New Delhi [India], July 29 : Former India cricketer Parthiv Patel commented on the handshake controversy that erupted during the fourth Test between India and England and questioned "if Ben Duckett had been batting on 90 in the same situation and the opposition offered a handshake, would England have accepted it?"
In the final moments of Day 5, drama unfolded after India fought to keep the series alive courtesy of Ravindra Jadeja's (107*) and Washington Sundar's (101*) gritty 203-run unbeaten partnership.
With the draw in sight, England captain Ben Stokes went to the Indian pair to offer his hand to signal the end of the contest. With Jadeja on 89 and Sundar on 80, the southpaws refused to accept it and opted to chase their centuries as they neared the three-figure mark. During the last few overs, England bowled spin and even part-timer Harry Brook and seemingly threw half-hearted deliveries at the duo, with hopes that Jadeja-Sundar would finish off quickly and spare the English attack from more humiliation as they gave away a 311-run lead, which turned into a 114-run lead for India.
The exchange was shown on live television, with Stokes taunting Jadeja if he will score his century against Harry Brook, not even a part-time bowler for his team. Even opener Zak Crawley chimed in with some banter, saying that Jadeja should have played faster if he wanted his century. These remarks during the last hour of the match revealed the immense tiredness, frustration, and helplessness of an English attack that had squandered a chance of winning the series, with their skipper Stokes even putting his body on the line, holding up his shoulder and grimacing after every delivery.
"England did things their own way. Their effort was clear they wanted to bowl India out and win the game," JioHotstar expert Parthiv said.
"But when they realised that wasn't possible, they put their weapons down and acknowledged that India had played very well," he added.
He also appreciated India's gritty approach with the bat and the resilience shown by the batters.
"At the same time, India did what they wanted to do in their own way two players worked really hard, batted brilliantly, and both deserved to score centuries," he said, referring to the long, determined effort from Jadeja and Sundar.
However, Parthiv raised a thought-provoking question about how England might have responded in a reversed scenario.
"The only question I have is this: if Ben Duckett had been batting on 90 in the same situation and the opposition offered a handshake, would England have accepted it? I am very curious to know this, especially with so many talking about the 'spirit of the game,'" he said.
The former India wicketkeeper believes the game still had some cricket left in it and that India had earned the right to continue batting.
"In my opinion, the game should have continued till the end of the day, even if the Indian batters completed their centuries. If 15 overs were still left, India should have batted because they worked extremely hard," Parthiv stressed.
He also recalled how precarious the situation looked just a day earlier, highlighting the turnaround.
"Before lunch on Day 4, when two wickets fell, it looked like India could lose the Test on Day 5. But from that point to batting through 143 overs is an incredible effort," he pointed out.
Parthiv concluded by supporting the Indian team's intent while expressing that he would've liked to see them continue for a bit more.
"So, I believe what India did was absolutely right though personally, I feel they could have batted a bit more," he said.
The series is still alive at 1-2, with the final match at The Oval to start from July 31.
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor
