Gautam Gambhir is under fire from all corners after India’s 0-2 loss to South Africa which is now the second Test series defeat for the Indian side in their last three assignments at home. Fans have demanded his sacking while experts too have questioned his decision making.
India lost the first Test against South Africa by 30 runs and the visitors absolutely thrashed the hosts in Guwahati in the second game to earn a 408-run victory, which is India’s worst defeat in Test history in terms of runs.
While the players have definitely not performed at the level that is expected from them, head coach Gambhir’s tactics have not helped either. We examine five of his worst mistakes in his coaching career with India so far that has led to the team sinking to historic lows.
Selection inconsistency
Sarfaraz Khan hit a century in the first India-New Zealand Test. He failed in the next two matches and has not been included in the playing XI since. Karun Nair played in England and was dropped from the next series. Sai Sudharsan batted well against West Indies at home but was dropped for series opener against South Africa.
With stalwarts like Virat Kohli and Rohit Sharma retiring, India are already thin on batting and Gambhir’s constant tinkering with the line-up has not helped anyone. Only West Indies have used more players than India since September 2024 in Test cricket.
Lack of role clarity
Sudharsan started the England tour at No 3. In the very next match, Nair took that spot. Two games later, Sudharsan was again back at No 3. Similarly, Washington Sundar started the South Africa series at the one-down spot but in the second Test, the all-rounder had to bat at No 8. Dhruv Jurel, a wicket-keeper batter who bats lower down the order, was asked to fill in for Shubman Gill at No 4 in the second Test.
The fact that seven batters have batted at a crucial position like No 3 since September 2024, speaks volumes of how much of a musical chairs it has become.
Quick Reads
View AllGambhir has used this same unpredictability to his advantage in shorter formats but in Test cricket, it has only created more uncertainty with players underperforming and results not going their way.
All-rounder obsession
Gambhir’s backing of Nitish Kumar Reddy has not bore much results since his ton in Australia late last year. Reddy being preferred over a genuine batter would have made sense if the team management was willing to use him with ball but he has hardly got bowling in his career so far.
Gambhir has strengthened the Indian T20I team by bringing in more multi-dimensional players but the same logic has not quite worked in the red ball set-up.
Rank-turner persistence
India crossed 300 just once across six innings in their historic 0-3 defeat to New Zealand in 2024. In the series against South Africa, India’s highest score was only 201 in four innings. The decision to go for a rank turner in Kolkata was baffling and the loss there further dented the confidence of a shaky batting line-up.
Gambhir’s unwillingness to lay out better batting surfaces for visiting teams has only backfired and although the team management did correct course in the second Test, South Africa just came out better prepared.
Huge huge achievement for the proteas, they have put their stamp of authority and showed why they are the deserved holders of the WTC title. #indvsa pic.twitter.com/Tvv1ANyiYj
— Ashwin 🇮🇳 (@ashwinravi99) November 26, 2025
Hastened transition?
Gambhir himself mentioned in the post-match conference that the team is under transition both in batting and bowling at the same time. But should the transition have happened this way?
Both Virat Kohli and Rohit Sharma were past their prime and not many would argue that their presence could have changed things in the South Africa series. However, India did miss the mastery of R Ashwin on the flat surface in Guwahati. Could things have been handled better to ensure that bowling and batting both do not have these massive holes at the same time? The quick transition means that young players are being asked to do too much too soon which is not ideal.


)

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)



