Dubai: Former India head coach Ravi Shastri has questioned BCCI about the injury management of the senior pacer Mohammed Shami and its decision not to fly the pacer over for the Border-Gavaskar Trophy series, which India lost 3-1.
Despite not playing international cricket since the 2023 World Cup Final due to an ankle injury and undergoing surgery in early 2024, the fast bowler featured in domestic red-ball cricket, raising hopes of a return during the Test series in Australia.
He was officially ruled out of contention before the fourth Test in Melbourne, with the BCCI medical team citing subsequent knee swelling.
Shastri and Ponting believe that Shami’s trip to Australia and a return late in the series could have been pushed.
Shastri said that Shami could have been taken to Australia, and then a decision could have been made on his participation.
“Absolutely, there’s no question about that,” Shastri said in the latest The ICC Review when asked if Shami could have tilted the series in Melbourne or Sydney.
“To be honest, I was very surprised with the communication going on in the media as to what exactly happened to Mohammed Shami. Where is he when it comes to recovery?
“He’s been sitting in the NCA for I don’t know how long. Why can’t proper communication come out on where he stands? A player of his ability, I would have brought him to Australia,” he said.
“I would have kept him part of the team and made sure that his rehabilitation was done with the team. And then, if we thought by the third Test match that this guy can’t play the rest of the series, I would let him go.
“But I would have brought him with the team, kept him, monitored him with the best of the physios and best of the advice even from international physios who are in Australia and seeing how he went. But I would have kept him in the mix,” Shastri added.
Ponting echoed Shastri’s sentiment before emphasising how important the pacer could have been at the backend of the Australia series.
“I was really surprised when he wasn’t flown out even halfway through the series, two Test matches in. India’s make-up obviously had Nitish Reddy there. So you had another seam-bowling all-rounder anyway.
“So if Shami, even if he wasn’t fully fit, if he had to bowl fewer overs in a day, you had a backup seam bowling option to help him out and I think he could have been the difference,” Ponting told The ICC Review.
“When you asked me (in an earlier The ICC Review) at the start about what I thought the result would be, I said 3-1 Australia because Shami wasn’t there. That was the first thing I said. That’s how important I felt he was to India.
“If Shami, Bumrah and Siraj were in their starting team, I think things could have been completely different here in Australia,” he said.
Shastri further opined that Shami could have provided adequate help for Jasprit Bumrah, who, too, struggled with fitness at the end of the series.
“It got so tight at 1-1 going into Melbourne. You just needed that experience and support. For all you know, he might have raised the bar as well. And it would have been the two guys there (Bumrah and Shami).
“Pat Cummins couldn’t have done it on his own; Scotty Boland had to step in. So you needed a bowler of his experience. You know, as hard as Mohammed Siraj tried, you needed Shami’s experience there,” said Shastri.
–IANS
Photo Credit: ICC
