The omission of Sanju Samson from India's ODI squad for the Australia tour has reignited debate over his role in the national team. With Rishabh Pant injured, many expected Samson to be the backup wicket-keeper.
Instead, selectors opted for Dhruv Jurel. Chief selector Ajit Agarkar defended the decision, citing Samson's "top-order batting" as a mismatch with India's current plans.
Add The Sporting News as a preferred news source
But former cricketer Anirudha Srikkanth and the data challenge that narrative, pointing out Samson's history in middle-order slots in ODIs.
Why was Sanju Samson not selected in India vs Australia ODIs?
Ajit Agarkar said that Samson bats at the top of the order and that his only ODI hundred came at No. 3. He also said that India has limited room at the top, implying Samson doesn't fit the existing configuration.
However, statistical evidence tells a different story:
- At No. 3: 3 innings, 163 runs, average 54.33 → ~32% of his ODI runs
- At No. 4: 1 innings, 51 runs
- At No. 5: 6 innings, 116 runs
- At No. 6: 4 innings, 180 runs, average 90.00 → ~35% of his ODI runs
Put simply, more than 71% of his ODI innings and over 58% of his runs have come from the middle order (positions 4-6). His performance at No. 6, in particular, suggests comfort and success in those slots, not weakness.
Anirudha Srikkanth calls out Ajit Agarkar's reasoning with data
Srikkanth criticized Agarkar's line of reasoning. He said that the selector seems unaware of Samson's actual batting distribution.
"The BCCI chief selector Ajit Agarkar seems unaware that the majority of Sanju Samson's ODI runs have come while batting at positions 4-6," he said.
More: Explained: Why Sachin Tendulkar rang opening bell at New York Stock Exchange | NCL T10 League
Samson’s middle-order credentials are well established in limited-overs cricket, including T20s, where he has often batted in varied positions. Meanwhile, after his last impactful ODI century (in South Africa, 2023), he has been overlooked for subsequent tours.
His 56.66 average across 16 ODIs includes three half-centuries from middle-order slots as well. While Agarkar is technically correct that Samson's ODI century came at No. 3, framing him as a pure top-order batter doesn't align with his track record.
The selection decision, therefore, raises a larger issue: whether selectors are valuing positional labels over performance history.
RELATED LINKS:
- Who will win the Women's Cricket World Cup 2025 odds, winners list, favourites to win, schedule and results
- ICC Women's ODI World Cup 2025: Schedule, fixtures, match times, latest results and points table
- Women's World Cup 2025 semi-final qualification scenarios: Rules, chances and points required for progressing from group stage
- How to bet online on cricket in India and the most trusted site
- All the latest cricket news
- All betting tips and predictions