously introspect to bring specialists back into the squad and give them an extended run for the benefit of Indian cricket. (A cricket buff from his student days, Anil Jauhri is   ex-CEO, National Accreditation Board for Certification Bodies and an international authority on standardisation.)

**************

  • Share:

About Us

We must explain to you how all seds this mistakens idea off denouncing pleasures and praising pain was born and I will give you a completed accounts..

Contact Us

Contact Info

  • 70, Gyan Khand- 4, Indirapuram, Ghaziabad. Uttar Pradesh.
  • +91-9810533682
  • info@mediamap.co.in
  • Week Days: 09.00 to 18.00 Sunday: Closed