OPINION | Indian cricket is caught in a web of its own making

Kohli era’s approach prioritised overseas wins

Starting in the mid-2010s, Indian cricket made a concerted decision to become a world-class side abroad. The logic was straightforward. Invest in pace, prepare for fast and bouncy foreign wickets, and win where it matters most. The payoff came in the form of memorable overseas wins: successive series triumphs in Australia, drawn series in England, and credible performances in South Africa.

By building a potent pace arsenal in Jasprit Bumrah, Mohammed Shami, Mohammed Siraj, Ishant Sharma, Umesh Yadav and Bhuvneshwar Kumar, India recalibrated its identity. But this success came at a cost.

At home, all bets are off

At home, India began preparing more aggressive, result-oriented pitches. The curators crafted “rank turners” that would turn sharply, but also deteriorate quickly and create wickets. The assumption was that Indian batters, schooled on spin, would dominate, and that opposition attacks would be out-bowled. That model worked fine as long as India had the likes of Virat Kohli, Cheteshwar Pujara, Ajinkya Rahane, and Rohit Sharma, batters well versed in spin, mindset and shot discipline.

Also, India had quality spin all-rounders like Ravichandran Ashwin and Ravindra Jadeja who could seize control and save India from collapse.

But with that core now trimmed and most of the skilled batters retired, the strategy is straining. The batsmen currently walking in do not have the same experience or technical finesse. When Harmer and Keshav Maharaj clawed through the Indian lineup in Kolkata, they did so not just because the pitch helped but because the opposition’s defence lacked both conviction and classical technique.

IPL’s a double-edged sword

Critics argue that this collision between strategy and personnel is now being exposed in full. A deeper issue sits beneath the scorecards. The new generation of Indian batters has grown up in the era of the IPL, where range-hitting and power metrics are often prioritised over the ability to build innings on turning tracks. It has created wonderfully gifted hitters, but not necessarily batters equipped for a 60-over grind against high-quality spin on deteriorating surfaces.

India team management’s false assumptions

So why does the management continue to back these tricky surfaces? Head coach Gautam Gambhir defended the Eden Gardens pitch after the defeat, insisting it was not “unplayable” and that such wickets were exactly what the team had asked for. In his view, the surface was meant to examine “technique and mental toughness,” rewarding those who defended well and applied themselves. Gambhir argued that in the WTC era, teams cannot afford to play on flat, lifeless tracks that stretch into the fifth day without producing results.

He also maintained that these conditions do not unfairly favour spinners, pointing out that seamers claimed a majority of the wickets. Crucially, he said these drier, more responsive pitches actually reduce the toss’s influence, because both sides are challenged from the outset. It is a philosophy that prioritises result-oriented cricket even if, as the Kolkata loss showed, the biggest test sometimes ends up being for India’s own batters.

Still, many see some dissonance in that logic. If the plan is to make them unplayable, why have batters who struggle against them? Former players have warned that what made this thinking work earlier no longer holds. The game has changed and along with that Indian personnel have changed.

A familiar pattern

It’s not just about one match or one series. This isn’t even the first time in recent memory that spin has undone India at home. Last year’s 0–3 loss to New Zealand on slow turning tracks also raised red flags. In that series, Indian batters were exposed repeatedly by spin, leading to widespread discussion about technique, selection, and pitch preparation.

Before that was the first test loss against England in 2024 (when Tom Hartley took 7 wickets in the Hyderabad Test). The list is long. In December 2022, India had stuttered to 74 for 7 chasing 145 against Bangladesh in Mirpur, before Shreyas Iyer and Ravi Ashwin guided India home safely. All of this data suggests that India’s batting building blocks, over the years, may no longer be engineered for long, grinding Test cricket.

Recovery has to start at the grassroots

Recovery demands more than introspection. If India truly wants to reset, they must reckon with several uncomfortable changes.

First, the surfaces must be rebalanced. Turning tracks can remain part of Indian cricket but they must be used judiciously, not as a default weapon. Curators should prepare pitches that encourage innings-building, rather than immediate chaos.

Second, India must re-embrace red-ball cricket at the grassroots. Even in the Ranji Trophy, many captains prefer relying on medium pacers and cutters, which are more immediately effective in limited-overs formats. Spinners rarely bowl long spells across four days, and batters rarely face the kind of gruelling spin that once shaped India’s finest. The result is a shrinking pool of elite spinners and a generation of batters under-exposed to the very skill they are now asked to master at Test level. Domestic tournaments should incorporate conditions that replicate subcontinental spin challenges but also encourage patience, and classical defence.

Third, coaching structures need to re-focus on spin. Young batters must be taught how to read release points, move their feet, keep soft hands, rotate strike, and bat on turning tracks for hours. These are skills that don’t come overnight; they must be nurtured at every level.

Finally, India’s identity in Test cricket requires rethinking. For decades, they dominated at home because they could bat well on turning tracks. They overturned visiting teams because they could spin-dance, defend or attack as needed. But now, their success abroad has come at the cost of triumphs at home. To remain a top Test side, India must rebuild a batting philosophy that is balanced, not front-loaded toward pace or spin but both.