Indian all-rounder Nitish Kumar Reddy was quickly brought into the national team last year, viewed as a crucial piece to complete the ideal playing XI. However, it now seems the team management is uncertain about the exact role of this seam-bowling all-rounder. Many are questioning whether he can truly serve as a direct replacement for Hardik Pandya.
For a player who impressively scored a Test century under challenging conditions at the MCG last year and has a solid reputation batting higher up the order in the IPL, Reddy is currently batting at a lower position, typically No. 8, and is rarely called upon to bowl during critical phases of the game.
Under Head Coach Gautam Gambhir, the team management emphasized the need for Reddy to gain more experience in international cricket. Yet, he bowled a mere four overs across two Test matches at home against West Indies this month. He was given a chance to bat at No. 5 in the second Test, but only after Yashasvi Jaiswal and Shubman Gill had already established a formidable score.
On paper, Reddy’s diverse skill set should provide perfect balance to the squad. However, he is given very limited opportunities to showcase these abilities on the field. India’s decision to play without an outright strike spinner like Kuldeep Yadav in the first two ODIs in Australia significantly contributed to them losing the series in Adelaide before the third and final match in Sydney.
Reddy’s current underutilization brings to mind how Shardul Thakur was sparsely used during the two Test matches in England this past summer. Captain Gill, through his on-field tactics, often makes his reservations about a player quite evident.
Indeed, Thakur bowled only 27 out of the 339 overs India delivered in Leeds and Manchester. India’s assistant coach, Ryan ten Doeschate, even admitted that the team management later wondered if Kuldeep could have been a better choice in those England matches.
This situation prompts a vital question: Are the team management and the captain truly aligned on player selection for the playing XI? Former India wicketkeeper Deep Dasgupta, a close observer and commentator of the team, remarked, “First, one has to check if Gill and Gambhir are on the same page. It could also stem from lack of conviction. Gill will get more clarity about what he exactly wants from his team. They are trying to give Reddy exposure, but that can’t happen by just standing in the field doing very little.”
Since becoming head coach, Gambhir has been vocal about his philosophy of playing with a deep batting lineup, even if it means sacrificing a specialist strike bowler. Dasgupta elaborated, “Modern-day white-ball cricket demands batting depth. India’s real problem is their usual No. 9, 10, and 11 are quintessential tailenders. Kuldeep can hold his own as a batter, but you can’t compare it to the tailenders of the SENA countries. Reddy is a batter who can bowl. The person who bats at No. 8 has to be the other way around. And without Bumrah, Kuldeep has to be the big strike bowler.”
It’s understandable for the team management to seek a genuine seam-bowling all-rounder in the mold of players like Ben Stokes, Pandya, and Cameron Green. However, Reddy is still a developing talent. It’s worth remembering that when Pandya’s bowling form declined in 2021, selectors were hesitant to play him purely as a batter until he could bowl effectively again. As it stands, Reddy’s bowling isn’t consistent enough for Gill to rely on fully.
“I hope they don’t get stuck with finding Pandya’s like-for-like backup. They have to be flexible with the options they have. Even if they want to persist with Reddy, he needs to be looked at differently and thrown into the deeper end,” Dasgupta advised. Gill is relatively new to captaincy. He has faced situations where his lack of confidence in certain players has left him operating with effectively fewer than eleven fully utilized players on the field. He managed to get by in England, but this approach is likely to be exposed in the demanding world of international cricket.