ENG Vs IND: Ravichandran Ashwin Slams Team Management For Choosing Extra All-rounder Over Kuldeep Yadav In Manchester Test

At the end of Day 2 in the crucial fourth Test between India and England, the scoreboard spoke volumes: England were in firm control, and the Indian team looked listless, outplayed, and tactically exposed. For Indian fans, selectors, and former cricketers, the sight of England’s batters steamrolling the visitors’ bowling attack in a must-win encounter was not only frustrating—but alarming.

Among the most vocal critics of India’s strategy was none other than veteran spinner and cricketing mind Ravichandran Ashwin, who took to his YouTube channel, “Ash Ki Baat,” to express deep concerns over what he called “tactical miscalculations” and “selection decisions that defied logic.”

In a brutally honest critique, Ashwin did not mince words—highlighting what he believes were grave errors in team selection, usage of bowlers, and misplaced priorities by the Indian team management.

Kuldeep Yadav’s Omission: A Missed Opportunity for Breakthroughs

One of the most glaring decisions, according to Ashwin, was the exclusion of left-arm wrist spinner Kuldeep Yadav from the playing XI. Kuldeep, who has shown promise in the previous matches with his variations and knack for picking wickets on lifeless tracks, was left out in favor of more batting depth.

Ashwin’s argument was simple yet potent: in Test cricket, especially in English conditions where long partnerships are the norm, it’s wickets—not extra batting at No.8—that break momentum.

“You may get 20–30 extra runs from a No.8 batter, but if that player at No.8 takes 2–3 wickets, then the complexion of the Test match can change. The management decided to play Nitish Kumar Reddy at Lord’s and Birmingham, but he is not Ben Stokes yet,” Ashwin remarked.

The decision to back a young, promising all-rounder like Nitish Kumar Reddy over a proven wicket-taker like Kuldeep didn’t sit well with Ashwin—or many fans. While Nitish has impressed in the domestic circuit and possesses raw talent, the comparison to someone of Stokes’ caliber was premature. Ashwin’s assertion hinted at a bigger flaw: the team’s tendency to back versatility over specialization.

In modern Test cricket, especially in pressure-cooker scenarios, captains need strike bowlers who can break partnerships and tilt sessions. Kuldeep Yadav, with his unorthodox style, could’ve been that wildcard—especially against an aggressive English middle order.

Anshul Kamboj and the Curious Case of the New Ball

If Kuldeep’s absence was disappointing, Ashwin believed the new-ball choice was outright baffling.

India handed the new cherry to Anshul Kamboj, a talented but inexperienced pacer making his debut. The decision raised eyebrows, particularly because it meant relegating Mohammad Siraj—India’s second-most experienced seamer after Bumrah—to first change. The result? England’s openers hammered a 166-run stand, setting the tone for a day of dominance.

Ashwin was quick to acknowledge Kamboj’s potential:

“Anshul has a good wrist position and swings it both ways. I see why Shubman gave him the new ball.”

But he also pointed out the glaring risk in that decision:

“Siraj is a proven new-ball bowler. Especially in England, you want someone who can nip the ball in early and keep it tight. Giving the new ball to a debutant against players like Zak Crawley and Ben Duckett is a big gamble.”

Ashwin’s comments are rooted in tactical depth. While it’s important to give new talent a chance, doing so in a must-win match with the series on the line is a high-stakes experiment. Siraj’s record with the new ball is superior, especially in seaming conditions, and his ability to strike early has been a weapon for India in the past.

Instead, the decision to give Kamboj the new ball not only cost India in terms of immediate impact but may also have hurt the debutant’s confidence. By the time Siraj was brought in, the openers were well-set, and the damage had been done.

The Larger Question: Has the Team Lost Its Tactical Edge?

Ashwin’s criticism sheds light on a bigger problem plaguing Indian cricket in recent months: strategic inconsistency. Whether it’s the rotation of fast bowlers, over-reliance on all-rounders, or defensive selections that prioritize depth over impact, the team seems stuck between building for the future and winning in the present.

In this fourth Test, the margin for error was zero. India, trailing in the series and needing a win to stay alive, needed its best XI—those who could make things happen. Instead, the squad felt experimental, hesitant, and undercooked.

Ashwin, with over a decade of Test experience, understands the psychological impact of such selections:

“You have to send a message—to the dressing room and the opposition—that you’re here to win. Leaving out a proven match-winner like Kuldeep, giving the new ball to a debutant, it sends mixed signals.”

Fans and Experts Echo Ashwin’s Sentiments

Ashwin’s video quickly went viral, with fans, former cricketers, and analysts rallying behind his observations. #PlayKuldeep trended on social media, and many questioned the role of senior players and the selection committee in the final playing XI.

Cricket analyst Harsha Bhogle, while more measured in tone, echoed similar concerns during a mid-innings commentary:

“India has immense talent, no doubt. But in big matches, selections need to reflect match-winning intent, not just balance.”

Even former captain Sourav Ganguly weighed in post-match, stating:

“I would have played Kuldeep. England’s batters don’t read wrist spin that well. It could’ve been a game-changer.”

Leadership Under Scrutiny: Shubman Gill in the Spotlight

Another silent subplot is the role of captain Shubman Gill. Leading the side in the absence of Rohit Sharma, Gill is admired for his composure and tactical brain in white-ball cricket. However, red-ball captaincy—especially overseas—requires a different level of experience and instinct.

The decision to back Kamboj for the new ball, persist with Nitish Reddy, and not push harder for Kuldeep’s inclusion may ultimately be on the selectors, but as match-day captain, Gill’s judgment is now under the scanner.

Ashwin, while refraining from directly blaming the young skipper, implied that more seasoned voices in the camp should have prevailed. It raises an uncomfortable question: Is the Indian Test team currently lacking a tactical leader who can make hard decisions under pressure?

What Lies Ahead: Must-Win Situation, Mounting Pressure

With two days remaining and England holding a commanding position, the road ahead for India is steep. The team not only needs to mount a comeback on the field but also reassess its off-field decisions. Tactical errors, selection gambles, and underperforming seniors—everything is now under the microscope.

If there’s one silver lining, it’s that Indian cricket has historically responded best when its back is against the wall. But to mount a turnaround, the management must start listening—not just to fans and selectors—but to voices like Ashwin’s, who have been in the trenches and know what it takes to win.

Warnings or Wisdom?

Ravichandran Ashwin’s criticism wasn’t emotional—it was surgical. It was the kind of analysis that comes from someone who knows the pulse of Test cricket, someone who sees the game not just as a player, but as a student.

In cricket, selections can make or break matches. In a series-defining Test like this, India may have simply misread the script. And now, with the walls closing in, the team must reflect—and fast.

As Ashwin summed up his thoughts with quiet finality:

“The margins in Test cricket are fine. But when you consistently ignore match-winners for the sake of ‘balance’, those margins become the difference between victory and defeat.”

Let’s hope that message hits home.

Please check for information on the best betting sites in India – https://selectory.org/best-betting-sites/