Team Important, No Room for Stars!

Shubman Gill’s omission from India’s latest T20 squad has triggered widespread debate across the cricketing landscape. While chief selector Ajit Agarkar chose not to address the issue directly at the press conference, speculation has centred on the influence of head coach Gautam Gambhir and his uncompromising philosophy that no individual should eclipse the team.

Gill, admired for his classical technique and rapidly growing stature, has become one of the most recognisable faces of contemporary Indian cricket. However, Gambhir — long vocal about his resistance to “star culture”— is believed to favour a collective-first approach, where reputation and visibility carry little weight. Critics argue that this thinking appears selective, especially in a squad that continues to accommodate Hardik Pandya, whose flamboyant persona, off-field visibility and leadership role make him one of Indian cricket’s most prominent figures.

The contrast has raised a fundamental question: is Gill’s omission rooted in cricketing logic or in an ideological stance taken by the coach?

At the heart of the debate lies a delicate balance between individuality and conformity in modern cricket. Is Shubman Gill paying the price for being too visible, too admired, and too emblematic of a new star-driven era? Or is his omission a purely tactical call?

For now, Gill’s absence serves as a telling reminder that talent alone does not guarantee a place — especially under a coach whose ideology prioritises the collective over celebrity. Whether Gambhir’s approach ultimately strengthens Indian cricket or risks stifling its brightest talents will only become clear in the months ahead.

The Larger Question

Voices from the Cricketing World

Sushil Doshi (Hindi commentator) believes the decision may be format-driven. “Maybe Gambhir felt Gill is too classical for the shortest format. He will certainly be part of the ODI and Test teams, where technical soundness is vital. Restricting star culture and forming a young team can misfire in Tests, where experience and class are crucial. Gambhir should also remember that he is a coach, not a selector. He works with a team chosen by the selectors — why should he take responsibility for the selection?”

Pranab Roy (former selector) views the omission as a continuation of India’s evolving T20 strategy. “Gambhir is trying to build a culture where everyone is treated equally and the team’s needs come first. In this case, it seems to be more about strike rate. India wants to go hard from ball one, as seen in recent T20Is, and certain players suit that approach better. This thinking began under Rohit Sharma and is essential if India wants to stay ahead of the curve in modern T20 cricket.”

Saad Bin Jung (former first-class cricketer) offers a more psychological perspective. “Gambhir spent much of his career in the shadows of legends like Sehwag, Tendulkar, Dravid and Laxman. Despite that, he carved out his own identity through grit and fearlessness. That mindset defines him as a coach. He expects players to fully dedicate themselves to the team and stand on their own merit. When he feels that balance is missing, he acts. To him, Gill may simply be another gifted player who needs correction — and there’s nothing inherently wrong with that.”