[cricknation_live_score match=”‘He would have panicked’ – Sadagoppan Ramesh’s blunt claim on Vaibhav Sooryavanshi being sent to bat at No. 3 in 2nd T20I vs New Zealand”]
- “He would have panicked” – Sadagoppan Ramesh’s brutal claim that Vaibhav Sooryavanshi was sent to bat at No.1.
- 3 in the 2nd T20I against New Zealand Former Indian cricketer Sadagoppan Ramesh has questioned the decision to send Vaibhav Sooryavanshi at number 3.
- 3 in the 2nd T20I against New Zealand in Christchurch.
“He would have panicked” – Sadagoppan Ramesh’s brutal claim that Vaibhav Sooryavanshi was sent to bat at No.1.
3 in the 2nd T20I against New Zealand Former Indian cricketer Sadagoppan Ramesh has questioned the decision to send Vaibhav Sooryavanshi at number 3. 3 in the 2nd T20I against New Zealand in Christchurch. Vaibhav Sooryavanshi (Source: BCCI) Ishan Kishan’s mild right adductor muscle strain, sustained during the first T20I on October 23, 2026, forced a change in India’s batting order for the second match at Hagley Oval, Christchurch on Saturday, October 24, 2026.
Vaibhav Sooryavanshi was included in the starting XI as a replacement for Kishan and sent to number 1. 3 instead of the usual opening location. Sooryavanshi’s innings didn’t go as planned.
During the power play, he looked uncomfortable in front of the crease and initially presented a chance to off-spinner Michael Bracewell, which outfielder Bevon Jacobs misread. The reprieve was short: Sooryavanshi was caught at extra cover against Nathan Smith for just four runs. Former Indian cricketer Sadagoppan Ramesh gave an accurate assessment of the situation on his Instagram channel.
He felt that 15-year-old Sooryavanshi had panicked after the team management told him that he would be playing at No. 1. However, the expert-turned-cricketer supported the team management’s decision not to break the opening pair of Sanju Samson and Abhishek Sharma. “He should have opened.
As a youngster, he would have panicked as soon as management told him he would be batting at No. 3. He only played because Ishan Kishan was injured. While the management wasn’t wrong in failing to break the opening combination, Sooryavanshi doesn’t have the experience at No.3.
His strength is 0/0 with the expectation whether he will hit a six or a four on his first delivery,” Ramesh said on his Instagram channel. Why does Ramesh believe No. 3 was the wrong position for Sooryavanshi?
Ramesh’s concern centered on the mismatch between Sooryavanshi’s natural game and the demands of batting at No. 1. Sooryavanshi sat on the bench for India’s last six T20Is and only returned to the team due to Kishan’s injury, adding to the pressure of an unfamiliar role in an international game. “His batting style is characterized by the fact that he does everything right in the powerplay and then continues this momentum in the middle overs.
“If he is young and new to international cricket, it would have been ideal to have him play in a position where he is comfortable,” Ramesh said. Ramesh’s point was that Sooryavanshi’s strength lies in his ability to reach the crease at the top of the field with only two fielders stationed outside the crease, allowing him to attack from ball one. Placing him at No.
3, where the situation on the field and in the game can be very different, has eliminated this decisive advantage. How does Sooryavanshi’s dismissal reflect the pressure of the situation? Ramesh made a clear distinction between batsmen who are supposed to create a situation and those who have to react to a situation that is already in progress.
For Sooryavanshi, arrive at no. 3 meant the latter, and Ramesh sensed that the teenager was visibly affected by this responsibility. “Hitters like him are better when they are asked to create the situation at No. 0. But when he is sent to bat at No. 3, he is asked to react to a situation.”
He shouldn’t have reacted, but unfortunately he reacted under pressure and therefore withdrew. Samson has experience batting at No. 3 in a single game. But when Sooryavanshi was tasked with it, it was clear that he was tense,” said Ramesh.
