India have selected Harshit Rana as Jasprit Bumrah's replacement for the Champions Trophy, leaving out the more senior Mohammed Siraj. Why was the call made, and is it the right one?
On January 18, 2025, India announced their initial squad for the upcoming Champions Trophy. Three specialist pacers were named in that squad – Jasprit Bumrah, Mohammed Shami and Arshdeep Singh.
Conspicuous by his absence was Mohammed Siraj, India's preferred option as the supporting act to Shami and Bumrah during their stellar 2023 World Cup campaign.
Asked about the decision to leave out Siraj in favour of the then eight-ODI-old Arshdeep, skipper Rohit Sharma explained: "We wanted to pick a squad where we have options of both - somebody to bowl with the new ball and at the back end.
"Shami, we saw what he did with the new ball (at the World Cup) and that is where we feel Siraj's effectiveness comes down if he is not taking the new ball and with Arshdeep and Shami in the squad, we had no option but to select guys who can fulfill all three facets of bowling: bowling at the start, in the middle, and at the death."
If Siraj v Arshdeep was a marginal call, once pace spearhead Bumrah was ruled out of the competition, it seemed inevitable that Siraj would find a place. But that wasn't the case.
Read more: Why India replaced Yashasvi Jaiswal with Varun Chakravarthy in their Champions Trophy squad
Selected in Bumrah's place was Harshit Rana, whose three ODIs all came in the recently-concluded series against England. The 23-year-old played two Tests in Australia, and made his T20I debut just last month, as a concussion substitute.
Is Siraj really less effective with the older ball?
Siraj is a bowler with 44 ODI caps for India, and a stellar haul of 71 wickets from those – conceding runs at 5.18 per over. He has had a relatively heavy workload of late, but India have clearly stated that isn't the reason for leaving him out. At 30 years old, Siraj is not yet past his peak, and is still in relatively good physical shape.
Rohit's assertion that Siraj's effectiveness dips with the older ball is partly true, at least in the slog overs. Since 2022, Siraj has conceded at 7.6 runs per over in the last 10 overs of ODI matches.
Also read: Marks out of 10: India player ratings after their 3-0 series win against England
But he's also had a knack of picking up wickets in the middle overs – in the same time frame, he averages 21 with the ball in overs 21-40. This ranks third among Full Member bowlers with at least 300 balls bowled, and first among Full Member pacers.
Add to this Siraj's exceptional record with the new ball, and he has been a solid bowling package in the 50-over format. Since 2022, the only Full Member bowler with a better average inside the Powerplay is New Zealand's Trent Boult.
Bowling record in overs 1-10 of ODIs: Full Member bowlers (min. 300 balls)
| Player | Innings | Wickets | Econ | Avg | SR |
| Trent Boult | 20 | 22 | 4.6 | 18.3 | 24.0 |
| Mohammed Siraj | 41 | 41 | 4.4 | 18.7 | 25.8 |
| Mitchell Starc | 28 | 26 | 4.9 | 19.8 | 24.0 |
| Jasprit Bumrah | 21 | 16 | 3.7 | 21.3 | 34.5 |
| Lahiru Kumara | 18 | 17 | 6.3 | 21.7 | 20.8 |
| Dilshan Madushanka | 26 | 22 | 5.2 | 22.2 | 25.4 |
| Hasan Mahmud | 18 | 11 | 4.0 | 22.4 | 33.8 |
| Asitha Fernando | 15 | 11 | 5.0 | 22.9 | 27.3 |
| Mustafizur Rahman | 31 | 14 | 4.3 | 23.1 | 32.6 |
Why select Harshit Rana?
Rana has just 17 List A games under his belt (including the three ODIs he's played). His record is solid – 28 wickets, and an economy rate of 5.8, even after going at nearly seven an over against England. He also showcased his potential as a limited-overs bowler in the shorter format during the 2024 IPL, with his 19 wickets a significant contribution in KKR's march to the title.
That said, this is not necessarily the kind of record that traditionally leads to a player being fast-tracked to the national side. More than the numbers, it's Rana's style and promise that seem to have caught the team management's collective eye. In a way, this is one of India's more 'Bazball'-esque picks – attributes and potential given precedence over record.
Read more: Buttler insists England were not 'lazy' on India tour, following Pietersen criticism
Rana is tall and broad-shouldered, with the ability to really slam the ball into the wicket and extract bounce at a good pace, even on more placid pitches. This makes him a point of difference in the Indian bowling attack. Prasidh Krishna, who played the New Year's Test against Australia, can do similar but has had his own issues with fitness and form.
In addition, Rana has an extremely effective off-cutter – one that is close to 25 kph slower than his stock ball (for reference, most quicks have one that is 10-15 kph slower). This was on show through the IPL, and even accounted for Harry Brook in the second ODI, with help from an excellent Shubman Gill catch.
Match 2nd ODI, India vs England
vs
- Ball by ball Over
Rana over Siraj for this Champions Trophy might be a misstep
It's not unreasonable to say Siraj is an excellent option in the Powerplay, and remains a serviceable bowler in the middle overs of an ODI.
Contrast that to Rana. His attributes are tailor-made for success as a middle-overs enforcer – operating on a hard length, and rushing batters with pace and bounce. Bowling fuller lengths in an attempt to swing the ball doesn't seem to be the best use of his skills.
In fact, Rana has taken the new ball in all three of his ODIs so far, and his eight Powerplay overs have yielded returns of 2-75. Both wickets came in the same over – the 10th of England's innings, in Nagpur.
He may well develop his Powerplay bowling skills in the future, but as things stand, India have selected a bowler suited to the middle overs of an ODI, in favour of one who is capable of providing breakthroughs at the top of an innings. On its own, this cannot be called an error, but India are almost certain to play three excellent, restrictive spinners who can control the middle overs. Adding to this with Rana is only a minimal improvement in depth and quality.
As far as bowling at the top goes, they are without Jasprit Bumrah, Mohammed Shami is yet to get back to his best and Arshdeep Singh is promising but not yet a banker. Against this backdrop, it can be argued the better option would be for India to shore up that aspect of their attack.
England have already given them a taste of what could happen, with Powerplay scores of 77-3, 75-0 and 84-2 in the series just gone. But a combination of ill-advised batting decisions, and India's superb spin attack through the middle period, meant they eventually weren't hurt by this.
India's emphasis is clear – but is it the right one?
On India's approach with the ball, Rohit did say after the second ODI: "If you try to manage and squeeze in wickets in those middle overs, it gives you a chance to not worry so much about the death overs."
"When you look at this format, people talk about up front and the death, but the middle overs are very very crucial. That is where we squeezed in, took wickets in the middle. That's how you stop the run-scoring."
Also read: Pakistan trio fined for heated on-field confrontations against South Africa
India's emphasis on controlling that phase of the game is clear, but it is not out of the question that a more competent batting unit against spin, and/or one more practised in the rhythm of 50-over cricket, could cause issues through the middle for them. If that follows a sizable Powerplay, it could leave them exposed.
No team is perfect. All of them have a chink in the armour somewhere, and for several other sides, this level of borderline nitpicking might not even be a consideration. But with an extremely viable option available to India, and the minimal cost to fill a potential gap, it does appear strange to not take it.
Follow Wisden for all cricket updates, including live scores, match stats, quizzes and more. Stay up to date with the latest cricket news, player updates, team standings, match highlights, video analysis and live match odds.
