This sentence tests whether the underlined phrase needs the extra words 'by a mile' tacked on to it, or whether the plain superlative statement is enough and correct on its own. The underlined part reads: 'who is the best in the country by a mile'.
- Who is the best in the country by a mile (option a, same as the original): 'By a mile' is normally used with a comparison, such as 'he won by a mile', to say the gap between two things is large. Here it is bolted on to a simple superlative statement, and it does not fit the sentence naturally, so the original wording is not the best choice.
- Who is the best in the country (option b): This trims the sentence down to the plain, correct superlative claim: the player is the best in the country. It reads cleanly and needs nothing extra to make its point.
- Who is the best in the country for a mile (option c): 'For a mile' would suggest a distance or duration, which makes no sense when describing how good a cricketer is.
- Who is the best in the country with a mile (option d): 'With a mile' is not an English phrase that attaches to 'best', so this option is meaningless in context.
Option (b), 'who is the best in the country', is the correct rewrite because it removes the awkward, badly attached phrase 'by a mile' and leaves a clean, grammatically sound superlative statement.
Let's summarize:
- 'By a mile' is an idiom for comparing two measurable things and does not belong after a plain superlative like 'the best'.
- Options (c) and (d) invent phrases, 'for a mile' and 'with a mile', that carry no real meaning in this sentence.
So the sentence reads correctly as 'When you leave out a player who is the best in the country, the people need to know the real reasons', which matches option (b).