India suffered a six-wicket defeat to West Indies in the second T20I at Ranchi on October 9, 2026, with the visitors successfully chasing down 249 runs in 18.3 overs to level the five-match series at 1-1. India’s batting performance was strong, with Sanju Samson scoring 82 off 41 balls, Tilak Varma remaining unbeaten on 44 off 18 balls, Ishan Kishan contributing 43 off 22 balls, and Shreyas Iyer adding 40 off 18 balls. However, India’s bowling execution in the middle and death overs proved costly as West Indies completed their chase with relative ease.
Sunil Gavaskar has analysed India’s tactical mistakes during the match, focusing particularly on the bowling strategy employed in the closing stages. The former India captain highlighted concerns about the choice of bowlers in critical overs and questioned specific decisions made by the Indian team management during West Indies’ successful run chase.
“Definitely! I would have gone with either Arshdeep or Mayank (in the 17th over). Yes, Arshdeep went for plenty in his final over (18th over), but Mayank had struck the early blows. Of the wickets that had fallen, he had taken three,” Gavaskar told JioStar.
Mayank Yadav’s early impact and the 17th over decision
Mayank Yadav had made an impressive start to India’s bowling attack, removing Kamil Pooran and Shimron Hetmyer in the opening over and taking a third wicket in the early stages to leave West Indies at 58 for 3 by the 6th over. Despite this strong beginning, Mayank was not given the responsibility of bowling the 17th over, a decision Gavaskar questioned based on the match situation and the bowler’s economy rate at that stage.
The former captain believed that bringing Mayank back for that critical over could have changed the momentum of the chase. Shreyas Iyer gave the responsibility of bowling the 17th over to Kuldeep Yadav, and the wrist spinner conceded 24 runs, making the tourists the firm favourites to secure the win. Arshdeep, who bowled the 18th over, could not stem the flow of runs either, conceding 17 to West Indies skipper Shai Hope and Romario Shepherd. The visitors eventually romped home with nine balls to spare.
“His (Mayank’s) economy rate was about 12 an over, and at that stage, the West Indies needed more than that. So, if he had taken a wicket, and sometimes when the game is going in your favour, who knows, you would have got a wicket even if it had not been off a great delivery,” Gavaskar said.
Broader bowling strategy and middle-over concerns
Gavaskar also raised concerns about India’s broader bowling strategy during the middle overs, particularly questioning the decision to hand the ball to Shivam Dube in the ninth over when West Indies batters were still settling into their innings. He believed that Kuldeep Yadav would have been a more suitable choice at that stage of the match.
“And once you get a wicket, suddenly, the opposition is on the back foot. A new batter has to come in. So, maybe that (bringing in Mayank) could have been tried. For me, I think giving Shivam Dube the ball in that ninth over was not exactly what was required at that stage. When the batters were still trying to get their eye in, maybe Kuldeep coming in would have been a better idea,” Gavaskar said.
Shai Hope remained unbeaten on 102 off 45 balls and was named Player of the Match, while Sherfane Rutherford also scored a half-century in the successful chase. Roston Chase took 3 wickets for 24 runs for West Indies, and Shamar Springer took 2 wickets in India’s innings. The loss meant the series remained evenly poised at 1-1 heading into the remaining matches.
