0
0
Was India head coach Gautam Gambhir behind the extension of Ajit Agarkar’s tenure as chief selector? Barring the one instance where he did not get the final say in appointing Shreyas Iyer as India’s T20 captain, Gambhir has emerged as arguably the most influential head coach in the history of Indian cricket.
Sources told CricBlogger that Agarkar’s extension was delayed for some time because the board was waiting for Gambhir’s approval before taking a final call. “He has a big say on most of the matters,” a source said.
When CricBlogger reached out to Gautam Gambhir, Ajit Agarkar and BCCI secretary Devajit Saikia for comment, none of them responded by the time of publication.
Such a level of influence is virtually unheard of in Indian cricket. According to sources, Gambhir enjoys enormous authority over team affairs. He can back players for selection, push for omissions, and wield significant influence over the composition of the squad.
Sources also claimed that the decision to leave Shubman Gill out of the T20 squad just days before the T20 World Cup was not solely the selectors’ call. They alleged that Gambhir did not strongly back Gill’s case, which ultimately worked against the batter.
A similar situation, sources said, exists in the case of Mohammed Shami. While some selectors continue to view the veteran pacer as a valuable option in Test cricket, Gambhir is understood to be against his return. According to sources, that is the primary reason Shami has remained out of the Indian dressing room. They further claimed that Shami himself believes his absence is largely because Gambhir does not want him in the team.
Sources also claimed that the decision to hand Vaibhav Sooryavanshi his India debut ahead of Sanju Samson was driven by Gambhir’s preference. Faced with the choice between a teenage prodigy riding the momentum of a sensational IPL campaign and a proven performer in Sanju, who was India’s Player of the Tournament in the T20 World Cup, Gambhir is understood to have backed Sooryavanshi.
The move has raised questions within cricketing circles, particularly because Gambhir had earlier viewed Sanju as one of the contenders for India’s T20 captaincy. Why then was a player who played such a pivotal role in India’s T20 World Cup triumph left out of the playing XI after just three failures?
According to one source, the decision sends a strong message to the dressing room about the ruthless nature of selection under the current regime. “If Gambhir can leave out an incumbent Test captain like Rohit Sharma from the playing XI, then who is Sanju?” the source said. “Even the manner in which Suryakumar Yadav was shown the door after leading India to the T20 World Cup title could be a cause for concern. It sends a strong message that no player’s place is guaranteed under the current regime.”
If the team management was keen on giving Vaibhav Sooryavanshi an opportunity, the Ireland series would arguably have been the ideal platform to hand the teenager his debut. Instead, he was overlooked for that series and was introduced later at the expense of Sanju Samson, a move that sources said did not go down well with the wicketkeeper-batter.
Had Sooryavanshi been given his chance against Ireland, the team management might have avoided the awkward situation of dropping Sanju from the playing XI later. Whether that would have changed the course of events is impossible to say, but it remains a question worth asking.
