Analysing Agarkar & Co: India’s selection committee has been an unfair target in the Gambhir era

Vice-captain Shubman Gill was dropped after a relatively long run of under-performance in the shortest format. The seemingly-forced backing of Gill at the top of the order when multiple more explosive options were available at India’s disposal made his spot in the World Cup squad look like a foregone conclusion. Instead, Agarkar and Co chose to leave the Test and ODI captain out and bring a red-hot, SMAT-winning captain Ishan Kishan in the mix.

While the merit of the decision would be judged in hindsight by most, based on how it turns out, in principle, it feels like the right, even if tough, call has been made - much in line with how the Agarkar-led committee has functioned through its two-and-a-half year tenure.

Also read: Explained: Why Shubman Gill was left out of India's 2026 T20 World Cup squad

Agarkar’s time as chief selector has been far from easy. One can argue that this is a thankless role even at the best of times, especially in this part of the world, but Indian cricket has gone through a particularly tumultuous period during Agarkar’s tenure, right from the very beginning.

The ex-Mumbai and India quick took over in July 2023, when the position was vacant for five months following Chetan Sharma’s resignation after he was caught in a sting operation. The metaphorical bar was in hell. Agarkar brought an air of professionalism and respectability to the chair, fronting up to the media often, explaining the rationale behind his picks and the vision of the committee. Transparency and BCCI don’t usually go hand-in-hand, but Agarkar’s committee has seemed to make an attempt.

Then there’s been the small matter of big-ticket retirements and an extended transition. Several high-profile Test players called it quits in close proximity after prolonged periods of poor form, some of their own volition, and some after reportedly being given the nudge. How much of a role the selection committee had to play in those retirements can be endlessly debated, but what’s more important to acknowledge is how much it increased the complexity of their jobs. The last major transition of this scale in Indian cricket perhaps came in the early 2010s, when the Tendulkars, Dravids, and Zaheers gave way to Kohlis, Pujaras, and Shamis.

Selection by design, not default

Beyond dealing with the obvious challenges, what has set Agarkar’s selection committee apart has just been the quality of squads they have picked over the last two years - particularly in white-ball cricket - and how many of their calls have paid off.

The first major assignment for Agarkar and Co was the 2023 home World Cup, where India had a stellar run up until the fateful final. A mid-tournament injury to Hardik Pandya forced them to change the balance of their XI, but it was more down to the uniqueness of Pandya’s skills than a poorly-structured squad.

In T20Is, India groomed Yashasvi Jaiswal and Shubman Gill as openers for the 2024 T20 World Cup. But when Kohli and Rohit made themselves available for the event, they were always coming back. Both eventually played significant roles in the victory, but India were prepared with backups if they didn’t turn up.

Rinku Singh, despite his amazing start to international cricket, was overlooked for the in-form and multi-dimensional Shivam Dube. Agarkar came out and clarified that it was more to do with covering enough bases than Rinku being at any fault: “It’s probably the toughest thing that we have had to discuss, frankly. He [Rinku] has done nothing wrong, nor a Shubman Gill, for that matter. It’s the combinations. We are not quite sure what conditions we’ll get, so we wanted to try and have enough options,” he explained.

Dube played all eight games in the World Cup and bowled just one over, but his presence gave India the cushion they were looking for in both departments, and his cameo in the final eventually proved defining.

Thinking ahead

Following the victorious campaign, Kohli, Rohit and Jadeja retired, and Rahul Dravid’s tenure as head coach came to an end, allowing Agarkar and Co to blood the plethora of young talent from the IPL waiting to be unleashed. Abhishek Sharma’s fast-track to the T20I team after a destructive IPL 2024 was questioned for being too quick, but it has paid dividends, with the left-hander heading into the next World Cup as India’s most important batter. Varun Chakravarthy was recalled after consistent IPL campaigns. He’s now developed into arguably the most complete T20 spinner of this era. Shivam Dube has not only been persisted with, his bowling is also at a visibly better place than it was during the previous World Cup, evident in his new-ball spell in the Asia Cup final.

In ODIs, India dropped a regular wicket-taker in Mohammed Siraj for the Champions Trophy citing his relative lack of effectiveness with the older ball and gave a debut to Chakravarthy. While the decision was widely criticised, it was based on more than raw numbers. There was merit in it, considering the dry conditions India were playing in in the UAE. Chakravarthy ended up being the joint second-highest wicket-taker and India didn’t miss Siraj on their way to the title.

Another major call with long-term implications that the Agarkar committee took in ODIs was the change of guard from Rohit to Gill during the Australia tour this year. With two years to go for the next ODI World Cup, the timing of the switch was as close to ideal as it could have been. Rohit would be 40 by the time the 2027 World Cup comes along. Playing only one format, the risk of losing form or fitness (or both) increases. Handing over the leadership to Gill gives the youngster time to settle into the role while keeping options open in case Rohit’s form drops off. Given that Rohit was coming right off a Champions Trophy victory and there was nothing wrong with his ODI batting, it would have been a tough call to make, and was naturally met with backlash. But it didn’t prevent them from making the call.

Of course, there have been a few misses too, the biggest one being Jaiswal not becoming a T20I regular after the 2024 World Cup. But that has been a product of BCCI forcefully pushing Gill as an all-format face of Indian cricket as they look to build for a future without Kohli and Rohit, more than the selectors not recognising Jaiswal’s potential. To further nitpick, perhaps someone like Riyan Parag could have been given more opportunities in the white-ball set-up as an all-rounder, and Nitish Kumar Reddy could have been used more optimally across formats.

The general reception of Agarkar’s tenure when it comes to Test cricket has been in sharp contrast to the limited-overs formats, given India’s dismal record in Tests in the last one year. But a lot of the criticism has been misguided, as Agarkar and Co have been clubbed with the Gautam Gambhir-led team management, which has taken a significantly higher number of questionable calls in the last 18 months. As far as squad selections go, barring the continued exclusion of Sarfaraz Khan - which might have disciplinary undertones to it - a regimented process has been followed, where performers in domestic cricket have graduated to the India A level, and then to the national Test team.

Ultimately, whether the Gill omission pays off in the 2026 T20 World Cup or not will be decided on the field, as all selection calls eventually are. If it doesn’t, be ready for Agarkar to be slammed left, right, and center. But what it represents is far more significant than the fate of one player or one tournament. Over the last two-and-a-half years, this selection committee has consistently shown a willingness to plan ahead, prioritise roles over reputations, make unpopular decisions without hiding behind silence, and change track when necessary. In an ecosystem long shaped by sentiment and star power, Indian selection has felt like a process - imperfect, occasionally flawed, but purposeful. And that, perhaps more than any single result, is why Agarkar’s tenure deserves to be viewed as a step forward.