By Admin 
The first cracks in a magnificent edifice constructed with passion and care and skill and ruthless efficiency by a couple of generations of players over a period of a dozen years started to surface some 12 and a half months back. By November 2025, those cracks mushroomed into gaping holes, bringing down the structure completely and leaving the aura of Indian home invincibility in Test cricket in complete ruins.
There was a time when even the mightiest of sides trembled at the prospect of flying out to India for red-ball showdowns. India were formidable everywhere in the world, but particularly unstoppable in their backyard, using their familiarity with the unique conditions and their plethora of accomplished superstars to repel the occasional spirited challenge with an iron hand. A 1-2 defeat at the hands of Alastair Cook’s England in December 2012 was the catalyst for an extraordinary run during which they lost just four Tests from the beginning of 2013 to nearly the end of 2024. Then, Tom Latham and New Zealand came riding on optimism more than conviction, were pleasantly surprised at the ease with which India surrendered their hegemony and inadvertently set the template that Temba Bavuma’s World Test Champions finetuned over the last fortnight in splendid style.
A quarter of a century after Hansie Cronje led South Africa to what hitherto was their only series victory in India, Bavuma’s brave band recreated history with another 2-0 sweep that has sent the Indian cricket ecosystem to the throes of panic. All good things in life must come to an end and the cyclical nature of competitive sport dictates that such an eventuality would transpire at some stage, but confronted with the harsh reality check that is now hanging around their collective necks like a giant millstone, Indian Test cricket finds itself at a crossroads.
The crisis has been exacerbated by a series of poor decisions that haven’t helped the cause. While it is true that India are in a transitional phase following the retirements in the last 11 months of three of their long-serving virtuosos, the fact that they haven’t been able to summon their competitive instincts and pride in their own patch has been particularly disappointing.
There is no shame in admitting that South Africa came better prepared, armed with not just a terrific pace attack – severely weakened once Kagiso Rabada was ruled out of both matches with a rib injury – but also two wonderful, experienced spinners and batters who were willing to put in the hard yards. South Africa’s preparations entailed a tour of Pakistan, which in many ways proved to be the ideal build-up. After a big loss in the opening Test, the visitors came back strongly to score a commanding victory in the next in Islamabad, carrying confidence and momentum across the border. India, by contrast, embarked on a meaningless white-ball misadventure to Australia in the gap between Test series at home against West Indies and South Africa.
Shubman Gill, hastily made the One-Day International skipper to go with his T20I vice-captaincy, only landed in Kolkata some three days before the first Test, the hectic activities of the past five months surely a contributory factor to the neck spasms that restricted his batting in the first Test to three deliveries and kept him out of the second in Guwahati. Without their captain and their best batter since the tour of England in the summer, India rolled over without a fight; after four ill-fated innings on a snake-pit at the Eden Gardens and an excellent cricket strip in Guwahati’s debut as a Test venue, only two batters topped 100 runs for the series where South Africa had seven such individuals.
India were outbatted, yes, but they were also outbowled, out-fielded and out-strategised consistently, the lessons that ought to have been learned from the whitewash against New Zealand completely ignored. Gautam Gambhir, the beleaguered head coach, sought to distance the New Zealand loss from the South African implosion, seeking to take refuge in the ‘transition’ tack that he had assiduously avoided until the shattering 408-run defeat in Guwahati on Wednesday.
There had been no sign of transition being a stumbling block during the honourable 2-2 stalemate in England over the summer, or during the 2-0 conquest of West Indies in Ahmedabad and New Delhi last month. For that to be used as a factor to explain away the abject surrender to the Proteas seems a little convenient, an excuse that truly hasn’t resonated with India’s disillusioned fans whose collective disappointment is gradually turning into ire.
During their wonderful run when they found ways and means to overcome occasional moments of crises, such as against Australia in 2017, and England in 2021 and 2024 when they lost the first Test of each of the three series before storming back with fearsome intent, India wore a settled look, with changes minimal and strategic rather than based on a wing and a prayer.
Under Virat Kohli, even when there was the odd surprise inclusion or shock omission, one could understand the horses-for-courses approach, even if one didn’t always agree with it. Now, specialists seem to be rapidly going out the window. There is a marked slant towards ‘all-rounders’, genuine and hopeful, which has proved to be a self-destructive pathway.
In Kolkata and Guwahati, India had only six specialists — K.L. Rahul, Yashashvi Jaiswal, Kuldeep Yadav, Jasprit Bumrah and Mohammed Siraj in both games, with Sai Sudharsan replacing Gill for the second Test — and five all-rounders of varying hues. Among them were two wicketkeepers, one of them (Dhurv Jurel) playing as a batter, and a multitude of ‘multi-faceted’ players — Ravindra Jadeja and Washington Sundar (both matches), and Axar Patel in Kolkata and Nitish Kumar in Guwahati. Axar was one of four spinners at Eden Gardens in his first Test in 18 months, which meant Washington got to bowl just one over, while Nitish’s medium-pace was used sparingly in Guwahati, which begged the question if a specialist batter wouldn’t have been a more prudent option.
Constant reshuffling
There have been constant reshuffles to the batting order, with the pieces moved around willy-nilly. Gambhir pointed to the lack of Test experience — ‘Several of the batters have played less than 15 Tests’ — and said players were learning on the job, in a manner of speaking. Test cricket cannot be a finishing school, it can’t be used as an experimental stage. There is no little virtue in plumping for those who have come through the domestic grind, those who have stacked up 70 and 80 and 90 First Class appearances and produced the runs that ought to count for something. India could have turned to Karun Nair, Sarfaraz Khan, even Ruturaj Gaikwad, to bolster their tottering middle-order, especially once Gill was a doubt for the second Test. But by continuing to place their eggs in the all-rounder basket, they were playing themselves into a hole, clambering out of which will take some doing.
India don’t play a Test match till next August and their next home assignment, a five-Test series against Australia, isn’t until early 2027. They have nine Tests left in the league phase of the current cycle of the World Test Championship and, barring a miracle, they will again witness the final from the confines of their living room, so far behind have they fallen in the race midway through their campaign following the unexpected debacle against the Proteas.
The time between now and August, when they travel to Sri Lanka after a nine-year hiatus, must be used judiciously. There isn’t too much domestic red-ball cricket lined up, just the last two league rounds of the Ranji Trophy from January, followed by the knockouts, which doesn’t help, but in any case, domestic First Class runs don’t seem to count for a great deal, so that shouldn’t come as a deterrent.
Gambhir might have used white-ball successes (the Champions Trophy and T20 Asia Cup titles) to ward off questions about whether he is still the right man for the Test job, but the magnitude of the woes that confront him will not be lost on the feisty former opener who must be feeling helpless and frustrated at the lack of fight and application of his wards. It is incumbent upon him and chief selector Ajit Agarkar to clear a mess that they have helped create.
What the roadmap must be will remain a topic of conjecture and debate, but there needs to be a definitive, structured pathway to redemption in which the expertise of V.V.S. Laxman, the head of the Centre of Excellence, must also be tapped into. Gambhir and Agarkar can no longer afford to function in a vacuum; much damage has already been done to India’s standing as a Test behemoth and while the (forced?) retirements of Kohli, Rohit Sharma and R. Ashwin have doubtlessly contributed to this debacle because such experience and class can’t be replaced overnight, that can’t be the sole prop on which the tottering structure can be wished away any longer.
Transparency and messaging, among the strongest suits of previous leadership groups, must resurface because the worst environment in which players can be put is when uncertainty and insecurity go hand in glove.
They are hardly the ideal precursors to consistency in performances, but the players must also figure out if they are committed to Test cricket, or are merely content paying lip service to the five-day game. Some of the shot-making over the last two weeks has been preposterous; there has been little respect for either the game situation or the nature of the surface and the quality of the opposition bowling, which can be construed as a lack of investment in a format still considered the most challenging and rewarding even though the shorter limited-overs versions have taken over as the in-things.
South Africa played superb cricket, let’s not forget, and their 2-0 sweep didn’t come about only because of Indian failings. But to watch the Indian wheels come off so dramatically was chastening, humbling, painful almost. Simon Harmer, the off-spinner who was the Player-of-the-Series for his 17 scalps, insisted that a ‘hurting’ India will come back stronger. Do his Indian counterparts entertain the same conviction?