Five Cricket Legends, One Verdict: Padikkal Has Solved India's No. 3 Problem

When Sai Sudharsan went down with a right toe injury before the Sri Lanka tour, India's selection committee did what selection committees do: they found a like-for-like fill-in. Left-handed, technically sound, first-class pedigree. Devdutt Padikkal was the obvious stand-in at No. 3. Hold the spot. Don't lose it. Hand it back when the starter returns.

That was the plan. Padikkal had a different one.

At Galle, he scored 167 off 230 balls — a maiden Test century that turned into a statement of ownership. At Colombo's SSC, dropped twice before he was properly set, he batted through the loss of four partners and made 117 against a Sri Lankan seam attack that found more from the surface than anyone expected. Back-to-back centuries. Three Tests, five innings, 301 runs at an average of 60.20.

Sudharsan's numbers from seven Tests? 383 runs across 12 innings at 31.91. Not bad. Not even close to this.

The most telling endorsement came from someone who's watched Padikkal up close in the nets, the dressing room, and the slip cordon. Ravichandran Ashwin — recently retired, now the sharpest analyst in Indian cricket's commentary box — didn't just back Padikkal. He made it sound like the debate was already over.

Ashwin pointed to something most fans haven't seen: practice games at the WACA before the 2024-25 Border-Gavaskar Trophy, where Padikkal looked 'really, really comfortable' against pace. This isn't a batter who'll fold in New Zealand. This is one who's been preparing for exactly those conditions.

The fielding point matters too. Ashwin flagged Padikkal as a potential long-term solution in the slip cordon for spinners — the kind of marginal gain that turns good XIs into great ones. Test cricket is won by squads that don't leak catches, and Padikkal adds something Sudharsan doesn't in that department.

Mohammad Kaif didn't bother with diplomacy. His framing of the Padikkal-Sudharsan comparison was the kind of blunt honesty that only retired players can get away with: one batter scores fifties every third innings; the other walks in and wins you a Test match.

It's a savage reduction, but the numbers back it up. Sudharsan's consistency in getting to 40 or 50 was never in question. What was in question was whether that consistency translated into match-defining impact at the highest level. After Galle, the answer was unclear. After Colombo, it isn't.

Kaif also raised the WTC angle — India need points, badly. The player who helps captain Shubman Gill accumulate those points matters more than the one with the better domestic résumé. Padikkal, in three Tests, has contributed more directly to results than Sudharsan managed in seven.

When Cheteshwar Pujara talks about batting at No. 3 for India, you listen. The man defined the role for a decade. And his take on Padikkal was layered: praise for the present, caution for the future, and a very clear path to permanence.

The conditions in Sri Lanka, Pujara noted, were 'definitely easy' — he wasn't about to call two centuries on the subcontinent the final word. But he also wasn't going to diminish them. 'The first century is extremely special,' he said. 'The pressure is definitely there, no matter how good a form a batter might be coming in with.'

Then came the real test: New Zealand. If Padikkal survives the moving ball, the green surfaces, and Tim Southee's last dance, the No. 3 problem is solved. If he doesn't, we're back to square one. Pujara's framing was generous but honest — this is still a story with a second act to come.

Wasim Jaffer, the man with more first-class runs than almost anyone in Indian cricket history, added the final voice to what is now a unanimous chorus. His pick? Padikkal. Not because the IPL Orange Cap proves anything in Test cricket — Jaffer made that distinction himself — but because of 'a little bit of an edge' that's hard to quantify and impossible to ignore.

That edge is context. Padikkal walked into a series India needed to win for WTC points, on surfaces that spun from Day 1, against a Sri Lankan attack with nothing to lose — and he made it look like he'd been batting at No. 3 for India his entire career. Sudharsan's first-class record (3,004 runs at 42.91, ten centuries) is excellent. But Padikkal's (4,011 runs at 44.56, also ten centuries) is marginally better, and the Test returns aren't even close.

Here's the thing about India's No. 3 debate: Sri Lanka didn't settle it. New Zealand will.

Padikkal's twin centuries came on surfaces where the ball turned from session one — conditions that suited his game perfectly. Left-handed, comfortable playing spin off both feet, willing to use the sweep and the drive in equal measure. In Colombo, he was dropped twice before he was set. In Galle, he survived a tricky first hour against the new ball. Both times, he converted starts into centuries. That's a skill. That's not a fluke.

But the real question is what happens at Basin Reserve and Seddon Park, where the Dukes ball seams until tea on Day 2 and the covers come off to reveal a surface the colour of an olive. That's where Ashwin's WACA observation becomes critical — if Padikkal genuinely has 'a lot of time to play against pacers,' New Zealand is where he proves it.

For now, the consensus is clear. Five voices — Ashwin, Kaif, Pujara, Jaffer, Manjrekar — and one verdict: Padikkal bats at three. Sudharsan, when fit, will find a queue where there used to be an open door. The numbers made it obvious. The performances made it undeniable. The only thing left is for the selectors to agree with what everyone else already knows.