India collapsed twice with the bat at Headingley, adding to a long list of lower-order meltdowns in recent years. Naman Agarwal addresses the issue and looks at potential solutions.
24-6, 31-6: those were India’s last-six wicket aggregates in the two innings at Headingley. Technically, that’s a 30 per cent increase in output from the first innings to second. But that’s not how anyone will – or should – see it.
On both occasions, India squandered positions of strength which they could have converted into positions of invincibility. From 447-4 to 471 all out in the first innings, and 333-4 to 364 in the second. England’s last six wickets, by contrast, added 240 – and might add more on day five.
This wasn’t a one-off. Throwing away good starts because of an inept lower order has become an unenviable habit for India.
Since the start of 2024, India’s last five partnerships have added fewer than 50 runs nine times. No other tail in the world has done so on more than seven occasions.
Those nine collapses include, but aren’t limited, to the world record implosion at Cape Town where India astonishingly lost their last six wickets without adding a run to the total; the 7-15 and 5-29 in both innings of the Bengaluru Test that marked the start of a historic series defeat at home; the MCG Test which they were on the verge of drawing when the last session on day five began but couldn’t after losing 7-36; 6-33 on a rare green SCG surface where a few more runs could have changed the complexion of the game; and the two collapses here at Headingley – if either of them didn’t happen, England would not begin the final day with a realistic shot at victory.
Overall, India’s last five wickets have averaged 18.93 since the start of 2024, the worst among the nine nations in the World Test Championship. For the last four wickets, that reduces to 17.79, still the worst, while only Sri Lanka have fared worse for the last three, averaging 13.74 compared to India’s 15.77.
Average partnership per dismissal for the last five wickets since 2024
| Team | Avg | 100s | 50s |
| Ireland | 33.66 | 1 | 3 |
| Sri Lanka | 27.97 | 6 | 13 |
| Australia | 27.74 | 3 | 14 |
| England | 24.83 | 8 | 15 |
| South Africa | 23.7 | 3 | 10 |
| Bangladesh | 22.96 | 5 | 7 |
| Pakistan | 21.27 | 1 | 10 |
| New Zealand | 20.46 | 1 | 9 |
| West Indies | 19.77 | 3 | 6 |
| India | 18.93 | 2 | 10 |
| Afghanistan | 17.74 | 1 | 2 |
| Zimbabwe | 16.61 | 0 | 4 |
The real issue lies with the batting ability of India’s fast bowlers. Apart from Nitish Kumar Reddy, who’s more a batter than a bowler, the seven India quicks who have batted at No.7 or below have averaged a combined 5.8 with the bat since 2024. None of them have individually averaged above 10, with Akash Deep’s 9.22 being the highest. In fact, Jasprit Bumrah, Mohammed Siraj, and Prasidh Krishna, the three frontline quicks playing the Headingley Test all average under 10 even in first-class cricket.
Sure, the primary job of the players who bat in the last four to five positions of the batting order isn’t usually to score runs. So when they don’t, it’s difficult to blame them for not doing something well enough that they shouldn’t have been required to do in the first place. But, the rights and wrongs aside, the design of the game is such that every player has to bat and not every player has to bowl. And as the sport becomes increasingly optimised, lower order runs and batting depth have gone from luxury to necessity.
While even the best tailenders won’t be consistent, it has become increasingly important that they at least possess the ability to hang around and score some runs on their better days. Australia’s fast-bowling trio are perhaps the best example, each averaging more than 10 with the bat. Apart from Shoaib Bashir, a genuine tail-ender, England have Chris Woakes, Brydon Carse, and Josh Tongue batting at eight, nine, and ten at Headingley, averaging 31, 29 and 14 with the bat in first-class cricket.
Number of fast bowlers with 20+ wickets and a batting average above 10 since 2020
| Country | Number of players |
| England | 7 |
| New Zealand | 5 |
| West Indies | 5 |
| Australia | 4 |
| South Africa | 4 |
| Pakistan | 2 |
| Bangladesh | 2 |
| Zimbabwe | 2 |
| India | 2 |
| Sri Lanka | 0 |
| Afghanistan | 0 |
Since 2024, batters 8-11 have averaged 12.86 worldwide in defeats, which jumps to 18.68 in wins and draws. While it’s obviously not the only factor that determines the results of games, it does play a part.
India’s spinners have been decent batters in the 21st century. Some more than decent. But conditions outside home don’t allow India the privilege to field multiple of them, which makes having fast bowlers who are also somewhat reliable with the bat imperative. However, apart from Shardul Thakur – and to an extent, the untested Harshit Rana – India don’t have any. And if the Headingley Test is any indication, Thakur might not be around for long.
What solution is there, then, for India’s tail-end woes? Compromise on bowling quality to bolster batting depth? Despite all optimisations, the fundamental truth of Test cricket remains the same: you need to take 20 wickets to win. India lost the Australia series trying to sacrifice bowling for batting. They would lose more if they went down that route again.
Replacing the current set of quicks is also not an option because the ones waiting in line aren’t any different with the bat either.
Perhaps the only way this can potentially be solved is to simply train these bowlers to be better batters over time and put in place a system that demands a certain minimal level of batting output out of fast bowlers coming through the ranks.
This won’t happen overnight. But unless India start treating lower-order batting not as an afterthought but as an essential skill, they’ll continue to let winning positions slip through their fingers.