Leg and Off: Was Ravichandran Ashwin treated unfairly by the Indian team management?

Ravichandran Ashwin retired in the most low-profile scenarios possible, and although he is at peace with his decision, there is an uproar among fans and pundits. There is a general theory brewing that the veteran spinner quit midway through the series after being 'frustrated' and 'humiliated' by the team management.

“Cricket being a batters’ game, the fact that he invariably won the Player of the Series award didn’t win him kudos among the batters' fraternity. Every time there was even a five percent excuse to leave him out of the eleven, it was grabbed avidly with the excuse of team balance,” Gavaskar wrote in his column for Mid-Day (via Hindustan Times).

"(Retiring) is his (Ashwin's) wish and desire, I cannot interfere in that, but the way in which he gave that, there could be many reasons. Only Ashwin knows, maybe humiliation," Ashwin's father Ravichandran said (via NDTV).

On that note, let us dissect how much did the team management's decisions over the years influenced Ashwin's decision to retire once and for all without any prior notice.

---

#1 Ashwin had to pay the price for the batters' inefficiency

Ashwin, instead of being one of the first names on the team sheets, became the first name on the bench in overseas Tests. In any other team, he would have been the bonafide frontline spinner, with others revolving around him. However, India's frailties in challenging conditions meant that five batters and a wicketkeeper also did not suffice at times.

The situation got so dire that the team were in need of a strong batting presence as far up to No.7 and No.8. The frustrating part for Ashwin here is that he was no muck with the bat. Despite multiple Test hundreds, and an ability to play on all kinds of terrains, he was overlooked for Ravindra Jadeja, who was far more comfortable with the bat.

India were already skeptical of the two-spinner approach overseas in the modern era, but after Shardul Thakur was unearthed as a pacer who could also bat, Ashwin stood no chance in the packed lower order.

In an ideal world, India's formidable batting unit comprising some big names should be more than enough across any conditions. This would have given them room to play the seam bowling all-rounder, three frontline seamers, and one spinner.

With batting depth addressed, and only spin prowess to be considered, Ashwin would have pipped Jadeja, but it never came to that. With collapses being frequent (to this day), India have been forced to prioritize batting depth over bowling prowess every single time.

---

#2 Ashwin was sacrificed in the wrist-spin revolution

It is easy to overlook Ashwin's international white-ball career compared to his colossal red-ball achievements. However, at one time, Ashwin was India's first-choice spinner in limited overs too. Making his debut in 2010, he had made 111 appearances until 2017, before he was dropped altogether.

His numbers were not shabby at all when he was ejected from the side. He had taken 150 wickets at an average of 32.91, and an economy rate of 4.91. Harbhajan Singh, who went on to play almost double the number of ODIs he did, had 133 wickets in his first 111 appearances with a similar average.

Ashwin was ousted from the white-ball side through not much fault of his own, but largely due to two huge factors in the form of his fielding and the rising importance to wrist spinners.

Over time the off-spinner was viewed to be a defensive option not aligning with modern-day ODI cricket, and the preference largely went to wrist spinners like Yuzvendra Chahal and Kuldeep Yadav. The pair's chemistry, and the fact that they hunted in pairs during the middle overs for wickets meant that Ashwin had no chance of a return.

Even if there were room for three spinners, the batting ability of Ravindra Jadeja or Axar Patel always made the cut.

Ashwin made his ODI return, by which time it was too late, with more names like Washington Sundar entering the fray. A veteran like Ashwin, despite his skillset, stood no chance amid such competition. His white-ball skills are still highly valued, with his recent INR 9.75 crore IPL contract proving the same, it is just a shame that skewered and radical thinking led to fans being denied of his exploits in national colors.

---

#3 Ashwin does have a questionable record in SENA countries

In 26 matches in SENA countries, Ashwin picked up 72 wickets at an average of 39.55. Ravindra Jadeja, on the other hand, has played 22 matches in SENA countries, and has 52 wickets at an average of 39.05.

From the management's perspective, if the two spin bowlers are producing an eerily similar yield, and one has a much more impressive batting credential, then naturally you are tempted to go that way. In this context, apart from his ability to turn the ball away from the left-handed batters as an off-spinner. Ashwin did not bring too much to the table.

Even Harbhajan Singh made only 19 appearances in SENA countries over the course of his career, picking up 62 wickets at an average of 39.93, which is not far off from Ashwin's. However, in the former off-spinner's case, there was no outcry about any unfair treatment by the team management although his case was similar to Ashwin's.

He was dropped for a younger option in the form of Ashwin towards the end of his career in the early 2010s. In Ashwin's case, it is the likes of Jadeja and Sundar who have overshadowed him in his twilight. The team management's priority is to consider the team's best interest, without taking the player's stature into account.

---

#4 The management needed to make bold choices to evolve

It is easy to point fingers and judge the management for making the calls that went against Ashwin, but none of them were without a concrete reason, and in some cases, they had their hands tied.

With the batting unit crumbling consistently in SENA countries, forsaking batting depth was not an option at all. Furthermore, the results were also encouraging whenever Ravindra Jadeja and Shardul Thakur played together, giving the management more incentive to keep the formula intact and keep Ashwin as the backup.

The same was the case with his white-ball exile. Most of the teams had went in the direction of wrist spinners because of their variations and innate wicket-taking ability. India also prospered from the same as Kuldeep Yadav and Yuzvendra Chahal were arguably undroppable at their peak. To drop such a high-functioning duo would have raised far more eyebrows, than Ashwin's benching had produced.

Despite being the undisputed figure when it comes to innovation, Ashwin could not come up with ways to keep up with the pace of modern-day cricket. While it certainly is not his fault as he is a brilliant cricketer even without the innovation factor, but it certainly is not the management's either, because they are there to make the tough calls. Someone had to make way, and unfortunately for Ashwin, it was him.

A lot of what Ashwin has gone through can just be associated with being unfortunate. In another era, and in other circumstances, Ashwin would even have been India's captain. But from management's point of view, they could not even afford to have Ashwin as an option, because of the candidates they already had lined up.

His most realistic shot at captaincy would have arguably been white-ball cricket. But he had already lost his place long before the concept of split captaincy, second-string squads, and workload management became a telling influence on the game.

Even if he was, there is a chance that the management might have leaned towards grooming younger players in the leadership role rather than turning to a senior.

Timing holds a crucial space in cricket, apart from batting, and Ashwin needed that to transcend into the next level - a guaranteed member of the team irrespective of the conditions, and a captain - both of which just did not pan out.