Truthful Tuesday | Stop the outrage - the ECB are right in resting players for the India tour

Yet, 10 days prior to the first Test in Chepauk, talks of who will not be featuring in the first half of the series have overshadowed discourse about those who will actually be taking to the field. 

But while ECB’s ‘rest and rotate’ policy has understandably come under fire, particularly given it has deprived the country of the luxury to field a full-strength side against the toughest opponent in the world, it is, all things considered, a prudent move which, apart from being the need of the hour, could very well enable the team to reap long-term rewards in what is set to be the most hectic calendar year of cricket in the country’s history. 

The problem for England, however, is not just that they play a ridiculous number of Tests; they are also scheduled to play a ridiculous number of ODIs and T20Is, on top of which their entire first XI is also expected to feature in the IPL. In any other year the ECB would have prioritized Test cricket, discarded the limited-over-internationals and barred their players from playing the IPL without a second thought, but a World T20 happening in about 9 months time means that they need to give equal, if not more, precedence to white-ball cricket. The tournament taking place in India also means that any practice their players can get ahead of the tournament in the sub-continent will be pretty much invaluable. 

Perhaps for a side with more single-format specialists the schedule would have been viable, but where it gets tricky for England is that barring the spinners, the openers and Anderson and Broad, pretty much their entire Test side is composed of multi-format players, most of whom feature in all three formats. This, in turn, means that it simply won’t be feasible to field the strongest possible XI for every series throughout the course of the year, for there’s an inherent need to rest players to prevent burnout and injuries.

But here’s the deal: England have no insignificant or ‘small’ series lined-up. The country’s home summer kicks-off immediately after the IPL - a two-Test series versus New Zealand - after which they play a five-Test series against India. This will be preceded and succeeded by limited-over games versus Pakistan and Sri Lanka, after which they will head to India for the T20 World Cup. At the end of all this comes the Ashes, which is expected to kick-off some-time in December. 

By adhering to the ‘rest and rotate’ policy, what the ECB are aiming is keeping all players fresh, fit and firing all throughout the year. To enable this, compromises have to be made, and, unfortunately, one such has come in the form of a chunk of very-important players missing the India series. The situation is, of course, far from ideal, but in the board’s defence, it makes all the sense in the world to rest Buttler, Bairstow and perhaps more players as the series progresses. 

By resting them for a chunk of the Tests versus India, however, what the ECB have ensured is keep both Buttler and Bairstow fresh for the limited-overs series where their importance dwarfs what they bring to the Test side. Both Buttler and Bairstow can claim to be the two greatest white-ball cricketers in the country’s history and it goes unsaid that England’s chances in the WT20 will directly depend on how the two fare. 

The duo being handed a break now will render them available for 5 T20Is, 3 ODIs and the IPL that will be played in two months’ time, and with a World T20 happening in India in under 10 months’ time, such match practice in subcontinent conditions would do a world of good for both players and, in turn, the team. What this rest also does is ensure that at least one of these two men will be around - most likely Buttler, given Bairstow is not in England’s plan in home Tests - when some of the other cricketers might need rest during the home season. 

Why England would be better off resting players away in India is simple: as things stand, they are all but virtually out of contention to make the final of the first WTC cycle. This, of course, is no excuse to field a weakened side, for it sends a wrong message, but by choosing to rest their players here, England are making the most of their schedule. 

They will not have the same luxury come June in the home season, for, by then, the second WTC cycle would have kicked-off. In layman’s terms, a loss against India in two weeks’ time will be insignificant for England, while a loss in two months’ time against India at home would punch holes in their quest to make the final of the 2021/22 WTC. Thus, taking into consideration the bigger picture, it is pragmatic on ECB’s part to rest their players in a series which, for England, is low stakes.

Unsurprisingly, Ashes comparisons have been made by both former cricketers and the English media. “Would England have rested players had they played at the Gabba in two weeks’ time?,” asked a few, while certain others pointed out how England should consider India - and not Australia - as the final frontier. But it is all too convenient that these talks have emerged out of nowhere, a week after India’s unlikely triumph Down Under. 

For centuries, the Ashes has remained the ultimate prize for any English side and cricketer - how England fare in Australia has always remained the yardstick by which the team’s greatness has been measured. It remained the yardstick as recent as five months ago when the same media, journalists and ex-cricketers admonished Root for benching Mark Wood for the home season, sticking to Woakes, Anderson and Broad and not ‘building an attack that will win games in Australia’.  Suddenly calling for the side to treat India as the final frontier is a knee-jerk reaction influenced by recency bias; an opinion that reeks of hypocrisy. 

A team like India, for instance, recently came to know about the physical effects of bubble life, but, by continuing to pick the same players who have been inside bubbles since August, have shown that they really do not still understand the importance of keeping the players mentally fresh. The ECB, in this way, have been prudent in figuring out a balanced method to give adequate breaks to players while ensuring that they still put out a world-class team competent enough to go head-to-head with the best in the world. 

This argument whether England were justified in sending home their best players will continue to extend till the start of the country’s home season, and will worsen should they get wiped 4-0 by India, but, all things considered, the ECB have hit the nail on the head with their stance. For, sometimes, short-term sacrifices need to be made to reap long-term rewards.