WTC Final set to remain in England till 2031, confirms ICC
India Today had earlier reported that the Indian Cricket Board was highly interested in bringing the event to its shores. However, that seems to be unlikely in the near future.Here are the key decisions made at the ICC Annual Conference.England to host WTC Finals till 2031The ICC confirmed that the England and Wales Cricket Board will continue to host the next three finals of the World Test Championship. The decision was based on the ECB's successful handling of the event in previous editions and the logistical advantage of England's early summer window.Continued support for displaced women cricketersThe ICC will maintain its collaborative programme to support women cricketers of Afghan descent who have been displaced. This initiative is being carried out in partnership with the BCCI, ECB and Cricket Australia. It includes high performance training, domestic match exposure and involvement in upcoming ICC women's events like the 2025 ODI World Cup in India and the 2026 T20 World Cup in England.USA Cricket given three months' noticeThe ICC reiterated its demand for proper governance from USA Cricket. The board has been told to conduct free and fair elections and implement structural reforms within three months. The ICC has made it clear that it can take action if these conditions are not met.New Associate Member representatives elected to the CECThree new officials from Associate nations have been elected to the ICC Chief Executives CommitteeGurumurthy Palani from FranceAnuraag Bhatnagar from Cricket Hong KongGurdeep Klair from Cricket CanadaNew Associate Members AnnouncedTwo new cricket boards have been granted Associate Membership status by the ICC. The Timor Leste Cricket Federation and the Zambia Cricket Union join the global cricket community, taking ICC membership to a total of 110.- EndsMust Watch
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
‘Play tennis or golf if you can't handle short balls': Gavaskar calls concussion sub rule a ‘like-for-like substitute for incompetence'
India batting legend Sunil Gavaskar made a scathing assessment of cricket's existing concussion substitute rule during the India-England Old Trafford Test, terming it nothing but a replacement cushion used for the benefit of 'incompetent' batters who cannot handle short-pitched bowling. Gavaskar's remarks came after India wicket-keeper Rishabh Pant suffered a fractured toe while batting on Wednesday in Manchester before making a dramatic return to bat and score a half-century in India's first-innings on Day 2. Speaking on Sony Sports on a discussion of like-for-like substitutes to be implemented in cricket, Gavaskar first questioned the existing concussion substitute rule, that limited the nature of injuries for which a player can be substituted to bat and ball in a match rather than meeting only fielding requirements as wicket-keeper Dhruv Jurel will do for Pant in the remainder of the match. 'I've always felt that you are giving a like-for-like substitute for incompetence. If you are not good enough to play short-pitched bowling, don't play Test cricket; go and play tennis or golf. You are giving a like-for-like substitute for somebody who can't play the short ball and gets hit,' said Gavaskar on the rule that came into effect in mid-2019. However, Gavaskar said the International Cricket Council (ICC) must review the rules to allow certain replacements for injuries like the one Pant sustained freakishly while attempting a reverse swipe off fast bowler Chris Woakes on Day 1 of the fourth Test in the Anderson-Tendulkar Trophy. 'Here, it is a clear injury (Pant); there has to be a substitute. I want some sort of committee appointed to take a call on this. There is a cricket committee, ICC has a cricket committee, but at the moment that's headed by Sourav Ganguly, the ICC chairman is Jay Shah, and the ICC CEO is Sanjog Gupta,' said Gavaskar. With several Indians heading multiple positions in the international board, Gavaskar said a fresh committee could look into the substitution roles to maintain objectivity. 'So we don't want a situation for the media here in particular and in Australia to say, 'Oh, because it's an Indian situation, they have started to do that'. So, let it be a totally different committee to look at these injuries, maybe with doctors, etc., and let that committee come to a call,' he added. This is not the first time the legendary Mumbai cricketer had slammed the usage of the concussion sub. Earlier this year, Gavaskar lambasted the Indian team management when they used the loopholes in the concussion sub-rule to swap all-rounder Shivam Dube for fast bowler Harshit Rana after the former's batting innings. 'Even by the most generous stretching of the like-for-like term, there was nothing such between Dube and Rana. With tongue firmly in cheek, one can say that they are the same height and have the same standard in fielding. Otherwise, there's nothing like-for-like as far as they are concerned. England has every reason to feel done in. This Indian team is a superb team and doesn't need its wins to get tarnished by such acts,' he wrote in a column for The Telegraph.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
ICC may approve replacements for 'external injuries' soon
Rishabh Pant (Getty Images) MANCHESTER: Rishabh Pant 's foot injury on the first day of the fourth Test here has triggered a debate around the need for allowing like-for-like substitutions for external injuries. Pant going out to bat with a broken metatarsal made for a great story but it was a decision forced upon the team, since the playing conditions don't allow a substitute to bat or bowl. The International Cricket Council (ICC) is close to bring in a provision for likefor-like substitutions later this year, TOI has learnt. Go Beyond The Boundary with our YouTube channel. SUBSCRIBE NOW! 'There is a chance that teams will get to bring in a replacement for serious external injuries. The matter is already under deliberation. A ratification is expected in the next ICC cricket committee meeting,' an ICC source said. How and why Rishabh Pant's England tour could come to an abrupt end due to toe fracture In June, the ICC announced that a 'replacement-player' condition would be trialled by the Full Members of the world body. 'A player who suffers a serious injury on the field of play any time after the match has started (including any pre-match warm-up period) may be replaced for the remainder of the match by a fully participating like-forlike player,' the ICC had said in a statement on June 25. Former England captain Michael Vaughan has been vocal in his support of allowing proper replacements. 'Injury replacements should be permitted in Tests in the first innings of the game,' Vaughan had told BBC Sport two months ago. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Health: the best shoes to walk and stand all day Ultra-Comfortable Shoes Undo 'If there's a genuine injury in the first innings, it affects the game and the entertainment, which fans pay money to watch. The first innings is a good cutoff to make it fair.' India, after all, let go off a lot of runs when Pant was at the crease since he couldn't run fast enough to complete obvious singles. Catch Rani Rampal's inspiring story on Game On, Episode 4. Watch Here!
India Today
4 hours ago
- India Today
DRS: Is it time for injury replacements in cricket?
It was truly a brave sight to behold when Rishabh Pant came out to bat on Day 2 of the Manchester Test. The Indian vice-captain was feeling the pain, but he fought through it as the crowd at Old Trafford, regardless of their allegiances, stood up and applauded him for his bravery. Pant came in struggling, but battled his way to 54 as India posted these moments are stirring and make you understand why these players put their bodies on the line for the nation's cause—was it necessary? Mind you, Pant is someone who made a long recovery from a car crash a few years ago and was already injured during the Lord's Test. His fearless batting prowess was greatly reduced as he was in pain and shouldn't have had to put his body on the line in this match and risk aggravating the injury. With a broken toe, Pant is expected to be out for some time, meaning India will be without one of their best batters for the remainder of the tour—having already scored 479 runs from seven raises the question: should cricket introduce a substitutes system like some of the other team sports? The best example is football, where each team is allowed to make at least five changes to their lineup during 90 minutes—either as part of strategy or to preserve player energy. Something similar happens in basketball, while hockey has flying substitutes who come in and leave throughout the game. In cricket, we currently have the concussion substitute system, introduced by the ICC in April 2019. That rule comes with some conditions—only a like-for-like replacement for the injured player can be made. The ICC also introduced COVID substitutes during the pandemic era, which allowed a player showing signs of COVID-19 during the course of the game to be replaced with a like-for-like player. Pant was carted off the field on Day one (Courtesy: Reuters) Now, Pant's episode has certainly divided opinion on whether substitutes should be introduced more broadly in cricket. Shardul Thakur said that it would be unfair for other teams if the system were to come into play during the current cycle and should instead be considered for the next one."I think, I think there's some discussion going on if I'm not wrong. I was reading, reading it in the news, uh, whether that should come in play or not, right now I couldn't say much, but if it happens, I would say it should happen after this cycle of WTC. It shouldn't happen in the middle because already there are a few series that have been playing in world cricket. And it could be unfair when it comes to the points table and qualifying for the finals, looking at the whole WTC cycle," said Vaughan, on the other hand, batted for substitutes to come in for serious injuries like the one Pant suffered.'I don't like the fact that we've got four days left and we're heading into what is effectively a 10 vs 11 contest,' Michael Vaughan said. 'When concussion substitutes were introduced, I felt we should've gone a step further. If someone suffers a clear injury — like a broken foot or a ruptured muscle — they should be allowed to be replaced.'In the latest episode of Democratic Review System, an opinion-based column, sports reporters, producers and writers from the India Today Group share their your thoughts in the comment box below.1. Nikhil NazNo. Because how do you define an external injury— will a bruise and scratch be judged the same way as a dislocation or fracture? This leaves a lot of ambiguity and will allow teams to exploit this loophole to correct any selection mistakes they have made at the start of the match. Bottom line— fitness and injuries are an integral part of sport, you take it as 'bad-luck' and move on with the Sabyasachi ChowdhuryI believe the rule can be introduced, but only after thorough analysis and careful deliberation. The ICC must ensure the process is airtight, leaving no room for potential loopholes that could be exploited in the future. In Rishabh Pant's case, it's certainly unfortunate, but allowing a like-for-like replacement in such situations seems only fair and reasonable.3. Sidharth ViswanathanSimple answer for a complicated sport. NO. At a time when there has been a massive debate on what is a like-for-like replacement in a concussion substitute scenario, a substitute for external injuries will only complicate matters. If the MCC clearly defined what is an external injury, then a step can be taken. But, the backdrop of this is also debatable. In Manchester, Rishabh Pant suffered an injury primarily out of his own doing. If he has not played that shot, probably the injury would not have happened and the debate would not have arisen. Had India not exploited the grey areas in the concussion substitute situation, then this could have been seriously Akshay RameshYes, cricket remains one of the few major sports that does not permit standard substitutions for injuries. After considerable deliberation, concussion substitutes were finally introduced, and Covid-19 replacements have been in place since the onset of the pandemic. However, it is unfortunate that a team must suffer the consequences of an injury, something that is an inherent part of the ICC Cricket Committee should seriously consider allowing like-for-like replacements in the event of maintain the spirit and integrity of the game, the ICC and the MCC could collaborate to formulate clear guidelines and implement a robust framework. This could involve mandatory assessments by independent medical professionals or team doctors to authorise substitutions, thereby preventing any potential misuse of the replacements, if properly regulated, would be a progressive step forward in modernising the sport and ensuring fairness, especially in a format like Test cricket.5. Harshit AhujaWhile injuries are a part of any sport, for a sport that is already grappling with complex rules, allowing subs for external injuries could invite more controversy. Unlike internal injuries, which can easily be faked, there is visual proof of external injuries but that still doesn't completely eliminate the possibility of teams misusing their substitute. A swelling or a cut makes for visible proof but it could be difficult to ascertain if the wound/injury is severe enough for a player to carry on or not. Also, while most team sports, like football, hockey, & basketball, to name a few, allow substitutes, there are others like Judo, Table Tennis & rowing that don't have that provision. Too bad that we can have a 10 vs 11 situation in a match, but it is what it Sidharth GulatiYes!Understandably, there's a grey area around 'external injury'. I feel that it should be left entirely to the discretion of the match referee, backed by clear medical proof. The implementation would need uncomplicated guidelines to prevent any misuse.7. Rishabh BeniwalInjury substitutes make even more logical sense for a sport like cricket, as every player's contribution is immensely important in the game. In a format like Test cricket, losing one player due to an injury, especially if they're your main strike bowler or premier batter, leaves a massive hole in any team. Hence, injury substitutes can be the way forward to provide an even contest between two teams if one player is forced to sit out. However, there should be rules to prevent its misuse by any team as the law has the potential to add more controversy to the game.8. Alan John This is something that the ICC should test out. The injury to Pant has essentially left India handicapped in two departments for two straight games as he will be missed as a batter and behind the stumps. Maybe, the substitute should be allowed only after proper tests from a neutral medical facility and only after seeing the reports. And yes, the system of only having like-for-like replacements should be implemented here as well.- EndsTune InMust Watch
