The Gautam Gambhir-led team management was severely criticised for risking Washington Sundar in the 1st ODI against New Zealand.
An injured Washington Sundar came out to bat in the 1st ODI between India and New Zealand on Sunday, leaving many questioning the Gautam Gambhir-led management’s approach. Sundar remained unbeaten on 7 off 7 in the series opener, as KL Rahul finished off the tricky chase of 301 runs in Vadodara. But, soon after the game concluded, the spin-bowling all-rounder was ruled out of the series and replaced by Ayush Badoni. Seeing Sundar being risked despite the injury, former India batter Mohammad Kaif slammed the management for its double standards, citing Shubman Gill’s recent example.
Kaif reminded Gambhir and the Indian team management that Gill was ‘protected’ when he sustained an injury during the South Africa Test series. Surprisingly, however, the approach in Sundar’s case was different.
“You will remember when Shubman Gill was injured, he did not come out to bat in that Test match, the Kolkata Test. It was a high-scoring game and people thought that even 20 or 30 runs from him could help India win, but he still did not bat. That was done to give full protection to the player so the injury would not aggravate. But the same approach was not applied with Sundar. That is why I feel it was a wrong call. KL Rahul’s running between the wickets was affected. Even though India won the match, I feel there were higher chances of aggravating the injury in yesterday’s game,” Kaif said on his YouTube channel.
Though the Sundar stunt paid off and India won the match, Kaif feels the decision was risky as it could prolong the player’s absence from the team.
“If he is injured and you need runs at a run-a-ball, you should first try someone else. When a player is injured and you send him in under pressure, the injury can worsen. He couldn’t run doubles even though the ball was going to deep point or square leg, and he was only managing singles. Although the required run rate was around a run-a-ball and the match was under control, I felt that sending an injured player was risky. What might have been a one-week or ten-day injury could stretch to 20, 25, or even 30 days,” he added.
