Year in review 2017: Has Yuvraj Singh finally seen his India prospects evaporate?

A prince who has fallen on bad days, or one who can still dazzle you with a flourish of his sceptre? One who still glides across the turf, or one that huffs, puffs, pants and coughs? Still the mighty hitter of the cricket ball who can dismiss bowlers with a mere swish of the blade, or one who can do no better than graft, grind and toil? Still the epitome of style and spunk, or a mellowed-down individual, struggling for relevance? Still the royalty for whom runs are the riches, or the plebeian, who doesn’t know where the next run would come from? Still an asset, or is he now a liability?

There would perhaps be no prizes for guessing that we are talking about Yuvraj Singh. From the high of a timeless 150 against England at the start of the year to being dogged by yo-yo test woes in the middle, and finally, cracking it towards the end of the year, it has been a roller-coaster 365 days for India’s 2011 World Cup hero.

Indeed, 2017 has seen certain key developments which are sure to have profound implications on Yuvraj’s long-term India prospects. As the southpaw tries hard to resurrect his international career, Firstpost writers Debdutta Bhattacharjee and Shantanu Srivastava debate whether he stands a chance or has 2017 seen the end of Yuvraj Singh’s international career. While the former believes Yuvraj still has it in him to play for the Men in Blue, the latter believes that youngsters should be given a chance instead.

SS (believes Yuvraj is past his prime): Let me begin with a simple fact. Yuvraj has been a great servant of Indian cricket and nothing, not even the fact that he is past his sell-by date, can change that. Sports, like life, is about looking ahead. It’s about keeping on moving. Yuvraj’s poor run in 2017 — when he scored only two fifties, one of which he converted into his highest ODI score of 150 — proves that it’s time to look ahead. For a player of his class and calibre, one would expect more than the 372 runs that he mustered this year from 11 matches. The numbers are not impressive enough and with the talent pool that we have, it doesn’t make sense to look back. I know that sounds harsh, but that’s how it is at the international level.

DB (backing Yuvraj): What you get with Yuvraj is tons and tons of experience. What you also get with him is an indomitable spirit – the spirit that prevented him from crumbling in the face of cancer, the spirit that helped him to stage a comeback to the Indian team after an ignominious 21-ball 11 in the World T20 final in 2014. His magnificent 150 off 127 balls against England at the start of the year should have stopped detractors in their tracks, and the whirlwind 53 not out off 32 balls against Pakistan in India’s Champions Trophy opener should surely have driven them away, but Yuvraj had a few modest scores, and they were up in arms calling for his head.

Now, it is not that players have not had a poor run of form earlier, but they were persisted with. Case in point: Rohit Sharma, who had a horror time in 2012-13 from the start of the Commonwealth Bank series in Australia to just before the start of the Champions Trophy. Consider this string of scores — 21, 10, 33, 15, 0, 4, 68, 5, 0, 0, 4, 4, 4, 83, 4. Only two innings of note. Still, he was taken to the Champions Trophy, where he scored two back-to-back half-centuries. The mighty Virat Kohli struggled no end in the England Test series in 2014, only to go to Australia next up and score runs in torrents. Cheteshwar Pujara has had his issues with poor form and scoring at a snail’s pace. Had the Indian selectors consigned him to the bin, India wouldn’t have been going to South Africa today confident of mounting a creditable resistance to the hosts’ pace battery.

Also Yuvraj’s replacements, especially at No 4 in the batting order, haven’t exactly set the stage on fire this year. The moral of the story: as the cliche goes, form is temporary, class is permanent.

SS: Perhaps the selectors feel differently. Maybe they reckon other players can contribute in a similar vein, or maybe better. Of the three chances Yuvraj got in T20Is this year, his only substantial contribution was a 10-ball 27 against England in Bengaluru. He was given a decent run in the ODIs, but barring the 150 in Cuttack, and the half-century against Pakistan in India’s Champions Trophy opener, there was no noteworthy performance. His failure in the Champions Trophy final is also glaring. Agreed, his 31-ball 22 was the second-highest score for India, but given his experience and expertise, he should have made the start count. Also, the team management made him bat at No 4 on nine of the ten occasions he walked out to bat this year. The message was clear: he was in consideration for the slot. That he let it slip is no one’s fault but Yuvraj’s alone.

DB: I will beg to differ on the point of Yuvraj being given decent run in ODIs this year. He has played in only 11 matches this year, scoring 372 runs at an average of 41.33. An analysis of his innings this year tells you that low scores in the West Indies was the real turning point for him. Could he have got a longer rope? I think so, especially considering the fact that Kedar Jadhav, who has had his own issues with fielding and patchy form, has played over double the number of ODIs Yuvraj has this year, while his average is a tad lower than that of Yuvraj.

Could Yuvraj have been tried in a few more T20Is than the three against England in the early part of the year? Certainly. Eleven ODIs and three T20Is is too less a sample size to establish that a player is past his ’expiry date’. India could have afforded to give him a chance in matches where there was not a lot at stake, for examples dead rubbers against Sri Lanka and Australia. Also let’s see if there have been ‘viable alternatives’ emerging, particularly at the crucial No 4 position in India’s ODI batting order:

A total of six other players apart from Yuvraj were tried at No 4 this year, in a total of 19 matches. Their record when compared to Yuvraj: a big, fat zero!

SS: No 4 is a crucial position where the impact of runs matters as much as — if not more than — the sheer number of runs scored. As compared to Jadhav, Yuvraj’s ‘impact’ innings were quite less. Also you must consider that Jadhav batted at No 5 for majority of the year, arguably the more difficult position. In Pandey and Shreyas Iyer, India have better contenders for the No 4 slot. Also, there is constant talk of Dhoni being promoted.

Bringing Yuvraj into the mix again will only add to the confusion. Another worrying trait that I have observed in his batting is that he tends to get stuck at the crease far too often for somebody who has been known to be a naturally free-flowing batman. The Champions Trophy final this year is an example where he could only manage 22 off 31 balls, with India chasing 339 for victory. Earlier in the tournament, against Sri Lanka, he scratched around for 18 balls for his seven runs. Later, in an ODI in North Sound against the West Indies, he consumed 55 balls for his 39 runs. Anyone can go through a bad patch, but I think it’s better to have a failing youngster than a struggling senior in the team.

DB: Again, 11 ODIs is too less a sample size to infer that he has forgotten how to score quickly. In the Indian Premier League (IPL) — a tournament which sets a high standard — his strike rate was a healthy 142.37 this year. How did some of the other big names fare? Virat Kohli had a strike rate of 122.22, Dhoni a measly 116, David Warner (highest run-getter) 141.81 and Gautam Gambhir (second highest run-getter) 128.02 and Shikhar Dhawan (third highest run-getter) 127.39. All less than that of Yuvraj.

His innings against England in Cuttack and Pakistan in Birmingham were ample examples that he can still hit a long ball. Plus, he provides the variety of a left-hander (and a mighty stylish one to boot) in the middle order. Moreover, when he has has been middling the ball, he has been looking like the Yuvraj of old, who is so easy on the eye. So one can’t say that he has lost his touch and class. It’s just that he also has been finding ways to get out.

SS: Agreed that he has a lot of class along with the typical left-hander’s elegance, but class alone can’t win you matches. The criterion for winning matches has evolved from traditional skill sets of batting and bowling. One has to maintain a certain level to fitness, and Yuvraj would be the first one to agree, as he was one of India’s best fielders in his prime. Let’s not forget that he has failed the yo-yo fitness test thrice. Now, it is a stated policy of the Indian team management that if you don’t pass the test, you simply don’t get to play. So it would be next to impossible for him to make a comeback anytime soon.

DB: That Yuvraj is only a pale shadow of the fielder he used to be has been perhaps the biggest allegation against him this year. Yes, there were the uncharacteristic slip-ups during the Champions Trophy, the laboured approach looked a bit ugly, and most of all, there were the triple failures in the yo-yo test. But there is a tendency to overlook that he passed the test towards the end of the year and has thrown his hat into the ring as far as selection in the Indian team is concerned.

SS: Okay, so he passed the yo-yo test, even if it is on his fourth attempt. However, he doesn’t look in best shape, nor does he inspire confidence on the field. Team India can’t afford to have slow movers, especially under the new work culture of the Kohli-led Indian team and the changing dynamics of the game, which put tremendous emphasis on fielding. It’s indeed a sorry sight to see Yuvraj, once a livewire at point, losing his edge so drastically and dramatically.

DB: Let’s understand that he is not the same livewire after the bout with cancer and never will be. But still, he is not too worse off than let’s say a Jadhav, Jasprit Bumrah and Ravichandran Ashwin on the field. And like them, Yuvraj has also cleared the yo-yo test. But the bigger question is: are we over-emphasising the yo-yo test to the extent of ignoring the other fundamental skill sets, like batting and bowling? In fact, here is some food for thought: had the yo-yo test been in vogue during the time of let’s say, Sourav Ganguly, Anil Kumble or Zaheer Khan, one can’t really see them to have done too well. But leaving them out of the side would have meant giving up the loads of runs and wickets that they delivered for India. In fact, the three of them were integral to India’s rise as major powerhouse on the field in the past decade.

SS: The team management is going by the changing times. I can’t remember the last instance when we out-fielded Australia, South Africa or New Zealand. Jadhav, Bumrah and Ashwin are no doubt among the weaker fielders in the team, but they have not been scraping through the yo-yo test. Also they have age on their side and in all likelihood, you will see them improving in the near future, especially with the World Cup about 18 months away. At 36, it is very difficult for a player to re-invent himself, and no matter how much I love and admire Yuvraj, I must admit that the doors of the national team, as of now at least, are shut on him.

DB: A policy of getting rid of a player only because he is gaining in years would be an unjust one. Even at 35-36, if the player can contribute to the team’s cause, why not have him in the side? Players like Kumble, Imran Khan, Steve Waugh, Sanath Jayasuriya, Kumar Sangakkara have proved that age is just a number. There is no reason why Yuvraj can’t do that as well.

It’s quite evident that no consensus could be achieved on the topic, and Yuvraj is still good enough to divide opinions. But what’s of greater importance is to judge if he is good enough for the Indian team, and has 2017 told you that it is maybe time for him to make way. We leave it for you to decide. Participate in the poll below and let us know what you feel.