Title: Shardul Thakur was treated like a showpiece: Navjot Singh Sidhu
The fourth Test match between India and England at Old Trafford has been a topic of discussion among cricket enthusiasts, with many analyzing the Indian team’s strategy and performance. Former India batter Navjot Singh Sidhu has joined the chorus of criticism, stating that Shardul Thakur was treated like a showpiece by the team management. In an interview, Sidhu expressed his disappointment and frustration over the way Thakur was used in the match.
“What’s the use of playing six bowlers if you’re not going to use them properly?” Sidhu asked, pointing out the inefficiency of the Indian team’s bowling strategy. He emphasized that playing multiple bowlers is not enough, and it’s essential to use them effectively to get the desired result. Sidhu believes that Thakur was not given the opportunity to showcase his skills, and as a result, the team struggled to contain the English batsmen.
Sidhu also drew parallels with England’s Ben Stokes and Australia’s Nathan Lyon, highlighting the importance of having a reliable fourth-bowling option. He praised Stokes for his ability to adapt to different situations and bowl effectively, while Lyon is known for his consistency and ability to exploit the weaknesses of opposing batsmen. Sidhu believes that India lacks a similar bowler, which was evident in the fourth Test match.
The fourth-bowling option is crucial in Test cricket, as it allows the team to maintain a consistent pace and keep the opposition under pressure. Stokes and Lyon are two prime examples of bowlers who have made a significant impact in Test matches, and Sidhu believes that India needs to identify a similar player.
Sidhu’s criticism of India’s strategy is not without merit, as the team’s bowling attack has been a concern throughout the series. The inclusion of six bowlers, including Thakur, was seen as a bold move by the team management, but it failed to yield the desired results. Thakur, in particular, was expected to make a significant impact, but he struggled to contain the English batsmen and managed to take only two wickets in the match.
The Indian team’s batting also came under scrutiny, as they failed to post a competitive total in both innings. The top-order batsmen, including Rohit Sharma and KL Rahul, struggled to score runs, and the middle-order batsmen failed to capitalize on the starts they got. The lack of partnerships and inability to build a strong foundation made it difficult for the team to post a challenging total.
Sidhu’s criticism of India’s strategy is not the first time that the team has faced criticism for its approach to the game. The Indian team has been criticized for its inability to adapt to different conditions, and the lack of a clear game plan has been a recurring theme throughout the series. The team’s struggling batting and bowling attacks have been a major concern, and it remains to be seen how they will respond to the criticism.
In conclusion, Navjot Singh Sidhu’s criticism of India’s strategy regarding Shardul Thakur is a valid one. Thakur was treated like a showpiece, and the team’s inability to use him effectively was a major factor in their defeat. The Indian team needs to identify a reliable fourth-bowling option and work on its batting and bowling attacks if they are to compete with the best teams in the world.
