NEW DELHI — The recurring exclusion of Sanju Samson from India’s T20 International squad has ignited a fierce debate over transparency, accountability, and alleged favoritism in Gautam Gambhir’s team management. The controversy, amplified by sharp criticism from former chief selector Sandeep Patil, has laid bare systemic issues in the Board of Control for Cricket in India’s (BCCI) selection process, raising questions about whether performance metrics or personal preferences dictate team composition.
Patil, who led the BCCI’s selection committee from 2012 to 2016, publicly challenged the rationale behind Samson’s frequent omissions, framing it as a symptom of broader inconsistencies in India’s T20 setup. “Why is the axe always on Sanju Samson?” Patil asked in remarks published by The Times of India, arguing that the wicketkeeper-batter’s domestic record—including a prolific 2023 Indian Premier League (IPL) season—warrants more consistent opportunities. Samson, who has played 24 T20Is since his 2015 debut, has been dropped from India’s last three T20 series despite maintaining a domestic T20 strike rate of 138.5 over the past two years and leading Rajasthan Royals to the IPL playoffs in 2025.
The timing of Patil’s criticism is significant. It follows India’s underwhelming performance in the January 2026 T20 series against Australia, where the team suffered a 2-1 defeat, and precedes the 2026 T20 World Cup in the UAE, for which Samson was left out of the squad. The omission has drawn sharp reactions from former players, fans, and analysts, who argue that Samson’s exclusion defies conventional selection logic, particularly when compared to less experienced or lower-performing alternatives.
What Happened: A Pattern of Exclusion and Allegations of Bias
Samson’s case is not an isolated incident but part of a larger trend of contentious selections under Gambhir’s leadership. Since taking over as head coach in July 2024, Gambhir, a former India batter and two-time IPL-winning captain with Kolkata Knight Riders, has faced persistent questions over squad composition. The most recent flashpoint came after India’s series loss to Australia, where former cricketer Sanjay Manjrekar, writing in The Times of India, called for accountability within the management, stating, “Go deeper and actually sack those guys.” While Manjrekar did not name specific individuals, his remarks were widely interpreted as a critique of Gambhir’s decision-making.
Allegations of favoritism have further muddied the waters. An unnamed India batter, quoted in The Indian Express, claimed that Gambhir “has certain favorite players,” though the batter did not provide names or evidence. The comment followed the omission of Washington Sundar, a versatile all-rounder with a proven track record in T20 cricket, from the squad for the Australia series. Sundar, who has represented India in 40 T20Is and boasts an economy rate of 7.45 in the format, was left out despite his ability to contribute with both bat and ball. His exclusion has puzzled analysts, given India’s historical emphasis on multi-dimensional players in T20 cricket.
Shivam Dube, another all-rounder, has also faced scrutiny. Critics argue that Dube’s limited contributions with the ball and in the field—he averages just 1.3 catches per T20I and has not bowled in his last 10 appearances for India—raise questions about his selection over more specialized players. Dube’s inclusion in the squad for the 2026 T20 World Cup, despite his modest international record (a T20I batting average of 24.5 and a strike rate of 130.2), has fueled speculation about whether his selection is based on merit or perceived loyalty to Gambhir, who coached Dube at the IPL franchise Gujarat Titans.
The BCCI has not issued a detailed response to the allegations, but unnamed board sources told The Times of India that selections are based on “form, fitness, and team balance.” Gambhir himself addressed the criticism in a December 2025 press conference, stating, “We pick players who fit the team’s vision, not just individual performances.” However, the lack of specificity in these explanations has done little to quell the debate. Samson’s exclusion from the T20 World Cup squad, in particular, has become a lightning rod for broader frustrations, with fans and former players demanding clarity on why a player with his domestic credentials continues to be overlooked.
Why It Matters: Transparency, Trust, and the Future of Indian Cricket
The controversy surrounding Samson’s selection is not merely about one player’s career. It reflects deeper structural issues in Indian cricket, where the absence of transparent selection criteria has eroded public trust in the process. The BCCI’s reluctance to provide detailed justifications for its decisions—beyond vague references to “team vision” or “balance”—has left players and fans in the dark, fostering an environment where speculation and allegations of bias thrive.
For a sport as deeply embedded in India’s cultural fabric as cricket, the stakes are high. The BCCI is the richest cricket board in the world, with a revenue of over $600 million in 2025, and its decisions have far-reaching implications for players, franchises, and fans. The current debate underscores the need for greater accountability in how teams are selected, particularly in a format as dynamic as T20, where small margins can determine success or failure in high-stakes tournaments like the World Cup.
The issue also highlights a tension between data-driven selection and intangible factors like “team culture” or “attitude,” which selectors often cite but rarely define. Samson’s case is emblematic of this dilemma. His domestic numbers—362 runs at a strike rate of 146.79 in the 2023 IPL and a first-class average of 42.5—are among the best in the country, yet they have not translated into consistent opportunities at the international level. Whether his exclusion is due to tactical preferences, fitness concerns, or other undisclosed factors remains unclear, but the lack of transparency has fueled perceptions of unfairness.
The broader implications for Indian cricket are significant. If players believe that selection is influenced by factors beyond their control—such as personal relationships or favoritism—they may become disillusioned, potentially affecting their performance and morale. This could also deter young talent from pursuing cricket as a career if they perceive the system as opaque or unfair. For a country with a vast pool of talent, ensuring that the best players are given fair opportunities is critical to maintaining India’s competitive edge in international cricket.
Background and Context: The Evolution of India’s T20 Selection Policy
India’s approach to T20 selection has undergone several shifts over the past decade, reflecting the format’s growing importance and the BCCI’s evolving priorities. During the early 2010s, the team management, led by then-captain MS Dhoni and coach Duncan Fletcher, prioritized experienced players with proven track records in limited-overs cricket. This approach culminated in India’s victory in the 2013 ICC Champions Trophy and a semifinal appearance in the 2014 T20 World Cup.
However, the rise of the IPL as a talent incubator in the mid-2010s prompted a shift toward younger, more aggressive players. The 2016 T20 World Cup, where India reached the semifinals, saw the emergence of players like Hardik Pandya and Jasprit Bumrah, who were fast-tracked into the national team based on their IPL performances. This trend continued under Virat Kohli’s captaincy, with the team management placing greater emphasis on strike rates and power-hitting, particularly in the middle overs.
Gambhir’s appointment as head coach in 2024 marked another inflection point. Unlike his predecessors, Gambhir has emphasized a “team-first” philosophy, often prioritizing players who fit a specific tactical blueprint over those with standout individual records. This approach has led to the inclusion of players like Dube, who is seen as a lower-order hitter capable of clearing the ropes, and the exclusion of others, like Samson, who are viewed as more traditional wicketkeeper-batters.
The current controversy must also be viewed in the context of India’s recent struggles in T20 World Cups. Despite being one of the most consistent teams in bilateral T20 series, India has not won a T20 World Cup since 2007. The team’s failure to progress beyond the semifinals in the 2021, 2022, and 2024 editions has intensified scrutiny of the selection process, with critics arguing that the BCCI’s reluctance to take risks has cost the team in high-pressure tournaments.
Competing Claims and Uncertainty: What’s Really Driving the Selections?
The debate over Samson’s exclusion is complicated by competing narratives and a lack of definitive evidence. While Patil and other critics argue that Samson’s domestic performances warrant inclusion, Gambhir and his supporters contend that team balance and tactical fit are more important than individual statistics. The absence of a public selection policy or detailed explanations from the BCCI has made it difficult to assess the validity of these claims.
One of the key points of contention is whether Samson’s exclusion is due to his batting style. Samson is known for his elegant stroke play and ability to anchor an innings, but some analysts argue that his strike rate, while strong, does not match the explosive power-hitting required in modern T20 cricket. However, this argument is undermined by the fact that Samson has consistently delivered in high-pressure situations, including a match-winning 85 off 42 balls against South Africa in 2022.
Another factor often cited is Samson’s fitness. While he has not suffered any major injuries in recent years, some reports suggest that the team management has concerns about his long-term durability, particularly given the physical demands of wicketkeeping in T20 cricket. However, Samson has played over 100 IPL matches without major fitness issues, and his exclusion from the T20 World Cup squad—where fitness is paramount—raises questions about this rationale.
The inclusion of players like Dube and the exclusion of Sundar have also fueled speculation about whether Gambhir is prioritizing players from his IPL coaching stints. Dube, who played under Gambhir at Gujarat Titans, has been a regular in India’s T20 squad despite his limited contributions with the ball and in the field. Sundar, on the other hand, has been a consistent performer in domestic cricket and the IPL but has been overlooked in recent series. While there is no concrete evidence to support claims of favoritism, the perception persists due to the lack of transparency in the selection process.
What to Watch Next: The Road to the 2026 T20 World Cup
The coming months will be critical in determining whether the current controversy is a temporary blip or a sign of deeper dysfunction in India’s T20 setup. The BCCI’s next steps—particularly its response to the allegations of bias and its handling of the selection process—will shape public perception of Gambhir’s tenure and the team’s prospects in the 2026 T20 World Cup.
One key development to watch is whether the BCCI will formalize its selection criteria and make them public. Currently, the board relies on a five-member selection committee, led by Ajit Agarkar, to pick the squad, but the criteria used to evaluate players are not disclosed. Greater transparency in this process—such as publishing detailed rationales for selections or holding regular press briefings—could help rebuild trust among players and fans.
Another factor to monitor is the performance of the players currently in the squad. If India struggles in upcoming series, particularly against strong T20 sides like England and South Africa, the pressure on Gambhir and the selection committee will intensify. Conversely, if the team performs well, the current
Corrections
If you believe this article contains an error, contact Herald Express with the source URL and supporting evidence.
Story synopsis gathered from: Google News India – Sports — source.
