Former India cricketer Parthiv Patel weighed in on the handshake controversy that erupted during the fourth Test between India and England, raising an intriguing question: “If Ben Duckett had been batting on 90 in the same situation and the opposition offered a handshake, would England have accepted it?”The drama unfolded in the closing moments of Day 5 after India mounted a strong fight to keep the series alive, thanks to a resilient, unbeaten 203-run stand between Ravindra Jadeja (107*) and Washington Sundar (101*).With a draw appearing inevitable, England captain Ben Stokes approached the Indian duo to offer a handshake, signaling an end to the game. However, with Jadeja on 89 and Sundar on 80, the pair declined, preferring to chase their individual milestones as they neared centuries. In the final few overs, England resorted to bowling spin and even handed the ball to part-timer Harry Brook, delivering what seemed like half-hearted overs in the hope that the batters would hurry up and end the match — a match in which England had once held a commanding 311-run lead that was reduced to just 114 by stumps.The exchange played out on live television, with Stokes seen taunting Jadeja, questioning whether he would complete his century against Brook, who isn’t even considered a part-time bowler.
Poll
Did India make the right decision by continuing to bat for their centuries?
England opener Zak Crawley also chimed in, quipping that Jadeja should have batted faster if he wanted to reach the milestone. The banter during the last hour reflected the English camp’s exhaustion, frustration, and helplessness, especially after having squandered a golden opportunity to seal the series. Stokes himself looked visibly in pain, clutching his shoulder after every delivery.
“England did things their own way. Their effort was clear — they wanted to bowl India out and win the game,” Parthiv said during his appearance on JioHotstar.“But when they realised that wasn’t possible, they put their weapons down and acknowledged that India had played very well,” he added.He went on to commend India’s resolve and their batters’ determined display.“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 Jadeja and Sundar’s gritty effort.Parthiv then posed a hypothetical to challenge the narrative surrounding the ‘spirit of the game.’“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 wicketkeeper also argued that India had every right to carry on and that the match still had meaningful cricket left in it.“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 pointed to how quickly the momentum had shifted, recalling how dangerous the situation looked the day before.“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.In closing, Parthiv backed India’s call to keep going while sharing a personal opinion.“So, I believe what India did was absolutely right — though personally, I feel they could have batted a bit more,” he said.The series remains alive at 1-2, with the fifth and final Test scheduled to begin at The Oval on July 31.
