DK Slams Gambhir’s Sundar No. 3 Gamble: A Risky Bet?
The cricketing world is abuzz after a major strategic call in the first Test between India and South Africa in Kolkata. The decision to send Washington Sundar in at the pivotal Sundar No. 3 position has drawn sharp criticism from veteran commentator and former wicketkeeper-batsman Dinesh Karthik. His concerns go beyond the immediate match result, striking at the heart of player development and role identity in the modern game.
Table of Contents
- Karthik’s Bold Warning on the Long-Term Impact
- Why Did India Choose Sundar at No. 3?
- Sundar’s Proven Record: A Glimpse at His All-Round Prowess
- India’s Lingering No. 3 Crisis: A Revolving Door
- The Coach’s Perspective: Gambhir’s Vision
- The Road Ahead for Sundar and Team India
- Conclusion
- Sources
Karthik’s Bold Warning on the Long-Term Impact
Dinesh Karthik didn’t mince words. He described the move as “very tricky,” highlighting a fundamental conflict in the player’s role. His primary concern is that the immense pressure and technical demands of batting at No. 3 in Test cricket could come at the expense of Sundar’s bowling.
“This could affect his bowling in the long run,” Karthik cautioned . The logic is simple: the preparation, mindset, and physical focus required to anchor an innings at No. 3 are vastly different from those of a bowling all-rounder who typically bats in the lower middle order. By asking Sundar to take on this new, massive responsibility, the team management might be inadvertently diluting his effectiveness as a primary weapon with the ball.
Karthik’s fear is that Sundar might start seeing himself more as a batsman who bowls, rather than a bowler who can bat—a subtle but critical shift that could alter his entire career trajectory .
Why Did India Choose Sundar at No. 3?
This bold experiment by head coach Gautam Gambhir appears to be a direct response to India’s persistent search for a reliable No. 3 batsman. The team has been in constant flux at this position. Since the 2024 New Zealand series at home, India has cycled through a staggering eight different players at No. 3 in just 12 Tests, including Virat Kohli, Shubman Gill, and Karun Nair .
Faced with this instability, the management may have looked at Sundar’s solid first-class record, which includes a century batting at No. 3 for Tamil Nadu in the 2024-25 Ranji Trophy . The idea was likely to inject technical stability into a troubled top order, leveraging his ability to occupy the crease.
Sundar’s Proven Record: A Glimpse at His All-Round Prowess
Washington Sundar has already established himself as a valuable asset for India in the Test arena. In his 16 Test matches, he has amassed 821 runs at an impressive average of 43.21, including one century and five fifties .
However, his true value has often been his ability to contribute with both bat and ball. He was a standout performer against England in 2025, scoring 284 runs and claiming seven crucial wickets across four Tests . This dual threat is what makes him such a unique player and why Karthik’s warning carries so much weight. Messing with a successful formula could be a costly gamble.
India’s Lingering No. 3 Crisis: A Revolving Door
The No. 3 spot, once the domain of legends like Rahul Dravid, has become a problem area for the current Indian side. The constant chopping and changing has created a vacuum of consistency .
This desperate search has led to some unconventional solutions. While the intention behind promoting Sundar is understandable—to find a technically sound, patient batsman—the execution raises serious questions about player management. Is it fair to a specialist bowler to shoulder such a monumental batting burden?
The Coach’s Perspective: Gambhir’s Vision
Head coach Gautam Gambhir, a former top-order batsman himself, is known for his aggressive and sometimes uncompromising approach. His strategy seems to be about maximizing the team’s collective batting strength, even if it means redefining a player’s role. After the match, he defended the pitch and the team’s overall strategy, stating, “This is what we wanted,” suggesting a long-term plan beyond the immediate result .
However, this vision is now under intense scrutiny. Critics argue that short-term fixes in the batting order shouldn’t come at the cost of a player’s long-term development and core skill set.
The Road Ahead for Sundar and Team India
The question now is what comes next. Will this Sundar No. 3 experiment be a one-off, or is it the start of a new chapter in his career? His performance with the bat in Kolkata will be heavily dissected, but the more important metric might be his bowling output in the next match. If his bowling rhythm or confidence is affected, Dinesh Karthik’s warning will be vindicated.
For Team India, the challenge is to find a balance. They need to solve their No. 3 conundrum without jeopardizing the unique talents of their all-rounders. This situation underscores a common dilemma in modern cricket: how to best utilize multi-skilled players without stretching them too thin.
Conclusion
Dinesh Karthik’s critique of the Sundar No. 3 move is a timely reminder of the delicate balance between team strategy and individual player welfare. While the search for a solid No. 3 is a genuine problem for India, the solution might not lie in fundamentally altering the role of a proven bowling all-rounder. The long-term health of Washington Sundar’s career, and by extension, the Indian bowling attack, may be the true cost of this high-stakes experiment. The upcoming matches in the series will be a crucial test of both Sundar’s adaptability and the wisdom of the team management’s bold call.