Jadeja Slammed by Pathan: The Raipur ODI Finish That Sparked Controversy
In a stunning turn of events, India’s formidable 358/5 in the second ODI against South Africa in Raipur wasn’t enough. And according to former all-rounder Irfan Pathan, the man to blame is none other than Ravindra Jadeja. Pathan’s post-match analysis delivered a scathing verdict: “Where was the intent?” he asked, directly questioning Jadeja’s approach in the death overs .
This isn’t just casual commentary; it’s a full-throated indictment from a voice respected in the cricketing world. With the series now level at 1-1 after South Africa chased down the target with 4 balls to spare , the spotlight is firmly on Jadeja’s finishing role and whether he’s the right man for the job .
Table of Contents
- The Raipur ‘Collapse’ That Wasn’t a Collapse
- Jadeja Slammed by Pathan: The Core of the Criticism
- By The Numbers: Jadeja’s ODI Finishing Record
- A Strategic Mismatch? Is Jadeja the Right Finisher?
- Conclusion: The Intent Debate
- Sources
The Raipur ‘Collapse’ That Wasn’t a Collapse
On the surface, India’s innings looked like a textbook blueprint for a series-sealing win. Virat Kohli notched up his 53rd ODI century, while Yashasvi Jaiswal and Ruturaj Gaikwad provided solid foundations . The team was well on track to post 370+, a score that should have been out of South Africa’s reach.
However, the final 10 overs told a different story. The scoring rate, which was healthy, began to stall. Washington Sundar’s crawl (1 run off 8 balls) was bad, but it was Jadeja’s knock that drew the most ire. Coming in during a high-pressure phase, he managed just 24 runs off 27 deliveries. In a modern ODI where a finishing batsman is expected to score at a strike rate well above 120, Jadeja’s 88.88 was a massive letdown. This slowdown is believed to have cost India a good 15-20 crucial runs .
Jadeja Slammed by Pathan: The Core of the Criticism
Pathan’s frustration was palpable during his commentary stint. He didn’t mince words, stating, “We spoke in the commentary that the way Ravindra Jadeja batted, India could be in trouble,” and he was proven right . His central argument wasn’t just about the runs or the balls, but about the lack of intent.
For a player of Jadeja’s caliber and experience, who often bats at No. 7 or 8, the primary job is to provide a late surge. His role isn’t to see out the innings but to punish the bowlers and take the score from formidable to unassailable. Pathan believes that Jadeja failed to grasp this responsibility. He questioned whether Jadeja was playing for his average or for the team’s total, a critique that strikes at the heart of modern cricket’s team-first philosophy .
By The Numbers: Jadeja’s ODI Finishing Record
To understand the context of Pathan’s criticism, we need to look at the data. Jadeja’s overall ODI career strike rate hovers around 86, which is perfectly respectable for an all-rounder. However, in the current era of hyper-aggressive batting, and specifically in the finishing role, this rate is simply not enough.
While specific 2025 strike rate data for his finishing overs is nuanced, his recent performances have shown a pattern of caution over aggression in the final 10 overs. On November 30, 2025, just days before the Raipur ODI, he scored 32 off 20 balls against the same opponent, which was a positive sign. But the regression in Raipur has reignited the debate .
This inconsistency is what worries analysts. A finisher must be a reliable source of quick runs, not a variable one.
A Strategic Mismatch? Is Jadeja the Right Finisher?
This incident forces us to ask a bigger question: Is Ravindra Jadeja the right fit for the finisher’s role in this current Indian ODI setup?
Jadeja’s immense value to the team is unquestionable. He’s a world-class fielder, a match-winning bowler, and a gritty middle-order batsman. But the specific role of a finisher—a player who can clear the boundaries at will in the 45th to 50th overs—may not be his forte. His skillset is more aligned with building an innings or providing stability, not with the explosive hitting required at the death.
This is where the team management’s strategy comes under scrutiny. Perhaps the batting order needs a rethink. Could a more naturally aggressive hitter like Hardik Pandya (when fit), Axar Patel, or even a specialist like Rinku Singh be a better option for that final slot? The Raipur loss might be the catalyst for such a difficult but necessary conversation [[INTERNAL_LINK:india-odi-batting-order-strategy]].
Conclusion: The Intent Debate
The phrase “Where was the intent?” will likely echo in Indian cricket circles for some time. Irfan Pathan’s public criticism of Ravindra Jadeja has highlighted a critical flaw in a seemingly dominant performance. It’s a stark reminder that in modern cricket, a good score isn’t just about the total, but about how you get there.
While Jadeja is a legend of the game, his role must be constantly evaluated against the team’s strategic needs. For India to dominate in the upcoming ICC events, they need every cog in their machine to be operating at maximum efficiency, especially in high-leverage situations. The Raipur ODI was a missed opportunity, and Pathan’s words serve as a crucial wake-up call for the team’s management.