Parthiv Patel Questions Sanju Samson's Omission from T20 Team Amid Vaibhav Sooryavanshi's Inclusion

In a recent discussion, former cricketer Parthiv Patel expressed his views on the controversial decision to include Vaibhav Sooryavanshi in the Indian T20 team while sidelining Sanju Samson. Patel argues that while the emotional aspect of giving a young player a chance is understandable, the logical reasoning behind dropping an experienced player like Samson is questionable. He highlights the ongoing challenges in finding quality all-rounders in Indian cricket and critiques the team's planning and execution during the England tour. This analysis raises important questions about team selection and strategy in the current cricket landscape.

By Narendra Chaudhary Jul 10, 2026, 23:48 IST

Debate Over Team Selection

Former cricketer Parthiv Patel has entered the discussion regarding Vaibhav Sooryavanshi's selection in the Indian T20 squad, which has come at the cost of Sanju Samson's spot. Patel argues that while it may feel emotionally justified to include the young talent, dropping the experienced Samson lacks logical reasoning.

During a conversation on JioStar, Patel pointed out that although Samson has faced criticism for inconsistency in the past, his current exclusion is difficult to rationalize.

Patel remarked, 'Why is Sanju Samson always the one to miss out? Over the last decade, the recurring theme in his career has been his inconsistency.'

'Players who fail to score quickly or those who are inconsistent often find themselves sidelined. Decisions should not be made based solely on emotions. Emotionally, giving Sooryavanshi a chance seems right, but logically, Samson's exclusion raises questions.'

The 15-year-old Sooryavanshi was selected after Samson, who had been named player of the tournament in the recent T20 World Cup, struggled to score in three consecutive matches. However, Sooryavanshi has yet to make a significant impact.

India has already lost the series 0-3 to England, with the final match set for Saturday.

Patel noted a common perception that the player left out is often viewed as the better choice.

'This is a typical mindset. When a player is excluded, we tend to believe they would have performed better. For instance, during the last T20 World Cup, there were questions about Shreyas Iyer's absence from the team.'

'Now that he’s back, people are suggesting Rajat Patidar should be included instead,' he added.

Patel also expressed concerns about the IPL's Impact Player rule, stating it has stunted the growth of quality all-rounders in Indian cricket, complicating the search for a long-term successor to Hardik Pandya.

'For years, we've been saying everything will improve once Jasprit Bumrah returns. Yet, a decade later, we still lack a suitable replacement for either Bumrah or Pandya,' he stated.

'The primary reason for this is the Impact Player rule in the IPL. While Bumrah's situation is unique, India won't find the all-rounder they need until this rule is abolished.'

Additionally, Patel questioned the Indian batting lineup's strategy for the England tour.

'The most significant shift we made in T20 cricket last year was our intent. We weren't playing with the same aggression as other teams globally. Skill has never been a concern for these players,' he explained.

'Ishan Kishan handles short balls effectively. Whenever Sooryavanshi faced short deliveries in the IPL, he attacked them, and Abhishek Sharma can also handle short balls. However, if the ball isn't suitable for a pull shot, it simply can't be played.'

'Poor shot selection arises from playing across the line. Ultimately, this reflects a lack of planning. England has outperformed us in both strategy and execution.'