Afghanistan’s decision to promote Naib to No. 3 Afghanistan wasn’t experimental; it was a calculated Afghanistan batting order change aimed at adding experience and stability in the middle overs. Jonathan Trott’s Afghanistan selection call prioritized composure against spin and pace variation, while the Noor Ahmad dropped vs New Zealand debate centered more on execution than personnel. In short, Naib’s proven strike rate in India and ability to absorb early pressure made him the safest structural fit, not just a form pick.
Stability Through Experience at Three
For months, Afghanistan tried several different players at #3 in an attempt to settle into this role. Unfortunately, that created a lot of disruption in the rhythm of play from the powerplay to the middle overs. This is typically when the momentum of the inning slows on many Asian surfaces.
In comparison to all other players, Naib possesses one obvious attribute that gives him the ability to read the game and workload: he is aware of the overall match situation and workload, so he does not feel compelled to start scoring runs immediately after being given out at No. 3; instead, he allows himself to develop his innings. He started slowly against New Zealand and then accelerated, showing us how he could have a typical No. 3’s inning: survive the early overs with the new ball, make it through the middle overs to lay a base for the finisher, etc.
Gulbadin Naib’s India Record Matters
The conditions will be a major factor in that decision. Chepauk’s pitch had grass on it with cracks and an uneven bounce, which usually rewards players who are able to stay back in their shots and smash the ball directly down the middle of the field.
Naib has shown his form as one of the top (Naib T20 strike rate in India) so far in the competition, which was clearly evident by the 63 he made from just 35 balls in this game. Additionally, Naib has done well in India previously, and his style of playing a solid foundation at the crease with massive power and distance in the shots he hits through mid-wicket and long-on is ideal for 2-paced pitches in which timing can beat brute force.
Numbers matter here:
- 63 runs off 35 balls vs New Zealand
- Previous high strike rate success in India
Those returns justify the promotion more than reputation alone.
Trott’s Selection Call Explained
The Jonathan Trott Afghanistan selection call wasn’t purely about batting. It was about overall balance.
Afghanistan needed:
- one stabilizer in the top order
- power hitters at 5–6
- seamers to exploit early bounce
Naib’s flexibility, capable of anchoring or accelerating, allows others like Rasooli to play more freely. This reduces role confusion. Trott effectively assigned clear phases: consolidation at 3, power in the middle, finishing at the death.
Noor Omission Was an Execution Issue
The (Noor Ahmad dropped vs New Zealand) discussion grabbed headlines, but Trott’s reasoning pointed elsewhere. The pitch wasn’t expected to spin heavily, and the seamers were trusted to exploit surface cracks.
The problem wasn’t the combination; it was the lengths. The quicks conceded heavily without control, exposing that poor execution, not team balance, cost Afghanistan.
The answer is easy to see; Gulbadin Naib No. 3 Afghanistan is successful as he has created stability with structure. He is experienced, adaptable, and has had an incredible amount of success in India, which enables Afghanistan to make a consistent transition between the middle order and their finishers. Trott’s decision also represents the larger strategic view, defining roles for each player versus constantly changing them. If Naib can continue to provide the same level of tempo control that he has shown so far, then the batting unit will appear much more solid in close contests, and the team will be able to stabilize itself, rather than continuing to rotate players. Therefore, I expect him to maintain this role throughout the remainder of the tournament.