Under Rohit Sharma's leadership, a successful cricket player is always a possibility. Ask Ravichandran Ashwin, who returned to the field to compete in the T20 World Cup in Australia, and who was immediately selected for the World Cup 2023 team despite not having played an ODI in six years because to an injury to Axar Patel. Consider Mohammed Shami. After the World Cup in the UAE in 2021, he was informed that his skills were no longer needed for T20s. However, he was India's top pacer in the subsequent World Cup after Jasprit Bumrah was declared ineligible, around ten months later. Include Umesh Yadav and Ajinkya Rahane in the group as well. After not being given any consideration for the World Test Championship final, Rahane was chosen for more than a year.
Rohit constantly relies on his background. When he gave Umesh a T20I comeback for the home series against Australia in 2022, he was questioned about the same thing. "Match practise is not necessary for players like Shami and Umesh in a certain format. For years, they had been engaging in the same activity. He said, "They can show up and deliver the goods."
How is it possible for the same captain to bench Shami over the World Cup's opening four games? The most seasoned bowler in India's World Cup team, Shami was a man in form, having taken 19 wickets in 12 matches and as many as five only two weeks prior to the ICC tournament. In one-day international cricket, Shami is a captain's dream due to his unrivalled seam position, control with the new ball, and yorkers at the end of the game. None of that was unknown to Rohit.
He was fully aware of the devastation that Shami's songs might cause. And he's been on fire ever since he was given the opportunity to play in the starting lineup against New Zealand during the group stage. In just six games, he has amassed 23 wickets, shattered several records, reached unprecedented heights, and—above all—became India's most influential bowler and, in the eyes of many, the most influential bowler of the competition.
In his six World Cup matches, the Uttar Pradeshi right-arm bowler has claimed three five-wicket scores. Shami made history by taking the first seven wickets in an ODI in the thrilling semi-final encounter against New Zealand. In just 17 innings, he was also the fastest to achieve 50 World Cup wickets.
India's decision to sideline Shami for the first half of the tournament appears even more harsh in light of what he has done. Would it? There are nine times out of ten that Shami deserved to be in the India XI. However, the World Cup was a unique moment, and Rohit had the perfect idea.
*Why Rohit was not wrong in benching Shami for the first half of World Cup 2023
Even with all of his expertise and accomplishments, Shami was not one of India's top two pacers. Yes, India's pace assault is that good. Jasprit Bumrah had the number one slot earmarked for him, but Siraj proved unstoppable with the sort of performance he put out, taking more wickets this year than any other bowler. Furthermore, Rohit was not able to play Shami as the third seamer. He was unable to act. The cause? With the bat, none of Bumrah, Shami, or Siraj can be relied upon.
It was obvious going into the World Cup that Kuldeep Yadav would be India's starting spinner. He was never going to be the answer to India's long tail issue, with a batting average of 10 and a strike rate of 53. As a result, Rohit had to consider a third seamer with some batsmanship. And Shardul Thakur was the greatest choice.
India selected Shardul as their No. 8 bowler even though he is not as dangerous as Shami because Hardik Pandya could share the workload of an extra seamer. You might wonder why you need a batsman at number eight. The solution may be found in the second semi-final between South Africa and Australia. Australia trailed 39 runs to win when Steve Smith was lost. Both pacers and spinners might find something to like on the Eden Gardens pitch. Australia may have been forced to return home if Mitchell Starc hadn't played a strong No. 8. With three wickets remaining, Starc and Pat Cummins guided Australia to victory with remarkable composure as they faced all kinds of challenges.
Cummins was also crucial when he batted at No. 8 during Australia's run-chase against Afghanistan, during which Glenn Maxwell hit a remarkable double century. It would have been extremely tough for Maxwell to go for his strokes if it weren't for the Australian captain's confident batting at the other end.
At No. 8, Rohit requested that guarantee. He didn't want to find himself in a position where it was impossible to even trust India's final four wickets to contribute 40 runs. Selecting a batsman who could contribute with both bat and ball and provide useful overs was his best bet at No. 8. The only seam-bowling option available was Shardul's.
But when Pandya hurt his ankle, everything changed dramatically. India was now without the buffer of a spare seamen. How did Rohit behave? He instantly reverted to Shami, who is a superior bowler. He was now in too deep to take a chance on a questionable third seamer. He wanted someone like Shami, someone who could be relied upon to take wickets in addition to consistently bowling 10 overs.
The seasoned pacer returned the favour with consecutive efforts that won matches. The fans would now like to see another Shami-show in Ahmedabad against Australia in the major final as India prepares to break their ICC trophy drought, but they should not hold Rohit and the Indian team management responsible for benching him during the tournament's first phase.
0 Comments