Gautam Gambhir, the head coach of the Indian cricket team, is facing scrutiny regarding his handling of Jasprit Bumrah's workload during the ongoing Test series against England. The decision to publicly announce that Bumrah would only play three of the five Test matches has drawn criticism, with some suggesting that this information should have been kept secret to gain a tactical advantage.
Several reports indicate that Bumrah is likely to miss the second Test at Edgbaston as part of a pre-planned workload management strategy. This decision follows a demanding performance in the first Test at Headingley, where Bumrah bowled nearly 45 overs across both innings. The team management aims to prevent any recurrence of the back injury that previously sidelined him during India's tour of Australia earlier this year.
Former India cricketer Aakash Chopra has questioned the wisdom of publicizing Bumrah's limited participation. Speaking on his YouTube channel, Chopra wondered why the team management found it necessary to reiterate this plan repeatedly before the start of the tour. He argued that keeping England guessing about Bumrah's availability could have been beneficial. "Why was it not kept a secret? We don't announce our team as well. So why was it necessary to reiterate it repeatedly before the start of the tour that he would play three matches only? Let them guess. You play whichever Tests you wish," said Chopra.
Chopra further elaborated that if Bumrah plays the second Test, he would only be available for one of the remaining three matches. This allows England to prepare pitches accordingly for the rest of the series. "You have played one, and you know you can play only two of the remaining four matches, which is not a good thing. If you play the second as well, you will play one of three. So, suddenly, the opposition gets into a great frame of mind that Bumrah, your biggest strength, is also not there. You can prepare pitches accordingly," Chopra explained.
Head coach Gautam Gambhir has defended the decision, stating that managing Bumrah's workload is a priority due to the significant amount of cricket ahead. He confirmed that the plan for Bumrah to play only three Tests was decided before the tour and that the loss in the first Test would not change this strategy. "I think for us to manage Bumrah's workload is more important because there's a lot of cricket going forward and we know that what he brings to the table as well," Gambhir said. "So before he came on this tour, it was already decided that he's going to play three Test matches, but let's see how his body turns up."
The absence of Bumrah undoubtedly weakens India's bowling attack. In the first Test, Bumrah was the only bowler who consistently troubled the English batsmen, taking five wickets in the first innings. The rest of the pace attack, comprising Prasidh Krishna, Mohammed Siraj, and Shardul Thakur, struggled to maintain consistency and penetration.
With Bumrah likely to miss the second Test, India may need to make changes to their bowling lineup. Arshdeep Singh and Akash Deep are potential candidates to replace him. However, the team will be under pressure to perform without their premier strike bowler.
Former India head coach Ravi Shastri has also weighed in on the issue, warning that resting Bumrah for the second Test could lead to another defeat. He suggested that India might want Bumrah to play at Lord's, but resting him in Birmingham could be a risky move.
Despite the criticism, Gambhir has urged critics not to judge the bowlers too harshly, emphasizing the need to give them time to develop. He pointed out that the current pace attack lacks experience, with some bowlers having played very few Test matches. "If we start judging our bowlers after every Test, how will we develop a bowling attack?" Gambhir questioned.
