Ajit Agarkar Puts an End to Virat Kohli's London Fitness Test Controversy

A controversy that had simmered for weeks across social media finally received official clarification when BCCI chief selector Ajit Agarkar addressed questions about Virat Kohli taking his mandatory fitness test in London rather than at the Board's Centre of Excellence in Bengaluru. Speaking at the squad announcement press conference for the Australia tour, Agarkar firmly stated that both Kohli and Rohit Sharma met all required fitness norms and have been declared fit and available for selection.

The Controversy That Sparked Debate

Earlier in September 2025, when BCCI centrally-contracted players assembled at the Centre of Excellence in Bengaluru for mandatory fitness tests, one notable absence caught everyone's attention: Virat Kohli. Players like Rohit Sharma, Shubman Gill, Jasprit Bumrah, and Mohammed Siraj were all photographed undergoing Yo-Yo tests and other physical assessments at the facility. But Kohli was nowhere to be seen.

Days later, a Dainik Jagran report claimed that Kohli had obtained special permission from the BCCI to undergo his fitness tests in London, where he was residing with his family. According to the report, Kohli's test results were then sent back to the CoE for official records. This revelation triggered widespread criticism on social media, with fans and critics questioning whether the BCCI was providing preferential treatment to its biggest star.

Agarkar's Clarification

When asked point-blank about Kohli's London fitness test during Saturday's press conference, Agarkar provided a measured, diplomatic response that aimed to put the controversy to rest.

"I think they've both done their fitness tests or the fitness norms that have been suggested. Again, I wish Adrian was here or somebody from the team was there. As far as I know or the selectors know, they've gone through the required norms that have been put in place. So, I haven't heard anything other than that."

The chief selector emphasized that the selection committee follows a clear protocol: before finalizing the squad, they submit names to the Centre of Excellence, which then provides fitness status reports for all players under consideration.

"Generally, before selection, we give names out to the CoE who tells us about the fitness status of all the players. And everyone who's been picked has been declared fit and available."

This statement made one thing clear: from the selectors' perspective, Kohli passed all required fitness parameters, regardless of where the tests were conducted. The mention of Adrian le Roux—India's strength and conditioning coach—suggests that specific fitness details remain with the team management rather than the selection committee.

Why the London Exception?

While Agarkar didn't explicitly explain why Kohli was granted permission to take his fitness test in London, the circumstances provide context. Kohli has been residing in London with his wife, actress Anushka Sharma, and their children. After retiring from Tests and T20Is earlier in 2025, and with a seven-month gap between India's ODI assignments (Champions Trophy in March to Australia series in October), Kohli's international schedule became far less demanding.

A BCCI official, speaking to media earlier, had indicated that Kohli "would have definitely taken permission" for the London arrangement, suggesting this wasn't a unilateral decision by the player but an approved exemption by the board.

The Broader Context: BCCI's Fitness Standards

The controversy must be understood within the framework of BCCI's tightened fitness standards. In January 2025, following India's Test series loss to Australia, the board issued a comprehensive 10-point diktat aimed at improving standards across Indian cricket. One key provision mandated that fitness tests become compulsory for all players, with no exceptions.

This policy was meant to ensure that India fields only match-fit cricketers who meet minimum physical benchmarks. The Yo-Yo test, VO2 max assessments, strength evaluations, and agility drills form part of this comprehensive fitness battery designed to identify any physical limitations that might affect on-field performance.

Given this backdrop, reports of Kohli receiving an exemption to take tests remotely—rather than at the designated facility—naturally sparked questions about consistency and fairness in policy implementation.

The Public Reaction

Social media erupted when news of Kohli's London fitness test first emerged. Critics argued that:

Uniformity matters: If fitness tests are mandatory at a specific facility, all players should follow the same protocol regardless of stature or convenience.

Precedent concerns: Allowing one player to take tests remotely could open doors for others to request similar exceptions, potentially undermining the centralized system.

Transparency issues: The lack of official communication about the exemption fueled speculation and criticism, with fans feeling the BCCI was providing special treatment without public accountability.

However, some voices—including former cricketer Aakash Chopra—questioned whether the controversy was overblown. Chopra argued that as long as Kohli met the required fitness standards, the location of testing shouldn't matter. He even suggested this could set a positive precedent, allowing players to complete assessments wherever they're based rather than requiring everyone to travel to Bengaluru.

Kohli and Rohit: Fit and Ready for Australia

Agarkar's comments about fitness extended beyond just Kohli. He confirmed that Rohit Sharma—who did complete his tests in Bengaluru—also met all required benchmarks. Both veterans have been included in the ODI squad for the three-match series against Australia starting October 19.

"That's the format they (Virat and Rohit) are at the moment playing. We picked them. As far as the 2027 World Cup is concerned, I don't think we need to talk about it today. Obviously, with the captaincy change, that's generally the thought."

This measured response deliberately avoided long-term commitments about the 2027 World Cup while confirming both players are fit for immediate selection. The emphasis on "the format they are at the moment playing" underscores that their futures depend on continued performance and fitness rather than guaranteed places based on past achievements.

The Underlying Question: Special Treatment or Pragmatic Flexibility?

The London fitness test controversy ultimately raises a fundamental question about how cricket boards should balance standardized protocols with practical flexibility for unique circumstances.

The case for standardization: Requiring all players to undergo tests at the same facility ensures uniform conditions, eliminates variables in testing methodology, and reinforces that no one is above team requirements.

The case for flexibility: If technology allows accurate remote testing with verified results, forcing players to travel internationally for assessments when they're already in other locations seems unnecessarily rigid and potentially wasteful.

Agarkar's handling of the issue suggests the BCCI leans toward pragmatic flexibility when players seek proper permissions and meet all substantive requirements. The key phrase in his response—"everyone who's been picked has been declared fit and available"—prioritizes outcomes (passing fitness standards) over process (where tests occur).

Looking Ahead: Lessons for Future Policy

This controversy may prompt the BCCI to formalize its policy on remote fitness testing. Clear guidelines about when, where, and under what conditions players can complete assessments outside the Centre of Excellence would prevent future speculation and criticism.

Potential policy elements could include:

• Advance permission requirements with documented approval processes

• Standardized testing protocols that must be followed regardless of location

• Verified supervision by qualified professionals at remote testing sites

• Official communication about exemptions to maintain transparency

• Limited circumstances under which remote testing is permitted

Such clarity would benefit everyone—players understand the rules, selectors implement consistent standards, and fans have transparency about decision-making processes.

Conclusion: Controversy Closed, Focus on Cricket

Ajit Agarkar's straightforward confirmation that Virat Kohli met all required fitness norms effectively closes this controversy from an official standpoint. Both Kohli and Rohit Sharma have been declared fit and available for the Australia ODI series, regardless of where their assessments occurred.

Whether one views Kohli's London fitness test as preferential treatment or pragmatic flexibility ultimately depends on perspective. What's undeniable is that the BCCI approved the arrangement, Kohli passed the required standards, and selectors deemed him fit for selection.

The real test now shifts from fitness assessments to on-field performance. After a seven-month gap from international cricket, both Kohli and Rohit must prove they can still compete at the highest level. Their performances in Australia will matter far more than where they completed their fitness tests.