In a decision that sent ripples across social media and sparked debate among cricketing aficionados, India’s team management faced intense scrutiny over the exclusion of left-arm pacer Arshdeep Singh from the playing XI for the first One Day International against New Zealand in Vadodara. The omission, which saw Prasidh Krishna preferred, not only drew sharp criticism from fans but also prompted a subtle yet significant query from none other than veteran off-spinner Ravichandran Ashwin, intensifying the spotlight on India’s pace bowling strategy.

The Vadodara ODI: A Controversial Start

The stage was set for an exciting encounter on January 11, 2026, with India captain Shubman Gill winning the toss and opting to bowl first. India’s bowling attack featured a trio of specialist fast bowlers – Mohammed Siraj, Harshit Rana, and Prasidh Krishna – alongside spin options in Kuldeep Yadav and all-rounder Washington Sundar. However, the glaring absence for many was Arshdeep Singh.

Arshdeep, a bowler known for his death-over prowess and left-arm variation, had played all three matches in the preceding series against South Africa, managing to secure three wickets. While this return might not appear prolific on paper, his overall impact and economy often paint a different picture, as some social media users were quick to point out.

Ashwin Joins the Chorus: ‘Where-is-deep Singh?’

The sentiment of bewilderment soon transcended fan forums and reached the corridors of cricketing intellect. Ravichandran Ashwin, never one to shy away from expressing his candid views, took to X (formerly Twitter) with a pointed, yet succinct, remark: ‘Where-is-deep Singh? That’s all #INDvsNZ’.

Ashwin’s comment, delivered with characteristic wit, underscored a deeper question about the logic behind the selection. It immediately resonated with a large section of the cricketing fraternity, giving legitimacy to the growing disquiet among fans.

The Prasidh Krishna Dilemma: Pace vs. Economy

The crux of the outrage largely stemmed from the comparison between Arshdeep and Prasidh Krishna. Social media users and cricket pundits alike questioned the decision to opt for Prasidh, who was labelled an ‘inconsistent performer and a run-leaking machine’ by one user, Dhillon. This user starkly contrasted Prasidh’s inclusion with Arshdeep’s, highlighting that Arshdeep was ‘the most economical bowler for India in the last ODI series’.

This raises a fascinating strategic dilemma for team management. While Prasidh Krishna brings genuine pace and bounce, especially on Indian surfaces that can sometimes offer variable bounce, his propensity to leak runs in white-ball cricket has been a point of contention. Arshdeep, on the other hand, might not possess the raw pace of Prasidh but offers crucial left-arm angle, swing, and often better control, particularly during the powerplay and death overs. His economy, as highlighted, suggests a bowler who can restrict scoring, even if wickets don’t always come in a cluster.

Understanding Team India’s Pace Strategy

The selection of Mohammed Siraj, Harshit Rana, and Prasidh Krishna indicates a leaning towards right-arm seam and pace. Siraj has established himself as a frontline pacer across formats, offering swing and consistent lines. Harshit Rana, a relatively newer face, presumably offers similar attributes or specific tactical advantages that the team management saw fit for the Vadodara pitch. The inclusion of Prasidh, despite his known struggles with consistency and economy, might point towards a desire for outright pace or specific match-ups against the New Zealand batting line-up.

However, the absence of a left-arm pacer like Arshdeep removes a vital dimension from the attack. Left-arm quicks naturally create different angles for right-handed batters, making scoring more challenging and providing a crucial point of difference. In modern white-ball cricket, where variety is key, overlooking such a proven option, especially one lauded for economy, is a decision that warrants deeper explanation.

The Rishabh Pant Impact and KL Rahul’s Role

Adding another layer to India’s team composition was the unfortunate blow of Rishabh Pant’s injury. The star wicket-keeper batter was ruled out of the three-match series owing to a side strain (oblique muscle tear) sustained during a net session. Dhruv Jurel was named as Pant’s replacement in the squad. However, for the first ODI, KL Rahul was assigned wicket-keeping duties, meaning Jurel did not make it into the India XI.

Pant’s absence, while a significant loss to the batting line-up, doesn’t directly explain Arshdeep’s exclusion but it highlights the fluidity of selection. Rahul’s dual role as keeper-batter allows for flexibility in team combination, theoretically enabling the team to play an extra bowler or batter. Yet, in this instance, it still led to the contentious choice in the pace department.

The Broader Implications: Favouritism or Strategy?

The accusations of ‘blatant favouritism’ from some quarters, though strong, reflect a frustration that has often surfaced in Indian cricket history when selections appear inconsistent or defy logical cricketing arguments. While every team management operates with a specific strategy and considers various factors – including current form, opposition, pitch conditions, and player potential – decisions that seem to contradict recent performance or common cricketing wisdom often lead to such allegations.

For Arshdeep Singh, who has shown immense potential and delivered impactful performances for India in recent years, such an exclusion can be a test of mental fortitude. For the team, it raises questions about clarity in communication and selection policies, especially when a senior statesman like Ashwin publicly queries a choice.

As the series against New Zealand progresses, all eyes will be on India’s pace attack and whether the chosen combination can deliver the desired results. The initial furore surrounding Arshdeep’s omission serves as a powerful reminder of the passionate, discerning nature of Indian cricket fans and the high stakes involved in every selection decision.

---

Disclaimer: Cricket Mantra aggregates breaking cricket news from multiple reputable sources, enriching them with in-depth analysis and expert commentary to provide comprehensive coverage for our readers.