Gambhir’s Axar Patel Number 3 Gamble: A Masterstroke or a Fatal Flaw?
The Mullanpur crowd fell silent on a dewy December evening in 2025. Shubman Gill was back in the hut after a golden duck, and the script everyone expected was about to be ripped up. Instead of the in-form Tilak Varma or the captain Suryakumar Yadav, in walked Axar Patel. Yes, the all-rounder, known more for his tidy left-arm spin than his explosive hitting, was promoted to the crucial number 3 spot in a chase of 214. The mastermind behind this bold, some might say reckless, plan? New head coach Gautam Gambhir.
This single decision, born from a philosophy that “batting orders are overrated,” has become the defining talking point of the second T20I between India and South Africa. And the harsh reality is, it failed spectacularly. But to understand why, we need to dive deeper than just the scorecard.
Table of Contents
- The Gamble and the Fallout
- Gambhir’s New T20 Philosophy Explained
- Why Axar? The Strategic Logic (or Lack Thereof)
- De Kock and Chakaravarthy: The Other Key Players
- What Does This Mean for India’s Future?
- Conclusion
- Sources
The Gamble and the Fallout
South Africa, put into bat, were powered by a masterclass from wicketkeeper-batsman Quinton de Kock. His explosive 90 off just 46 balls, laced with 8 fours and 5 sixes, laid the foundation for a formidable total of 213/4 [[19], [22]]. Chasing such a total requires a lightning-fast start and a player who can dominate the powerplay.
Enter Axar Patel at number 3. The intention was clear: use his power-hitting ability to clear the short boundaries in the powerplay. However, the execution was a disaster. Axar looked completely out of his depth, struggling to time the ball and rotating the strike. His 21 runs came off a painstaking 21 deliveries before he was dismissed, leaving India reeling at 52/3 in the 7th over . This collapse from the top order effectively ended India’s hopes of a successful chase long before the middle overs began. The gamble didn’t just fail; it actively sabotaged the innings.
Gambhir’s New T20 Philosophy Explained
This isn’t just a one-off experiment. Head coach Gautam Gambhir has been vocal about his vision for the Indian T20 side. In the lead-up to this series, he stated, “I think batting orders are very overrated,” emphasizing a need for all-round aggression and flexibility [[11], [12]]. His goal is to build a side with seven to eight genuine bowling options that can bat deep till number 8 .
On paper, it sounds like a modern, dynamic approach perfectly suited for the chaotic nature of T20 cricket. The idea is to maximize every ball by sending in the player best suited to the situation, not just the next man on a pre-determined list. However, the execution in Mullanpur raises a critical question: is this philosophy being applied with enough tactical nuance, or is it just chaos disguised as strategy?
Why Axar? The Strategic Logic (or Lack Thereof)
So, what was the logic behind sending Axar Patel at number 3?
- Powerplay Aggression: The primary aim was to leverage his power-hitting against the new ball in the fielding restrictions.
- Balance: Promoting a bowling all-rounder might have been an attempt to maintain a better bowling balance for the rest of the innings.
- Surprise Factor: It was a clear attempt to disrupt the South African bowling plans by presenting an unexpected matchup.
While these points have a theoretical basis, they crumble under scrutiny in this specific context. Axar’s T20 strike rate in the powerplay (overs 1-6) in international cricket is far from explosive. He is a finisher, a player built for the death overs, not for anchoring or dominating a high-pressure chase from the get-go. The surprise factor was there, but it surprised the Indian batting lineup more than the opposition. The move felt less like a calculated risk and more like a philosophical statement with no regard for the player’s actual strengths or the match situation. For more on India’s tactical evolutions, see our analysis on [INTERNAL_LINK:india-t20-world-cup-strategy-2024].
De Kock and Chakaravarthy: The Other Key Players
While the Axar experiment dominated the headlines, two other players were central to the narrative of this match.
Quinton de Kock was in sublime form. His 90-run knock was a brutal display of clean hitting that took the game away from India in the first 10 overs . He now boasts over 11,500 runs in the T20 format, and his ability to play a long, dominant innings at the top makes him one of the most dangerous openers in the world .
On the bowling front for India, Varun Chakaravarthy was the lone bright spot. The mystery spinner was the pick of the bowlers, returning with an impressive 2/29 from his four overs [[21], [22]]. His ability to extract turn and deceive the batters, even on a good batting track, showcased why he is a vital part of India’s T20 plans. His performance was a masterclass in control, a stark contrast to the chaos at the top of the order. You can follow his career stats on ESPNcricinfo.
What Does This Mean for India’s Future?
Gambhir’s tenure is in its infancy, and it’s clear he’s willing to make bold, unconventional calls to shape the team in his image. However, this Axar Patel number 3 experiment serves as a cautionary tale. A philosophy, no matter how modern, must be grounded in reality. It must consider the individual skill-sets of the players at your disposal and the specific demands of the match situation.
If this approach continues without more careful application, it risks not only losing matches but also damaging the confidence of key players like Axar, who was set up to fail in a role he was never designed for. The line between fearless innovation and reckless abandon is a fine one, and India’s new management seems to be walking it on a tightrope.
Conclusion
The decision to send Axar Patel in at number 3 was a high-risk, high-reward gamble that crashed and burned. While Gautam Gambhir’s desire to break free from traditional T20 shackles is commendable, this particular move felt misjudged and poorly executed. South Africa’s massive total, built on De Kock’s brilliance, was always going to be a tough ask, but the top-order implosion, self-inflicted by this tactical blunder, made the chase impossible. The real test for Team India now is whether they can learn from this failure and refine their aggressive philosophy into a truly winning formula.