Grand Finale: Ashwin vs Jadeja

[subshakerz]

There is a reason why Indian team picks Jadeja over Ashwin when it comes to choosing between them.

Isn't this what posters who I argue with are complaining about all the time on how unfair it is?

 

[Majestic]

Isn't it Ashwin because he won India two BG Trophies in Australia?

Bumrah and Siraj were equally impactful if not more in 2020-21 series. Pant was main game changer and the star of the series though, he turned the tables around with that 97 at Sydney, made India believe that they can win the series too and followed it up with the match winning 89* at Gabba.

In 2018-19 tour, Pujara was the showstopper with bat and Bumrah with bowl. Ashwin played one test and bowled in two innings, picked 6 wickets, did a good job. Jadeja played 2 tests and bowled in 3 innings, picked 7 wickets and scored a 81 in Sydney. Both were even steven.

Conclusion, both contributed well in both the series India won in Australia.

 

[howitzer]

Guess what!!! I'm going to wait until Jasprit Bumrah Jadeja and Ashwin have retired before deciding!!! @SillyCowCorner1

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Guess what!!! I'm going to wait until Jasprit Bumrah Jadeja and Ashwin have retired before deciding!!! @SillyCowCorner1

Yes. The right way things should operate.

 

[Xix2565]

The gap between Jadeja and Ashwin with the bat is much more than their gap with the ball. And this is without accounting the fielding gap.

There is a reason why Indian team picks Jadeja over Ashwin when it comes to choosing between them.

The bowling gap is more impactful because of the role bowling plays. And India's reasoning for picking only one of them isn't solely based on the two of them in isolation. This is prime Modi level of obfuscation here smh.

 

[CricAddict]

The bowling gap is more impactful because of the role bowling plays. And India's reasoning for picking only one of them isn't solely based on the two of them in isolation. This is prime Modi level of obfuscation here smh.

Just remove that last line in each of your posts and your posting will be great, Xix. Your last lines in general are not connected to cricket and it is what upsets many.

And yes, agreed that there are other factors too. The pitch given to India away usually is pace friendly and so they go with the better batsman. But aren't those reasonings a factor as well in deciding who among the two is a better cricketer? Ashwin is the better bowler for which there is absolutely no doubt as of now.

 

[Xix2565]

Just remove that last line in each of your posts and your posting will be great, Xix. Your last lines in general are not connected to cricket and it is what upsets many.

And yes, agreed that there are other factors too. The pitch given to India away usually is pace friendly and so they go with the better batsman. But aren't those reasonings a factor as well in deciding who among the two is a better cricketer? Ashwin is the better bowler for which there is absolutely no doubt as of now.

They don't go with the better batter, they go with what they feel will help them get 20 wickets. They've begun to rate and back their pace attack more and more while Ashwin/Jadeja have gotten better in the same time, so they've decided to leave one out when necessary. This isn't that easy to solve in general, because of stuff you've stated here and known for a while already (injuries and form as well), so I don't think it should matter in general for comparing the two of them.

I personally have come around to the idea that India should've kicked the extra batter when the two of them were available but people here and elsewhere get worried about batting depth and so on in conditions different from Indian conditions. This isn't a wrong feeling to have, but it's also heavily influenced by the general context during the tours. This debate also could be much different if say one of Hardik Pandya or Bhuvneshwar Kumar were more durable and played more Tests during the last few years, we could've had 2-3 pure pacers/Ash+Jadeja/Hardik or Bhuvi as the bowling attack which overall seems far more balanced than what's been available.

So just looking at Ashwin vs Jadeja, I think Jadeja's later development as an AR cricketer along with his injury history does hurt his case as the better player between the two of them.

 

[CricAddict]

They don't go with the better batter, they go with what they feel will help them get 20 wickets. They've begun to rate and back their pace attack more and more while Ashwin/Jadeja have gotten better in the same time, so they've decided to leave one out when necessary. This isn't that easy to solve in general, because of stuff you've stated here and known for a while already (injuries and form as well), so I don't think it should matter in general for comparing the two of them.

I personally have come around to the idea that India should've kicked the extra batter when the two of them were available but people here and elsewhere get worried about batting depth and so on in conditions different from Indian conditions. This isn't a wrong feeling to have, but it's also heavily influenced by the general context during the tours. This debate also could be much different if say one of Hardik Pandya or Bhuvneshwar Kumar were more durable and played more Tests during the last few years, we could've had 2-3 pure pacers/Ash+Jadeja/Hardik or Bhuvi as the bowling attack which overall seems far more balanced than what's been available.

So just looking at Ashwin vs Jadeja, I think Jadeja's later development as an AR cricketer along with his injury history does hurt his case as the better player between the two of them.

Ashwin and Jadeja combine to provide an input better than a specialist batsman. So, 100% they should both have been playing in all the tests and the Indian management were not smart enough to provide them that confidence. Jadeja's later years are almost panning out the Imran Khan way. He is focusing more and more on batting and less on bowling since the team doesn't depend on his bowling anymore.

But why is him getting better at batting and hence, not giving the same importance to bowling hurt his case when we assess them both as overall cricketers?

 

[Xix2565]

Ashwin and Jadeja combine to provide an input better than a specialist batsman. So, 100% they should both have been playing in all the tests and the Indian management were not smart enough to provide them that confidence. Jadeja's later years are almost panning out the Imran Khan way. He is focusing more and more on batting and less on bowling since the team doesn't depend on his bowling anymore.

But why is him getting better at batting and hence, not giving the same importance to bowling hurt his case when we assess them both as overall cricketers?

To me, bowling is just a more influential part of Test cricket, and so being better in that aspect of the game is enough to offset the batting part of this comparison. That's it basically.

 

[CricAddict]

To me, bowling is just a more influential part of Test cricket, and so being better in that aspect of the game is enough to offset the batting part of this comparison. That's it basically.

Let's agree to disagree then. Both are equally important in my view.

 

[Xix2565]

Let's agree to disagree then. Both are equally important in my view.

That's fair.