- ‘He should have opened’ – Murali Kartik slams Vaibhav Sooryavanshi’s Indian management Former India player Murali Kartik says Sanju Samson should have played at No.1.
- 3 in place of Vaibhav Sooryavanshi in the second T20I against New Zealand in Christchurch.
- ‘He should have opened’ – Murali Kartik slams India’s handling of Vaibhav Sooryavanshi (Photo Source: BCCI) Fifteen-year-old Vaibhav Sooryavanshi found himself in an unfamiliar position, batting at number 1, in the second T20I against New Zealand in Christchurch on Sunday (October 25).
‘He should have opened’ – Murali Kartik slams Vaibhav Sooryavanshi’s Indian management Former India player Murali Kartik says Sanju Samson should have played at No.1.
3 in place of Vaibhav Sooryavanshi in the second T20I against New Zealand in Christchurch. ‘He should have opened’ – Murali Kartik slams India’s handling of Vaibhav Sooryavanshi (Photo Source: BCCI) Fifteen-year-old Vaibhav Sooryavanshi found himself in an unfamiliar position, batting at number 1, in the second T20I against New Zealand in Christchurch on Sunday (October 25). 3 after he was brought in as a replacement for the injured Ishan Kishan.
The teenager, who was ruled out of the entire T20I series against the West Indies and also missed the series opener against the Kiwis, managed just four runs from eight deliveries in the role, promng heavy criticism from the team management over the decision. Former India player Murali Kartik was quick to personally defend Sooryavanshi and put the blame squarely on the management. During the post-match show on Sony Sports Network, Kartik argued that Sanju Samson should have stepped in as a senior member of the team at the No. 1 position.
3, rather than the 15-year-old being forced into an unfamiliar position in the middle class. “I have said this many times, even before the game started, especially before we batted. When you play against Vaibhav Sooryavanshi, where is he best? He is good as an opener.
They put it in the middle order. He didn’t play there, he’s a little boy and he only hit one way. This is precisely why there are experienced players who can play different roles.
In my opinion, he should have opened today even if they had won the game, which is a different matter when you play against Vaibhav Sooryavanshi,” Kartik said. Why did Kartik choose Samson for number 1? Kartik’s argument focused on the different profiles of players available to the Indian T20I leadership.
Abhishek Sharma and Samson are the two designated openers in the current T20I setup, but Kartik pointed out that Abhishek and Sooryavanshi have a very similar playing style that is best suited to the opening batting. Samson, on the other hand, is a much more versatile hitter who can play different positions in the order, making him a logical candidate for the No. 1 spot. 1 responsibility when the situation required it.
“Because Abhishek Sharma plays the same way and Vaibhav Sooryavanshi is also a similar player. Sanju Samson is a player who is a banker for you. He can play in different positions.
I agree that he may not be in that position and people may wonder why, but sometimes as an older and more experienced player you have to take on these roles. This is especially true if you have chosen Vaibhav Sooryavanshi,” he explained. The former player’s point of view was simple: asking Abhishek to lower the order would create the same problem since his game is based on the opening.
According to Kartik, Samson’s broader skillset made him the only realistic player who could fill the vacancy left by Kishan’s injury without upsetting the balance of the top order. Should Shivam Dube have replaced Ishan Kishan instead? Beyond the issue of batting positions, Kartik raised broader concerns about how the Indian management handled Kishan’s absence.
He argued that if the plan had been to always use Sooryavanshi in the middle order, then the management should have thought about picking Shivam Dube to replace Kishan from the start as Dube was a player specifically suited to that part of the innings. “If Vaibhav Sooryavanshi didn’t play today, it would be a different matter. Then Shivam Dube could have played if someone who cared about the middle class had wanted to.
I think it’s about bringing out the best in everyone and in that regard, Vaibhav should have opened Sooryavanshi,” he concluded. The former spinner’s overall position has been consistent throughout: Sooryavanshi’s value in the team is at the top of the rankings, placing him at number 1. 3 without previous experience in this role was a planning error by management, regardless of the outcome of the game.
India won the second T20I against New Zealand but Kartik claimed that the result did not justify the decision taken with the young batsman.
