What Australia Does for Starc, India Won’t for Shami

Mitchell Starc has just finished one of the finest series of his career. Australia won the Ashes 4–1. Starc was named Player of the Series. The achievement says as much about Australia’s faith in him as it does about his skill. Starc has dealt with injuries for years. He has also dealt with doubts. Yet he was never pushed aside. He was managed. He was trusted. And when it mattered, he delivered.

At 35, Starc produced one of the finest Ashes campaigns by a modern fast bowler. He finished the series with 31 wickets, consistently striking with the new ball and returning for decisive spells when conditions demanded experience over raw pace. Australia did not just win the Ashes, they dominated it, and Starc stood at the centre of that dominance.

This was not an overnight resurgence. Starc’s career has been marked by injuries, workload management, and phases where his place in the XI was debated. Yet Cricket Australia persisted. That long-term view paid off spectacularly.

Half a world away, Mohammed Shami’s story has taken a markedly different turn. Shami remains one of India’s most accomplished fast bowlers of the modern era. His performance at the 2023 ODI World Cup, where he emerged as India’s leading wicket-taker, was a masterclass in seam movement and reverse swing under pressure. Few bowlers in world cricket possess his ability to strike in the middle overs and break partnerships on flat surfaces.

Injuries followed, as they do with fast bowlers who operate at high intensity. What followed next, however, has defined the current debate around his career. Since returning to competitive cricket, Shami has quietly put together a strong body of work in the domestic circuit. In the 2025–26 Ranji Trophy, he picked up 20 wickets in just four matches at an impressive average, repeatedly showing he could handle long spells and sustained workloads. His performances were decisive, match-shaping spells that underlined fitness and rhythm.

In white-ball domestic cricket, the returns were equally convincing. Playing the Syed Mushtaq Ali Trophy, Shami finished among the leading wickettakers for Bengal, claiming 16 wickets in seven matches. These were spells that suggested a bowler not merely returning, but ready.

Yet, despite this evidence, Shami’s name has remained absent from India’s international squads. Selectors have cited fitness management, workload concerns and long-term planning as reasons for caution. With India boasting enviable depth in fast bowling, younger options have been preferred while Shami watches from the sidelines.

This is where the contrast with Starc becomes instructive. Australia’s philosophy appears rooted in trust and role clarity. Starc was not expected to play every match or carry every workload, but he was never pushed to the periphery. The communication was clear: recover fully, return strong, and your place remains secure if you perform. India’s approach, by contrast, appears more guarded, almost transactional. Fitness is not just a physical benchmark but a perception, and once doubt creeps in, the road back becomes unclear.

The question, then, is not whether India’s selectors are wrong to be cautious. Modern cricket demands workload science, injury prevention and forward planning. But caution becomes counterproductive when performance evidence is repeatedly ignored. Domestic cricket has long been positioned as the pathway back to the national team and Shami has followed that route diligently. When strong performances do not translate into opportunity, the messaging becomes blurred , not just for him, but for the entire domestic ecosystem.

There is also the matter of experience. India’s fastbowling depth is undeniable, but depth should enable rotation and longevity, not premature exclusion. In high-stakes tournaments and tight series, seasoned operators often make the difference. Starc’s Ashes performance was not about raw pace alone but it was about knowing when to attack, when to contain, and how to exploit pressure moments. These are lessons that cannot be fast-tracked.

What separates the two cases is not talent, age or injury history. It is philosophy. Australia backs proven match-winners and builds systems around extending their impact. India, at least in Shami’s case, appears to be hedging, prioritizing potential availability tomorrow over proven excellence today. One approach resulted in an Ashes Player of the Series. The other has left one of India’s finest fast bowlers in limbo.

As international schedules grow more demanding and fast bowlers more fragile, boards will increasingly be judged on how they balance data with trust, planning with patience. Mitchell Starc’s Ashes stands as a powerful argument for backing pedigree. Mohammed Shami’s situation raises an uncomfortable question: when form, fitness and experience align, what more does a fast bowler need to do to earn belief?

Going forward the answers will shape not just careers, but the culture of selection itself.

THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY THE AUTHOR ARE PERSONAL

Siddhaarth Mahan, The author is a prolific sports writer, presenter and creates digital sports programmes. He brings a storyteller’s touch for the game’s deeper narratives.