Why it's Testing times for coach Gautam Gambhir and Team India

India Today

15 hours ago

It seemed like the arc of a big-budget Bollywood drama: the arrival of a fiery new lead, an early rush of optimism, some swaggering victories, and then—just as the music swells—an abrupt turn into trouble. Gautam Gambhir's tenure as India's head coach has so far been part thriller, part family saga and part box-office misfire.When the former opener took over from Rahul Dravid in July 2024, ahead of a white-ball tour of Sri Lanka, it was billed as a new era: intense, fearless and unflinchingly direct. Few, however, anticipated how quickly the romance of appointment would give way to the grind of responsibility. India won the T-20 series 3-0 in Sri Lanka but lost the ODIs 0-2.advertisementYes, there has been silverware—the Champions Trophy crown in February 2025 and an almost unblemished T20 record that includes clean sweeps against Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, besides beating South Africa 3-1 in November 2024 and England 4-1 in January-February this year. But Test cricket—that old, unsparing critic—has been far less kind.Since Gambhir took charge, India have played 11 Tests: won three, lost seven and drawn one. The win percentage—just 27.3 per cent—is unsettling by Indian standards. The contrast between formats couldn't be starker: in white-ball cricket, India have thrived. In the longest form, they've stumbled, often spectacularly.
But as in any great script, the coach is not the only character in this unfolding drama. The supporting cast has fumbled its lines too—dropped catches, misfiring bowlers, fragile middle orders. Gambhir's role is under scrutiny, yes. But so is the very fabric of India's Test blueprint.It would be safe to surmise that Gambhir's apprenticeship as India's head coach is now firmly behind him. When the former opener succeeded Rahul Dravid in July 2024, ahead of a white-ball tour of Sri Lanka, few could have anticipated how quickly the romance of appointment would give way to the reality of pressure. But in cricket, as in life, the longer format remains the true crucible. And there, the figures are far less forgiving.THE LITMUS TESTIndia's Test troubles began last year at home—ironically, their fortress. In a rain-curtailed match in Bengaluru against New Zealand, Rohit Sharma opted to bat first on a damp surface. India were skittled for 46, their lowest-ever home total. What could have been dismissed as a freak collapse turned into a pattern as India went on to lose 0-3 to the visiting Kiwis, the spinners feasting on frail techniques and poor footwork.The whitewash inflicted by New Zealand stripped much of the sheen from India's 2-0 Test series victory over Bangladesh in September 2024—a series where the opposition offered little resistance. Then came the marquee tour of Australia, stretching from November to January. A famous 295-run triumph in Perth briefly rekindled hope, but it was swiftly extinguished by three sobering defeats.advertisementIndia's vulnerabilities were laid bare by their second-innings batting collapses: 175 in Adelaide (a 10-wicket loss), 8 without loss in Brisbane (match drawn), 155 in Melbourne (a 184-run defeat), and 157 in Sydney (defeated by six wickets). Such performances with the bat simply do not win you Test matches.Ironically, in the very Perth Test they won, India had been bowled out for just 150 in the first innings. Yet they rallied spectacularly in the second, declaring at 487 for 6—a commanding total that piled pressure on Australia and paved the way for a memorable victory.Then came June 2025—and with it, England. In Leeds, India walked into Headingley in the throes of transition: no Rohit Sharma, no Virat Kohli, no R. Ashwin. This, for all intents and purposes, was Gambhir's India—a fledgling side led by Shubman Gill, flanked by the youthful promise of Yashasvi Jaiswal, Sai Sudharsan and Rishabh Pant. The result? Another defeat. But this one was as humbling as it was instructive.On a seaming Headingley pitch, India's batting order once again unravelled—not so much from lack of ability as from an alarming absence of application. Despite producing five centuries across the match, the side's brittle underbelly was ruthlessly exposed. In the first innings, only five batters reached double figures; of the remaining six, three were dismissed for ducks.advertisementThe second innings echoed the same dysfunction: three ducks, three others scoring 4, 4 and 8, with just five again crossing into double digits. The five centuries—so valuable in isolation—were effectively nullified by the anaemia of the rest. And yet, the blame cannot rest solely with the players.Head coach Gambhir, for all his vaunted cricketing intelligence and warrior's mindset, must shoulder a measure of responsibility. His combative persona may have set the press gallery alight, but his strategic imprint on this Test side remains elusive. The batting group, in particular, has displayed no coherent plan against lateral movement—a curious blind spot in a country where the ball is known to speak from the first session to the last.What makes it more confounding is that Gambhir's own playing career was built on grit and adaptability, especially in challenging overseas conditions. His teams, thus far, have shown worryingly little of either.BLAME GAME, BIG PICTUREBut here's the inconvenient truth: a coach is only as good as his players. And cricket, most cruelly in Tests, offers no hiding place for errors that unfold over five days.advertisementIn that first Test against England, one top-order batter played across the line, gifting his wicket cheaply. A slip fielder shelled a regulation catch. A star bowler—expected to lead the attack—failed to take a single second-innings wicket. Gambhir could do little. In such a scenario, India were always destined to lose. It was not strategy that failed, but execution.That said, the coach is not blameless. Selection calls, rotation management, field settings and the overall tactical narrative remain squarely his remit. Why persist with some bowlers in conditions unsuited to them? Why the hesitation to groom a left-arm spinner when most of India's defeats have come without them? And why this inconsistency in trusting youth, one match too soon or one series too late?Gambhir's supporters argue he is still early into the job. His critics wonder aloud whether the learning curve, given the stakes, can afford to be so steep.Indeed, Gambhir was never expected to be Dravid. His appointment wasn't about calm stewardship—it was about changing gears. If Dravid was 'The Wall', Gambhir was brought in to rattle it, to infuse aggression, self-belief and a harder edge. That philosophy has, to some extent, delivered dividends in white-ball cricket. But Test cricket, with its long shadows and slower reckonings, demands more than passion. It demands patience, systems and the quiet, meticulous art of preparation.advertisementWhat Gambhir must now decide is whether he is content to be a man of mood and momentum—or if he can become a craftsman of the format that still defines cricket's highest theatre.Subscribe to India Today Magazine- EndsMust Watch