You’d think Team India would have learned from the bruises of Australia. Remember that series? Flat pitches, lack of penetration with the ball, and a stubborn reluctance to drop bat-heavy lineups for bowling balance. Fast forward to the ongoing England tour, and here we are again—2-1 down, staring at another potential series loss, and questions about team selection louder than ever. KL Rahul and Shubman Gill’s gutsy stand in Manchester might’ve delayed the post-mortem, but the cracks are clear: India’s refusal to take bold risks is costing them, big time.
A Lineup Built on Caution, Not Confidence
Let’s call it what it is: India is afraid of batting collapses. And instead of confronting the issue with accountability or technique tweaks, they’ve just stacked the batting order like it’s Jenga. Three front-line bowlers plus three “all-rounders” sounds balanced on paper, but in practice, it’s a compromise on both ends.
The absence of Kuldeep Yadav in all four Tests so far is baffling. Here’s a guy who’s recently spun webs in every condition thrown at him. But India chose to play Washington Sundar and Ravindra Jadeja—both capable with the bat but lacking bite with the ball in these conditions. Jadeja’s returns? Just seven wickets in as many Tests, leaking runs at an average nudging 68 — numbers that sound more like a struggling part-timer than India’s premier spinner. That’s not control, that’s a liability.
Even worse, debutant Anshul Kamboj, picked over a more experienced Prasidh Krishna, bowled just 18 overs in a 600-run England innings. That’s not just a selection mistake—it’s a selection surrender. You can’t pick a bowler and then not trust him.
Kuldeep, the Elephant in the Dressing Room
If there’s one name Indian fans have been screaming on social media, it’s Kuldeep Yadav. The left-arm wrist-spinner has been in red-hot form across formats, and yet, he’s carrying drinks. India’s bowling coach Morne Morkel admitted they’re “trying to fit him in,” but let’s be honest— “trying” isn’t good enough when you’re bleeding runs and wickets.
Washington Sundar may have solidified his place with that 4-for at Lord’s, but, honestly, what’s the message being sent here? Batting ability is more important than bowling match-winners? That’s the slippery slope this selection panel seems to be sliding down — rewarding batting insurance over genuine match-winning ability. Sundar bowled 28 overs in Manchester–and only after 68 overs had been obliterated. It feels like mismanagement and validates being told what to think.
Read Also: Indian Batters Who Conquered Old Trafford
Injuries Hurt, But Timidity Hurts More
Let’s face it–India has not had an easy time after managing the bowlers they had. Akash Deep is injured; Prasidh Krishna didn’t take advantage of his opportunity to tour; and not having Mohammed Shami is a glaring omission. With that considered, the decisions that have been made are no more a case of conservativeness than decision-making on what is best for the team.
If the dice roll on Anshul Kamboj worked, it would have been acknowledged, but it wasn’t a brave pick; it was an unsure one. Prasidh was on the bench, had a lot of first-class experience, had every chance to fire in the tour, and was let down by the structure. However, they seem unable to support a bowler after one or two ordinary performances.
That same fear runs deep in this squad selection. The refusal to take chances on bowlers who may leak runs but also take wickets has led India to settle for containment over aggression. And that’s exactly why England were able to post a 600-plus total for the first time against India since 2014.
To catch up on the most current news on all of your favorite thrilling cricket updates, visit Six6slive to access our comprehensive Latest News, insightful analysis, and updates. Connect with the action now to make sure you never miss out!