- August 7, 2025
Let us not beat around the bush: if you are watching Jasprit Bumrah, then you must be watching. The spectacle is sensational, the speed is furious, and he changes games. But think of that: in 2025, India toured England, with Bumrah playing in all four of the tests – and lost all four! Wow, that sounds crazy, right? That is exactly what a recent column writing (and former) Australian keeper Brad Haddin said in his column recently, and it created quite a little bit of stir; what is the reality here: was it Bumrah just being unlucky, or India moving away from their pace spearhead? Let’s have a look.
India Without Bumrah: Depth Over Dependence?
Brad Haddin’s comments came after India achieved a dramatic six-run win at The Oval to pull the Anderson-Tendulkar Trophy level at 2-2, and Bumrah wasn’t even playing in that game. Both of India’s victories in the series came without Bumrah. While that appears to be an ironic dig at Bumrah, it shows something bigger—India’s deepening pace attack.
Gone are the days when Indian pace began and ended with Bumrah. Mohammed Siraj, Mukesh Kumar, and even newcomers like Akash Deep have shown that they can hold their own on foreign soil. Bumrah’s absence in the fifth Test wasn’t the disaster it might’ve been a few years ago. Instead, India found a way, proving that their cupboard is anything but bare.
Sure, Bumrah still picked up 14 wickets in just three games—second-most for India. But the wins? They came when he was resting.
Workload Management or Worrying Sign?
Bumrah didn’t play all five Tests by design. The guy has battled back injuries, and India isn’t willing to risk breaking their MVP right before the 2025-26 home season and upcoming ICC events. It’s called smart rotation, not sidelining.
But here’s the catch—how do you build team momentum when your lead bowler is in and out? That’s the challenge. Bumrah isn’t just India’s wicket-taker-in-chief—he’s the guy who flips the switch when things get flat, fires up the team with his intensity, and turns pressure into panic for the opposition.
The fact that India managed to win without him is impressive, but the fact that they had to win without him also says something. You can rotate players, but when your match-winner becomes a part-time presence, it does raise questions. Is India preparing for a post-Bumrah era already? Or are they simply preserving their golden goose for bigger battles?
Stokes Missing – Bumrah Playing?
And then there’s the other side of the coin—England. Brad Haddin wasn’t just pointing fingers at Bumrah; he also highlighted who wasn’t playing for England in that fifth Test—Ben Stokes. And that, in his view, was the real game-changer.
Stokes did not take to the field for the finale as he was ruled out with a shoulder injury, and England came unstuck just 35 runs shy with 4 wickets left in the chase. Haddin reckons that if Stokes had suited up for the final Test, England wouldn’t just have edged the match—they’d have wrapped up the series 3-1 without blinking. That’s a fair one – Stokes had played four Tests and taken 17 wickets and scored 304 runs. What an influence.
So the headline may not be ‘India wins without Bumrah’ but ‘England loses without Stokes.’ Both teams were without their stars at the time it mattered most, and the results reflect that.
So, did Bumrah underperform? Not. He was lethal, as always. But did India win with him? Nope. And that’s what makes this such a fascinating cricket paradox.
For more, visit JeetBuzz News to read our quality Cricket Blog updates. Explore if you want to reminisce and enjoy all of your favourite cricket players and nostalgic match moments. To ensure that you never miss out, keep updated and join in the fun!
