IND vs ENG: 'He's a legend, but ...' - Suresh Raina on Jasprit Bumrah's availability for 4th Test in Manchester
NEW DELHI: With the Test series between India and England delicately poised at 2-1 in favour of the hosts, all eyes are on whether pace spearhead
Jasprit Bumrah
will be in the XI for the fourth Test at Old Trafford, Manchester. Former India cricketer
Suresh Raina
weighed in on the burning question, hailing Bumrah as a "legend" while stressing that the final decision rests with the medical team.
Go Beyond The Boundary with our YouTube channel.
SUBSCRIBE NOW!
Speaking to ANI during the World Championship of Legends in Birmingham, Raina said, 'I think it is a doctor's call, to be very honest. I know my body. I know my doctor. I know what guidelines he is giving me, how to play the game. With Bumrah, he is a legend. He knows his body. He knows his workload.'
Why Team India came to Manchester from London via train and walked in rain
Bumrah, who has taken 12 wickets in two Tests in the series — including a five-wicket haul at Lord's — was rested for the second Test as part of workload management.
His inclusion could be pivotal in India's bid to level the series.
'A little rest is important for Bumrah, especially after returning from such a long injury,' Raina added. 'But if they want to win or draw the series, then both Bumrah and [Rishabh] Pant will be key in the fourth Test.'
Poll
Should Jasprit Bumrah play in the fourth Test against England?
Yes, he is crucial for the team
Only if he is fully fit
Let the medical team decide
Pant, India's second-highest run-scorer in the series with 425 runs at an average of 70.83, suffered a finger injury at Lord's but continued to bat. Assistant coach
Ryan ten Doeschate
confirmed the team's intent to assess both players closer to the match.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
What these ergonomic sandals do is simply incredible
HealthCheck Report
Undo
'We'll make that call in Manchester,' Ten Doeschate said. 'We know we've got Bumrah for one of the last two Tests. With the series on the line, there's a leaning towards playing him.'
Exclusive | First look of the Old Trafford pitch
On Pant, he said: 'I don't think you're going to keep Rishabh out of the Test no matter what. He batted with pain, and it's only going to get better.'
India face a selection dilemma, but with the series hanging in balance, expect tough calls to define the Manchester showdown starting July 23.
Catch Rani Rampal's inspiring story on Game On, Episode 4. Watch Here!
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Deccan Herald
16 minutes ago
- Deccan Herald
Provoked Gill blasts England for 'lacking spirit of game'
The Indians, hoping to bowl at least two overs in order to give themselves the best chance of taking a wicket or two, were visibly enraged and things came to a boil when Crawley pulled out of a Jasprit Bumrah delivery midway early in the over.
Time of India
44 minutes ago
- Time of India
Colin Cowherd Claims LeBron James Has Accepted He'll Never Surpass Michael Jordan's Legacy: "MJ makes you feel something but LJ Doesn't"
LeBron James and Michael Jordan (Image via Getty) Colin Cowherd has reignited the never-ending GOAT debate by declaring that LeBron James knows he will never surpass Michael Jordan —not because of talent or longevity, but due to Jordan's unmatched legacy, emotional impact, and cultural power. Despite LeBron's historic career and statistical dominance, Cowherd argues the gap between the two legends remains rooted in intangibles Jordan still owns. Why Michael Jordan Still Wins Over LJ According to Colin Cowherd Colin Cowherd pinpointed three main areas where Michael Jordan remains untouchable: - Brand Power: Jordan's Air Jordan empire isn't just a shoe line—it's a global phenomenon. Cowherd called it 'the most powerful marketing campaign in sports history,' noting that LeBron James, despite immense commercial success, hasn't reached that same transcendent level of influence. - Emotional Connection: Michael Jordan, Cowherd says, 'makes you feel something.' His clutch performances and larger-than-life persona created a legacy that goes beyond numbers—a deep, emotional bond with fans that remains strong decades later. - Loyalty and Identity: Cowherd contrasted Jordan's commitment to the Chicago Bulls with LeBron James' team-hopping path. While LeBron sought the best basketball situations, Michael Jordan built his dynasty with one team, further cementing his mythos. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Up to 70% off | Shop Sale Libas Undo LeBron James' Longevity Can't Be Ignored Collin Cowherd (Image via Amy E. Price/Getty Images) To be clear, Colin Cowherd gave LeBron James his due. He acknowledged LeBron's incredible durability and elite play into his 40s, something even Cowherd once said wouldn't happen. In his 22nd season, LeBron remains one of the league's top performers, disproving early doubts about his staying power. Cowherd also stated that LeBron may have the most complete resume in basketball history, with All-Star appearances, championships, MVPs, and records piling up year after year. Seinfeld vs. Law & Order and How Cowherd Drew a Cultural Analogy Cowherd illustrated the contrast between Michael Jordan and LeBron James through a pop culture analogy, comparing Jordan to Seinfeld and LeBron to Law & Order . He described Jordan as Seinfeld —short-lived but iconic, unforgettable, and still a cultural landmark years after its original run. In contrast, LeBron was likened to Law & Order —a long-running, steady presence that remains relevant but lacks the same explosive cultural moment. This analogy captures how many fans perceive the two legends: Jordan as the singular, unforgettable phenomenon, and LeBron as the enduring force of consistency. Criticism Over Lakers Commitment Colin Cowherd also criticized LeBron James' decision to opt into a lucrative deal with the Lakers , claiming it limits the franchise's ability to build a title-contending roster. He suggested that LeBron may now be prioritizing financial security over chasing a final championship, a shift from the 'championship or bust' mentality Michael Jordan represented. Fans and analysts have called for Cowherd to walk back some of his past takes, especially those doubting LeBron's longevity. But Cowherd stands firm—respecting LeBron's greatness while still placing Jordan on a higher tier when it comes to legacy and cultural relevance. In Cowherd's view, LeBron's greatness lies in performance and longevity, but Michael Jordan's GOAT status is built on unmatched brand appeal, emotional depth, and singular loyalty. While LeBron James continues to break records, Cowherd believes even he knows that the emotional magic and cultural legacy of Michael Jordan remains unmatched. Also read: Los Angeles Lakers Reportedly Among Five Contenders Eyeing $26.2 Million Golden State Warriors Star in Free Agency The debate will rage on—but Colin Cowherd's latest comments offer a compelling lens: in the battle between longevity and legend, Jordan still holds the edge. Catch Rani Rampal's inspiring story on Game On, Episode 4. Watch Here!
Economic Times
an hour ago
- Economic Times
Ind vs Eng 4th Test: Can India script an injury-time comeback?
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel England don't just hold the 2-1 lead in this series going into the fourth Test at Manchester, they seem to have the rub of the green as least when it comes to injuries. England announced early that they were making only one change to the team that won the third Test, bringing in Liam Dawson , the veteran left-arm spinner, into the eleven in place of Shoaib Bashir, who injured a finger on his left hand while fielding. Dawson will be playing only his fourth Test, at the age of 35, after eight years in the cricketing wilderness. Dawson has had decent returns at the domestic level over the last few seasons and was thought to be the best person to play a role in Bashir's absence. His first three Tests yielded seven wickets at an average of nearly meanwhile, have plenty to think about when it comes to team composition. Shubman Gill, the captain, confirmed that both Arshdeep Singh and Akash Deep were unavailable. Nitish Reddy has already been ruled out of the rest of the meant that Jasprit Bumrah would certainly play — and logic dictated that anyway with the series being on the line — and that Anshul Kamboj, the 24-year-old from Haryana, was likely to make his Test debut. Kamboj has played only 24 first-class matches, but he has 79 wickets at an impressive cost of 22 per scalp and is also handy with the other option was to play Prasidh Krishna, but he has not lived up to the billing thus far and offers little with the bat. India also confirmed that Rishab Pant was fit to keep wickets and Gill backed Karun Nair to come good, suggesting that all he needed was one decent score to turn things England wore a settled look, India were swirling a touch, but it was in similar circumstances that they pulled off victory in the second Test. So, they will not feel hugely disadvantaged. What was a bit unusual, however, was Gill's invoking of the spirit of cricket. Gill is only three Tests old as captain, one of which included his now well publicised exhorting of Zak Crawley for time-wasting tactics.'A lot of people have been talking about this, so let me clear the air for once and for all. The English batters on that day had seven minutes of play left. They were 90 seconds late to come to the crease,' said Gill. 'Not 10, not 20, 90 seconds late. Yes, most of the teams use this tactic. Even if we were in a position, we would have also liked to play fewer overs. But there's a manner to do it. But to be able to come 90 seconds late on the crease is not something that I would think comes in the spirit of the game.'This is a supremely slippery slope to be on. After all, the rules exist for a reason, and umpires are at hand to enforce them, even if perhaps they are not always as proactive or strict as they can be. When Gill says there's a 'manner' to do it, which would be acceptable, this is problematic. Different teams will see different things as acceptable, based on accepted practices growing up playing the game and cultural Gill was only stating his position to get under the skin of the opposition, that's a perfectly legitimate approach. After all, England made it clear that they had engineered a mindset shift of their own in this context. 'It was good fun, ' Harry Brook said of the fracas with Gill. 'We watched the Indians go hard at Creeps (Crawley) and Ducky (Duckett). We had a conversation, we thought it was the perfect opportunity to not be the nice guys that we have been in the past three years, to go out there and put them under more pressure than what they have probably had before.'Brook pointed to how this had come from within the set up. 'He (McCullum) actually said a few days before that we are too nice sometimes, and I brought it up the night before the last day: 'Baz said the other day we're too nice, I think tomorrow is a perfect opportunity to really get stuck into them'.England used this sense of outrage to funnel their aggression in the pointed end of the third Test and it worked for them. But, only because they did so from a place of calm, and as a strategy. If Gill is doing the same, there's no reason India can't be similarly galvanised. But, if he genuinely believes that it is the world against him and his team, it may well become a self-fulfilling prophecy
