Asian Games 2026: What’s Behind The Row Over India’s Tennis Squad And Why Were 5 Players Left Out?

The selection of India’s tennis contingent for the 2026 Asian Games triggered a dispute between the All India Tennis Association (AITA) and the Sports Authority of India (SAI), with five players left out of the final squad despite the tennis body pushing for their inclusion.

The Sports Ministry last week announced a 492-member Indian contingent across 35 sports for the Asian Games in Aichi-Nagoya, Japan. The approved tennis squad, however, had seven players- three fewer than the 12-member team proposed by the AITA.

Yuki Bhambri, Dhakshineswar Suresh Ekambaram, Anirudh Chandrasekar, Sumit Nagal, Sri Ram Balaji Narayanaswamy, Ankita Raina and Rutuja Bhosale made the final cut.

Manas Dhamne, Vaishnavi Adkar, Sahaja Yamalapalli, Vaidehee Chaudhari and Prarthana Thombare were excluded.

The AITA said it made representations to the authorities seeking the inclusion of all the players it had recommended but was told that the government’s selection policy prioritised athletes with realistic medal prospects.

“We tried our best to convince the authorities to send all the selected players,” AITA interim secretary general Sunder Iyer told PTI, adding, “But they are citing the criteria of sending only the top-8 players in Asia. It’s disappointing but the criteria is the same for all sports, what to do.”

The Sports Ministry’s selection policy for the Asian Games and other multi-sport events is based on medal potential rather than participation alone. Athletes are assessed on factors including recent performances and rankings, with separate benchmarks applying to individual, team and doubles events.

The policy also provides for relaxation of the criteria in cases where there are sport-specific reasons.

Why Were Five Tennis Players Excluded?

The selection row deepened after SAI disputed the AITA’s account of the process. According to a PTI report citing a SAI source, the five excluded players were not part of the final squad submitted to the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) and, in fact, were not included in the long list sent by the AITA.

“Their names were not received by Sports Ministry in the final list shared by the IOA. In fact their names were not there in the long list sent by the All India Tennis Association (AITA),” the source was quoted as saying.

The source further claimed that the AITA was aware that the players did not meet the selection criteria and had been told they could not make the shortlist.

The AITA, however, rejected the claim.

“AITA stated that the matter was not merely about individual athletes but about ensuring that India fields its strongest possible tennis contingent,” Iyer said in a statement.

“Any suggestion that the AITA did not provide names or did not seek the inclusion of its selected players is factually incorrect and contradicts the Association’s written representation to the IOA dated July 3, 2026,” the statement added.

The association also asked the IOA to reconsider the exclusions on an event-by-event basis.

Why Did AITA Want A 12-Member Squad?

The AITA’s argument is that tennis selection cannot be assessed solely through individual rankings because the Asian Games feature separate singles, doubles and mixed-doubles events.

The association particularly highlighted India’s prospects in mixed doubles. Three Indian pairs were among the top eight accepted entries: Rutuja Bhosale-Yuki Bhambri, Ankita Raina-Sriram Balaji and Prarthana Thombare-Anirudh Chandrasekar.

With India allowed to field only two pairs, the AITA wanted additional doubles specialists available to maximise its medal chances.

It also backed Sahaja Yamalapalli, Vaishnavi Adkar and Vaidehee Chaudhari based on their performances in international competitions.

Ankita Raina, a bronze medallist at the 2018 Asian Games, was ultimately retained in the squad, while the other five players remained excluded.

What Rohan Bopanna Said?

The exclusions have also drawn criticism from former Indian tennis star Rohan Bopanna.

“Five players — including India's No. 1 and No. 2 in women's singles, who earned their rankings the hard way. No shortcuts. No favors. They competed internationally, qualified and proved where they stand,” Bopanna wrote on LinkedIn, adding, “Now a committee that never stood where they stood has decided their fate on paper, before a ball is struck."

Bopanna also questioned the purpose of rankings and qualification if selections were ultimately determined by a committee.

The government, meanwhile, maintained that the medal-potential criteria cannot be selectively relaxed for tennis.

“Allowing discretionary clearances for tennis players ranked 25th to 40th in Asia would undermine the integrity of the selection process and could lead to similar demands, and possible litigation, from other National Sports Federations,” a source was quoted as saying.

The dispute now leaves the Indian tennis contingent at the centre of a wider debate over how medal potential should be weighed against rankings, recent form and a sport’s specific requirements at multi-sport events.