Why Shreyas Iyer Has Been Overlooked in Tests Despite Strong Form

Despite delivering eye-catching performances across formats—IPL, Ranji Trophy, and even in limited Test opportunities—Shreyas Iyer remains conspicuously absent from India’s Test team. Here’s a breakdown of the stats, politics, fairness debate, and speculation on whether he could have turned the tide for India.

1. Red-Ball Technique Vulnerabilities

• Chief selector Ajit Agarkar openly stated there was simply “no room in Test cricket for him”, citing India’s depth in the middle order—even after Kohli and Rohit’s retirements.
• Former England spinner Monty Panesar echoed the selectors’ doubts, saying Iyer’s technique against swing and short‑ball is exploitable overseas.
• A Telegraph India insider noted that he’s still regarded as more suited to home conditions and too aggressive for English whites.

2. Ranji Focus & BCCI’s Reaction

• Shreyas skipped Ranji Trophy in 2023 due to a back injury but didn’t get sympathy from the cricket board. His prolonged absence and IPL prioritisation cost him his central contract in 2023–24.
• He regained it in April 2025 after IPL and White-Ball success, but the episode damaged trust with selectors.

3. Selection Politics at Play

• Former teammate Mohammed Kaif pointed to a double standard: Sai Sudharsan got a Test opportunity based on IPL pedigree, while Iyer’s similar form in IPL wasn’t rewarded.
• The audience discussions highlight that Iyer may have clashed with BCCI politics—his choice to skip Ranji and involvement with KKR preseason reportedly irked selectors.
• Notably, fans suggested players who didn’t conform to expectations were treated harshly (“players have zero incentive to play Ranji” and “Shreyas messed with BCCI politics”).

Form vs. Fairness: Is the Test Snub Justified?

Performance Case for Iyer

• In the 2024–25 domestic season, Shreyas scored 480+ runs at 68.57 in Ranji cricket, including notable centuries and leadership for Mumbai.
• He led Punjab Kings to the IPL playoffs and hauled 514 runs in IPL 2025, plus topped run charts in the Champions Trophy, making him a strong white-ball asset.

Test Suitability Concerns

• Experts like Ravichandran Ashwin and Ricky Ponting noted limited-overs form doesn’t always translate to long-format resilience.
• Former players Aakash Chopra and Robin Uthappa argued that Iyer still hasn’t done enough in red-ball cricket to displace those already in Tests.

In short, while it’s fair to pause Test ambitions over technique concerns, many fans argue that Iyer earned more opportunities than he got.

Would Iyer Have Changed India’s Recent Test Outcomes?

With India’s loss to England fresh in memory, here’s whether Iyer might have helped:

• His ability to counterattack and shift momentum could have been crucial in middle-order collapses. Sehwag even suggested his aggression could have pressured England’s batsmen differently
• But Test challenges in England involve leaving balls, defensive technique under persistent swing, and mental patience, areas where selectors reportedly view Iyer as lacking.

He might not have saved a match alone—but his presence could’ve offered a different dimension to India’s batting.

Voices from the Fray

Underlying Politics & the Broader Debate

The Audience voiced frustration:

“I think him faking an injury may have pissed off the BCCI bosses.”
“Selection is about following the system; maybe Iyer refused to play Ranji and that was seen as non-compliance.”

This reflects an undercurrent: in Indian cricket, format commitment and public narrative matter as much as runs.

Final Take

Shreyas Iyer’s red-ball career is a case of talent meeting structural resistance:

• His white-ball success and domestic numbers earned attention.
• But selectors and experts perceive weaknesses in his Test batting technique—especially in swinging conditions.
• Politics—his absence from Ranji, perceived attitude, and lack of IPL-style PR—perhaps compounded his exclusion.
• Whether it’s unfair or not depends. If pure red-ball criteria apply, the decision aligns with cautious selection policy. But form-based merit and public sentiment suggest he deserved more testing.

Would he have changed the result in England? Hard to say. But India’s domino of middle-order failures perhaps felt different with an Shreyas in the mix—a counter-puncher, not a conventional anchor.