Experts tear into Gambhir, Iyer as India face heat after England humiliation

Southampton, July 12: India’s humiliating 4-0 T20I series defeat to England has sparked widespread criticism from several former cricketers, with the team’s selection policy, leadership and tactical planning coming under severe scrutiny.
Leading the criticism was former India off-spinner R Ashwin, who accused the Gautam Gambhir-led team management of showing little faith in its players by constantly shuffling the opening combination.
Drawing a comparison with England’s handling of Jos Buttler, Ashwin said the hosts continued to back their captain despite his lean run before he eventually repaid that faith with a match-winning century. India, on the other hand, kept alternating between Sanju Samson and teenage prodigy Vaibhav Sooryavanshi.
“We played musical chairs with the openers,” Ashwin remarked on his YouTube channel, adding that India failed to show patience with players who had already proved themselves on the international stage.
Ashwin also questioned whether Sooryavanshi would receive a consistent run in the upcoming Zimbabwe series, saying India’s recent trend suggests no player is guaranteed opportunities, regardless of talent.
Former India batter Mohammad Kaif was even harsher in his assessment, describing the current setup as the “most confused Indian cricket team management” he has ever seen. Kaif criticised the handling of both Samson and Sooryavanshi, arguing that one is a proven T20 World Cup performer while the other is regarded as a generational talent. Instead of giving either player confidence, the management only created uncertainty through constant chopping and changing.
The criticism inevitably points towards head coach Gautam Gambhir, whose team has now come under increasing pressure after another disappointing overseas campaign. Questions are being raised over the lack of stability in team selection, the absence of clearly defined roles and the failure to back players through difficult phases.
Captain Shreyas Iyer has also found himself in the firing line. Under his leadership, India appeared tactically outclassed throughout the series, struggling to adapt to English conditions while repeatedly making questionable decisions both with the bat and in the field.
Former India wicketkeeper Dinesh Karthik believed England completely outplayed the reigning T20 World Cup champions.
“England have absolutely dominated India,” Karthik said, adding that the hosts were superior in every department and deserved to replace India as the world’s No. 1 T20I side.
Former England captain Eoin Morgan praised England’s leadership under Harry Brook and Brendon McCullum for ensuring a smooth transition after the Test series, saying the side carried no baggage into the T20Is. His comments stood in sharp contrast to India’s campaign, which lacked clarity and consistency.
Former India batter Sanjay Manjrekar shifted the focus towards selection, urging the selectors to look beyond IPL performances. He argued that batting on flat domestic pitches often creates a misleading picture of a player’s ability, particularly in challenging overseas conditions.
Former India wicketkeeper Deep Dasgupta echoed similar concerns, pointing to India’s poor fielding, lack of wicket-taking options in the middle overs and tactical shortcomings. According to him, England consistently stayed ahead in strategy while several of India’s plans simply failed to work.
Former England captain Nasser Hussain also weighed in, urging Indian batters to learn from Rohit Sharma’s past success in England and improve their approach against short-pitched bowling.
Collectively, the verdict from experts paints a worrying picture for Indian cricket. Rather than blaming the players alone, the criticism has centred on Gautam Gambhir’s team management, Shreyas Iyer’s leadership and a selection policy that many believe lacked consistency, conviction and long-term planning.
With another international assignment around the corner, the pressure is firmly on India’s think tank to answer growing questions over its direction and decision-making. (Agencies)