This was Ashwin’s 13th fifty in the longest format, and he reached a significant career milestone during this knock.
Only five players in the history of cricket have scored 3,000 runs and taken 400 wickets in a Test match. The Chennai cricketer became the fifth player to accomplish this feat. He joined Shaun Pollock, Richard Hadlee, Kapil Dev, Shane Warne, and other legendary all-rounders on the elite list.
We don’t see Ashwin getting his due as an all-rounder, despite his impressive stats. On the other hand, his teammate Ravindra Jadeja always makes it onto every list of world-class all-rounders despite having fewer wickets, runs, or hundreds.
In addition to Jadeja, Ashwin has better stats than New Zealand’s Sir Richard Hadlee, who is considered to be one of the best all-rounders to have played the sport. Hadlee hails from New Zealand. The legend of New Zealand played 86 Test matches and scored 3,124 runs at an average of 27.16, assisted by 15 fifties and two centuries.
Ashwin, on the other hand, has scored more than 3,000 runs at a slightly higher average. He has three more Test hundreds than Hadlee. Ashwin has already surpassed the legendary Kiwi’s total of 431 wickets when he left the field.
The issue is that people these days watch too much Twenty20 cricket, which has clouded their judgment and distorted their definitions of cricket. World-class all-rounders are only those who are successful in the game’s shortest format. All-rounders are not players like Ashwin who are known for their power hitting.
Why don’t we treat Ashwin in the same manner if Hadlee is regarded as one of the greatest all-rounders of all time? What has he done to deserve this unfair treatment?
I’m confident that Ashwin would have received the respect he deserved and his due if he had been born during the same time period as Hadlee and others.
