Former India star pinpoints glaring flaws in Shubman Gill's captaincy

India’s 1-2 ODI series loss to New Zealand has ignited fresh discussion around Shubman Gill’s development as a leader, shifting focus from his unquestioned batting class to his decision-making under pressure. Former India spinner Ravichandran Ashwin, known for his sharp tactical insights, offered a pointed assessment of Gill’s captaincy in a detailed analysis on his YouTube channel.

Ashwin zeroed in on what he felt was a lack of strategic clarity, particularly during the middle overs of the second and third ODIs. According to him, India failed to manage their bowling resources effectively at crucial moments, a trait that separated Gill from seasoned leaders like MS Dhoni and Rohit Sharma.

Drawing comparisons with those former captains, Ashwin explained that their greatness stemmed from an instinctive understanding of when to deploy specific bowlers and against which batters. That situational awareness, he felt, was missing in this series. In his view, Gill did not consistently turn to his strongest options when the game was hanging in the balance.

Also Read: Former star sounds alarm on India’s late-over bowl

Ashwin questioned the handling of Kuldeep Yadav in the third ODI. He questioned why Gill hesitated to use Kuldeep aggressively against New Zealand’s middle order, especially Daryl Mitchell and Glenn Phillips. Ashwin suggested that past setbacks appeared to influence Gill’s thinking, leading to a visible erosion of trust in his bowlers.

“You can’t judge a bowler solely on what happened in the previous match,” Ashwin observed, stressing that confidence from the captain is vital in tight situations.

Ashwin was particularly surprised by the absence of tactical flexibility. He believed Kuldeep should have been used in short, sharp spells to target Phillips’ technical vulnerabilities, even if that meant conceding a few singles to Mitchell. In Ashwin’s assessment, Gill seemed to lack a clear alternative plan, choosing instead to protect Kuldeep rather than unleashing him as a partnership-breaker.