408 runs. That is India’s greatest ever defeat in a Test at home.
Under Gautam Gambhir, India have now lost more Tests at home than they did in the previous decade.
Since taking over as head coach, Gambhir has overseen 10 defeats in 18 Tests — including two whitewashes against New Zealand and now South Africa, both on Indian soil. Ironically, as a player from 2004 to 2016, Gambhir lost only four home Tests. As coach, he has already lost five. The numbers tell a story that no spin can save.
After the 408-run humiliation in Guwahati, Gambhir was defiant yet defensive. “It is up to the BCCI to decide my future. But I am the same guy who got you results in England and was coach for the Champions Trophy,” he reminded the press, referring to India’s earlier successes this year. But the plea for perspective didn’t soften the optics — or the scoreline.
He added, “the blame lies with everyone and starts with me,” a rare admission. Yet if accountability begins with him, it also circles back to his decisions — and those have been baffling at best.
Gambhir has spoken about “prioritising Test cricket,” on Wednesday, saying, “that needs to be a collective effort and it depends on how much each individual cares for the dressing room.” The sentiment rings hollow when stacked against his selections.
Sarfaraz Khan, the most consistent batter at No. 5 in domestic circuit, was dropped after the Australia series amid whispers — never proven — that he was leaking dressing-room details. What is proven is his ability: his hundred against New Zealand was India’s lone bright spot in that series.
Karun Nair, who made a steady fifty in his last outing in England, didn’t get a look-in despite conditions that suit his game. When Gambhir says “prioritise Test cricket,” shouldn’t that start with rewarding domestic performers in Tests? Instead, we got Sai Sudarshan — whose first-class average is around 30 — drafted mainly because of IPL reputation.
Abhimanyu Easwaran remains India’s eternal twelfth man, more water-boy than Test hopeful.
Cheteshwar Pujara, Ravichandran Ashwin, Rohit Sharma and Virat Kohli have all stepped away from Tests, ushering in a transition that looked complete in England. But at home, the cracks have widened. Gambhir’s choices have deepened them.
It seems India’s longest format hasn’t been prioritised by anyone — not the BCCI, not the dressing room, not the coach.
After Guwahati, he admitted: “From 95/1 to 122/7 is not acceptable… you don’t blame any individual or any particular shot.” But that collapse was less about temperament than team balance.
His obsession with fielding multiple all-rounders has blurred roles beyond recognition.
Nitish Kumar Reddy is listed as an all-rounder but bowls little and bats even less. Washington Sundar and Ravindra Jadeja often bat above him, leaving one to wonder what Reddy’s role actually is.
Gambhir’s “horses for courses” approach has become a revolving-door policy where no one knows their course.
Worse, there’s no settled batting order. Sundar has batted everywhere from No. 3 at Eden Gardens to No. 8 in Guwahati. Stability — the cornerstone of any Test unit — is nowhere to be found.
Gambhir insists “batting orders are overrated,” but history, and India’s own success, say otherwise.
“You don’t need the most flamboyant and talented cricketers to play Test cricket,” Gambhir said after the defeat. “What we need is tough characters with limited skills. They make good Test cricketers.” That old-school grit sounds admirable, but grit alone doesn’t win when selection lacks sense and strategy.
For now, the scoreboard reads 408 runs — South Africa’s margin and India’s embarrassment. Gambhir says the future lies with the BCCI, but the present squarely with him. If this is how India “prioritises Test cricket,” it’s hard to tell where accountability ends and complacency begins.