If there’s one topic that’s buzzing in cricket circles right now, it’s Jasprit Bumrah and his selective Test appearances. The India vs England 2025 Test series has once again thrown up debates about fitness, commitment, and the tricky balance between star power and team needs. Sanjay Manjrekar, never one to mince words, has stirred the pot by saying something many fans might secretly agree with: Indian cricket must not adjust for Bumrah—it’s the other way around.
The Longevity Question: Star Power Isn’t Everything
For years, Bumrah has been India’s fast-bowling spearhead, a player who can change matches with his terrifying yorkers and toe-crushing speed. But Manjrekar states a painful fact: it is longevity and durability that matter when you define a great athlete. Bumrah is undoubtedly talented, but will he be able to do it over a demanding five-Test series?
India’s management had already agreed before the England tour that Bumrah would play only three out of five Tests, and although it was logical to come up with such a plan, this left many fans wondering which matches he was available for. And as Manjrekar highlights, it is an inconvenient truth that for cricket, it is not just on-the-field skills that count, it’s showing up when you’re not in a state of readiness.
A true legend is not someone who picks and chooses which matches they can pay particularly comfortably in, but is someone who rises calmly and positively to the occasion when it’s raining bad or fine weather and the back niggle is there. And at this moment, Bumrah’s controlled availability is challenging that conception.
Fitness Over Fame: The Hard Reality
Let’s be real—no player, no matter how talented, is indispensable. Talent aside, Manjrekar reminds us that the team always comes before one player’s convenience. Poetic justice? Perhaps. But it’s also a blunt reminder for selectors and team management—big names alone cannot carry a team.
Fitness and willingness to play must drive selections, not reputation. If a player can’t bowl one or two Tests in a row, why should they be the automatic first pick? This may seem harsh, but it’s reality in the modern day.
A prime example is Bumrah’s back injury in Sydney in regard to the Australia tour, when he ultimately did not bowl the fourth innings. He ended up as the highest wicket-taker, but his presence across the whole series brought into question what is more important: consistency or brilliance now and then.
Team First, Ego Later: Adapting Isn’t a Weakness
Here’s the bottom line: if Bumrah is to continue serving Indian cricket for many more years to come, he must adapt. The message is loud and clear—India’s cricket system bends for no single player, not even a superstar. The game will always show us, in the end, who is fit for the match and who is not.
Individual stars are nice, but collectively they can’t dominate the discussion. As India gets ready for home Tests vs West Indies and South Africa, Bumrah might not play again; the selectors have to make decisions based on a long-term vision of the team, and not based simply on preserving a marquee player.
FAQs:
- Was Bumrah fully fit during the England series?
No, he was not fully fit and had limited participation, which sparked criticism about his durability.
- What does Manjrekar mean by ‘Indian cricket must not adjust for Bumrah’?
He means the team should prioritize players who are match-ready and committed rather than bending schedules or selections for a one-star player.
- Is Manjrekar against Bumrah’s selection entirely?
No, he acknowledges Bumrah’s talent but stresses that availability and fitness should guide team selection.
