Eight changes in 12 Tests: India’s No 3 revolving door reveals scrambled selection strategy

Manchester, July 24: Three changes in the playing XI, a public backing undone within hours, and yet another tweak at the vital No.3 slot — India’s revolving door policy in Test match selections has taken centre stage yet again, raising fresh concerns about the team’s long-term vision and clarity under the new coaching regime.
As India took the field for the fourth Test against England at Old Trafford, all eyes were on B Sai Sudharsan, who returned to the XI at No.3. He replaced Karun Nair — the very player who had been endorsed barely a day earlier by Shubman Gill at a press conference. “Karun has been batting well… sometimes it’s about getting that one knock to click,” Gill had said. But 12 hours later, Sudharsan was seen shadow batting on a rain-soaked outfield, and by the next morning, the reports of his inclusion were confirmed.
It was India’s eighth change at No.3 in their last 12 Tests. Starting from the 2024 home series against New Zealand, the position has seen a constant shuffle — with names like Virat Kohli, KL Rahul, Devdutt Padikkal, Karun Nair, Shubman Gill, and now Sudharsan being tried with little consistency or patience.
Sudharsan’s 61 off 151 balls was solid — the longest and highest score by an Indian No.3 in the last nine Tests. But one innings doesn’t mask the broader issue: India’s selection policy, particularly for top-order batting, appears increasingly ad hoc and reactionary.
A Timeline of Confusion
India began the series with Sudharsan and Nair at No.3 and No.6. Their scores? A forgettable 0 and 30 for Sudharsan, and 0 and 20 for Nair. The next Test saw Sudharsan dropped, Nair promoted to No.3, and Nitish Kumar Reddy brought in at six. Nair played at one-drop in the third Test too, without passing 40 in any innings — and just like that, he was gone for the fourth match.
Yet this decision is baffling considering Nair’s lead-up to the series — he had batted at No.3 in warm-up matches, even scoring a double hundred. If he was India’s preferred choice at first drop, why was Sudharsan handed the debut? And if Sudharsan was seen as the future, why drop him after one outing?
The inconsistency is not just poor management; it’s a missed opportunity to genuinely assess talent at the highest level. Now, neither Nair nor Sudharsan can be sure of where they stand, nor have they been given the run of matches necessary to establish themselves.
A Broader Pattern of Instability
This confusion at No.3 mirrors the chaotic selection strategies seen across the Indian Test setup in the past year.
Take the New Zealand home series — India played three spin-bowling all-rounders: Ashwin, Jadeja, and Axar. After losing in Bengaluru, Washington Sundar was fast-tracked into the XI, courtesy a 152-run knock at No.3 in a Ranji Trophy game. He replaced Axar in the next two Tests.
Or look at the curious case of pacer Harshit Rana. Retained with the main squad after a niggle sidelined a frontline pacer, Rana was leapfrogged by Anshul Kamboj for the fourth Test — even though Rana had already played two Tests, albeit without much success.
All of this seems to reflect a broader issue: a lack of conviction. Team India under Gautam Gambhir’s coaching tenure appears to be making decisions driven less by planning and more by immediate results. Players are backed one day and dropped the next. Promises of long-term thinking are drowned out by short-term tweaks.
Strategy or Panic?
To be fair, not all decisions have been without merit. Choosing Sundar against left-heavy New Zealand, or picking Kamboj after strong ‘A’ performances, are justifiable. The problem lies in the speed of turnarounds — selection U-turns without giving the original plans time to play out.
Perhaps the only thing that has remained consistent is India’s preference for batting depth at No.8 — a trade-off that prioritises runs over wickets.
While debatable, it at least indicates a clear thought process. Unfortunately, such clarity is sorely missing when it comes to the top order.
The Big Question
The current pattern of selections raises the question: what is India really building towards? Is there a vision beyond the next Test match? The churn at No.3 — arguably the most critical position in a Test batting lineup — suggests there isn’t.
For now, India might scrape through on individual brilliance. But if the management can’t settle on a batting order, back players through slumps, and trust their own long-term plans. (Agencies)