India’s disappointing five-wicket defeat in the first Test against England at Headingley, Leeds, from June 20-24, 2025, has sparked intense scrutiny of the team’s performance. Despite setting a formidable target of 371 runs, India’s bowling attack, led by Jasprit Bumrah, struggled to contain England’s aggressive batting lineup, spearheaded by Ben Duckett’s audacious 149. Among the bowlers, Mohammed Siraj’s underwhelming performance has drawn significant criticism, raising questions about his place in the playing XI for the second Test at Edgbaston, starting July 2, 2025. With Jasprit Bumrah likely to be rested for workload management, the spotlight is on Siraj to step up as the senior pacer. However, his recent form suggests he may not be the right fit for the crucial second Test. This article delves into three compelling reasons why India should consider dropping Mohammed Siraj for the upcoming match, analyzing his performance, tactical fit, and the team’s strategic needs.
Inconsistent Bowling Performance and High Economy Rate
Mohammed Siraj’s performance in the first Test at Headingley was lackluster, particularly when compared to his role as a senior pacer expected to support Jasprit Bumrah. In the first innings, Siraj bowled 27 overs, conceding 122 runs at an economy rate of 4.50, while picking up just two wickets. In the second innings, he went wicketless, giving away 51 runs in 14 overs at an economy rate of 3.64. These figures highlight a recurring issue with Siraj: his inability to maintain control and apply consistent pressure on opposition batters.
Former Indian cricketer Mohammad Kaif was scathing in his critique, stating, “People say Mohammed Siraj tried very hard, bowls with his heart. Sir, don’t bowl with your heart, bowl with your mind and with line and length where we can get wickets.” Kaif’s comments underscore Siraj’s tendency to be erratic, often leaking runs when precision is needed. In the second innings, England’s batters, particularly Duckett and Zak Crawley, capitalized on Siraj’s inconsistent line and length, building a match-defining 188-run opening partnership.
Ravichandran Ashwin, in a detailed analysis on his YouTube channel, emphasized the need for Siraj to adopt a more disciplined approach, drawing comparisons to South African pacer Morne Morkel, who excelled in a supporting role by controlling the run flow. Ashwin noted, “My only question to Siraj is…can you dry up the run flow? You don’t have to pick up wickets. But can you not give away 4-5 runs every over?” This critique highlights Siraj’s failure to play the “bankable role” of a support bowler, forcing Bumrah to bowl longer spells and increasing the workload on the team’s spearhead.
Siraj’s recent Test record further supports the case for his exclusion. Over his last 10 Tests, he has taken only 28 wickets at an average above 45, with a declining strike rate and inconsistent line and length. This dip in form is particularly concerning on flat pitches like those expected at Edgbaston, where control and economy are critical to building pressure. With Bumrah potentially absent, India cannot afford a senior pacer who leaks runs, especially against England’s aggressive “Bazball” approach.
Lack of Tactical Adaptability on Flat Pitches
The Headingley pitch was deliberately flat, designed to favor England’s batting-heavy strategy and set up their record-breaking fourth-innings chase. While Bumrah adapted with a five-wicket haul in the first innings, Siraj struggled to adjust his approach, often bowling too short or failing to exploit the conditions. His natural length, described as “short of a good length,” was ineffective against England’s batters, who capitalized on anything loose.
In contrast, Prasidh Krishna, despite his inexperience and high economy rate (6.40 in the first innings), showed glimpses of effectiveness when he bowled fuller lengths or proper bouncers, dismissing set batters like Ollie Pope and Harry Brook. Siraj, however, failed to vary his lengths or adapt his game plan, often resorting to an aggressive, wicket-hunting style that played into England’s hands. This lack of tactical flexibility was evident in his inability to disrupt Duckett’s rhythm, even when a catch was dropped off his bowling on 98.
Ashwin’s analysis further highlighted Siraj’s tactical shortcomings, noting that his aggressive style forced Bumrah to overbowl, disrupting the team’s bowling strategy. On a flat Edgbaston pitch, where bowlers need to be patient and disciplined, Siraj’s current approach may not suit India’s needs. With Bumrah likely rested, India requires a bowler who can bowl tight spells and build pressure, a role Siraj has struggled to fulfill. Alternatives like Arshdeep Singh or Akash Deep, who have shown promise in domestic and international cricket, could offer the control and variation needed to counter England’s batting.
Need for a Stronger Lower-Order Contribution
India’s lower-order collapse in the first Test was a significant factor in their defeat. The team lost 7 wickets for 41 runs in the first innings and 6 wickets for 31 runs in the second, with the lower order contributing just 65 runs across both innings. Siraj, batting at No. 8 or 9, managed only three runs not out in the first innings and a golden duck in the second, dismissed by Josh Tongue. This fragility in the tail cost India valuable runs, as they fell short of a match-defining lead.
Ahead of the second Test, Siraj was seen spending significant time in the nets working on his batting, a possible indication of team management’s concern about the lower order. However, his focus on batting during practice, while commendable, raises questions about his primary role as a bowler. With Bumrah potentially absent, Siraj is expected to lead the pace attack, and his time in the nets might be better spent refining his bowling skills.
Moreover, India’s bowling strategy for Edgbaston may involve playing an extra bowler to compensate for Bumrah’s absence, putting additional pressure on the lower order to contribute runs. Alternatives like Nitish Kumar Reddy, a medium-pace all-rounder, or even Shardul Thakur, despite his underwhelming performance in Leeds, could provide more batting depth. Arshdeep Singh, while yet to debut in Tests, has shown resilience in shorter formats and could offer a fresh dynamic to the bowling attack without compromising the tail’s contribution. Dropping Siraj for a more balanced option could address India’s dual need for bowling control and lower-order runs.
Counterarguments and Context
While the case for dropping Siraj is strong, it’s worth considering the counterarguments. Siraj has been a key part of India’s pace attack in the past, notably during the 2021 England tour, where he played a pivotal role in India’s 2-2 series draw. His fiery attitude and ability to bowl with intensity have often lifted the team’s spirits. Additionally, his workload management in the past, such as being rested for the second Test in Vizag in 2024, suggests that the team values his long-term contribution.
However, the current context is different. With only a three-day gap between the first and second Tests, and Bumrah’s likely absence, India cannot rely on Siraj’s potential alone. His recent inconsistency, coupled with the team’s need for a more balanced attack, outweighs the sentimental value of his past performances. The availability of Arshdeep Singh and Akash Deep, who were seen in the nets at Edgbaston, offers India a chance to test fresh talent who may better suit the conditions and tactical requirements.
Strategic Implications for India
Dropping Siraj for the second Test would signal a bold move by captain Shubman Gill and coach Gautam Gambhir, who are under pressure to level the series. The decision would also reflect India’s acknowledgment of their over-reliance on Bumrah, a recurring issue highlighted by former selector Kiran More and others. A rejigged bowling attack, potentially featuring Arshdeep Singh or Kuldeep Yadav, could provide the variety and control needed to counter England’s aggressive batting. Kuldeep, in particular, could exploit any turn at Edgbaston, addressing the lack of a second spinner in the first Test.
Furthermore, the move would allow India to address their lower-order fragility, a critical factor in a closely contested series. By opting for a more balanced lineup, India could avoid the batting collapses that cost them dearly in Leeds. The team’s fielding, another weak link with 10 dropped catches, also needs attention, but replacing an underperforming bowler like Siraj could free up resources to focus on overall team strategy.
Looking Forward
Mohammed Siraj’s underwhelming performance in the first Test against England, characterized by inconsistency, high economy rates, and a lack of tactical adaptability, makes a strong case for his exclusion from the second Test at Edgbaston. His inability to support Jasprit Bumrah effectively, coupled with India’s lower-order batting woes, highlights the need for a more balanced and disciplined bowling attack. With alternatives like Arshdeep Singh, Akash Deep, or Nitish Kumar Reddy available, India has an opportunity to recalibrate their strategy and address the shortcomings exposed in Leeds. While Siraj’s passion and past contributions are undeniable, the team’s immediate needs demand a pragmatic approach. Dropping him for the second Test could be the catalyst India needs to level the series and regain momentum in the Anderson-Tendulkar Trophy.
