Image Credit- AP
It is clear how important Hardik Pandya is to the team
now that he won’t play in India’s upcoming World Cup match against New Zealand
on Sunday. His all-around abilities can only be replaced by selecting a player
for each discipline, which is impossible in an XI. No matter whatever path they
choose, India would have to present an unevenly matched team in Dharamsala.
They can substitute R Ashwin for Pandya if they still
want six bowlers with as much batting depth as feasible. With Ravindra Jadeja
at No. 6, Ashwin at No. 7, and Shardul Thakur at No. 8, the lower-middle order
would be relatively weak.
A more traditional strategy would be to deploy just
five bowlers and replace Pandya with a batter. Ishan Kishan has more ODI
experience and gives India another left-hand option, while Suryakumar Yadav has
the “x-factor.” They are both choices.
However, India may have a bowling issue if Pandya is
replaced with a specialist batsman. Thakur might disagree, but the squad might
be hesitant to select him as one of the five available bowlers. Thakur gives
India batting depth at No. 8—a position they have not yet needed in their first
four games—as a sixth bowler, which is the role he has been playing thus far in
the World Cup. Can the squad, however, count on him to bowl a strong ten-over
performance against New Zealand?
India will have the batting depth they desire and a
fifth bowler who can be counted on to bowl ten overs if they replace Pandya
with either Suryakumar or Kishan and bring in Ashwin for Thakur. But unless the
Dharamsala surface is a poor turner, that will leave them with just three
spinners—Ashwin, Ravindra Jadeja, and Kuldeep Yadav—and two quicks—Jasprit
Bumrah and Mohammed Siraj.
Therefore, if India wants a third pace bowler but is
concerned about Thakur’s ability to bowl 10 overs in a five-person attack, they
must use Mohammed Shami, which implies Jadeja at position seven is the depth of
the batting.
Despite how shocking it may sound, Kuldeep’s absence
is not that dissimilar from Shami’s absence thus far in the competition, giving
India the batting depth of Thakur at No. 8. This approach enables India to
field an XI that most closely approaches the composition of their first-choice
XI, however it is not the ideal one.
All of these are permutations, but if we want to
forecast what India will likely do, what they did the previous time they missed
Pandya might be a clue. Before the World Cup, India used Thakur as one of five
specialised bowlers in the ODIs they played against Australia. Most likely,
they will only alter the XI by one and ask Thakur for further information.