The Board of Control for Cricket in India’s approach to managing Jasprit Bumrah’s workload has not gone down well with everyone. The Indian pace spearhead, known for his history of back injuries, was rested for two of the five Tests in England, including the decisive final match of the series. Despite the stakes, the management stuck to its pre-series plan and India finished with a 2-2 draw, notably, both wins came in matches where Jasprit Bumrah was absent.
31 years old Jasprit Bumrah featured in three Tests, taking 14 wickets at an average of 26. In contrast, Mohammed Siraj played all the five matches and was one of only two fast bowlers, alongside England’s Chris Woakes, to appear in every game of the Anderson-Tendulkar Trophy. Chris Woakes, however, suffered a shoulder injury on the opening day of the fifth Test and could not bowl again in that match.
The decision to rest Jasprit Bumrah came after lessons from the past, when his full participation in the Border-Gavaskar Trophy in Australia left him sidelined for nearly two months. Yet former India cricketer and ex-chief selector Sandeep Patil is far from convinced by the logic. He questioned why the BCCI would base such key decisions on the advice of a physio, wondering aloud if medical staff now outrank captains, coaches and selectors in determining team composition.
Drawing from his own playing days, Sandeep Patil pointed to legends like Sunil Gavaskar and Kapil Dev who he recalls endured grueling schedules without complaint, batting or bowling through matches and even continuing to train in the nets. He recounted how he himself returned for the very next Test after suffering a head injury in Australia in 1981.
For Sandeep Patil, the idea of “workload management” is misguided. He believes a player is either fit or unfit and that should be the sole criterion for selection. During his tenure as chief selector, he says such concepts were never entertained, with players often pushing through injuries in the absence of the advanced rehabilitation programmes available today. In his view, representing the country should be motivation enough to play without what he dismissively calls naatak (unnecessary drama).
What is your take on this matter? Do let us know.
