Should Test cricket allow injury substitutions? Here's what players think

Business Standard

5 days ago

In the modern era of cricket, the issue of injury replacements has been a subject of much debate. While the implementation of concussion substitutes has received widespread support, the discussion around injury substitutes continues to divide opinions. This was evident when England captain Ben Stokes and India head coach Gautam Gambhir shared contrasting views on the issue, following Rishabh Pant's injury in the ongoing Test series between India and England.
The Current Rule on Injury Substitutes
Under the current International Cricket Council (ICC) regulations, teams can only replace a player in the playing XI under specific circumstances, such as concussion or a positive COVID-19 test. The rule does not provide for injury substitutes, even if a player is physically unable to perform his role in the team.
For example, Rishabh Pant's broken foot during the Manchester Test led to India having to make do without their regular wicketkeeper, with Dhruv Jurel stepping in as a substitute behind the stumps. Despite Pant's courageous batting display in the first innings, his inability to keep wickets left India at a disadvantage.
Ben Stokes' Strong Opinion: The 'Ridiculous' Debate
Ben Stokes, England's captain, was quick to dismiss the debate surrounding injury replacements, labeling it as "absolutely ridiculous." He argued that such a provision would open the door for numerous loopholes, making it difficult to maintain fairness in the game. In an interview, Stokes explained, 'You pick your eleven for a game; injuries are part of it. I completely understand the concussion replacement; player welfare, and player safety. But I think the conversation should just honestly stop around injury replacements.'
Stokes' criticism stems from concerns that teams could exploit the rule to gain unfair advantages. He emphasized that a player could easily be sent for an MRI scan, and even a slight injury could lead to a substitute being called in, which could disrupt the balance of the game. According to Stokes, introducing injury substitutes would "open too many loopholes," and the debate should be concluded.
Gautam Gambhir's Support for Injury Substitutes
On the other hand, India's head coach Gautam Gambhir supported the idea of introducing injury substitutes, particularly in cases where an injury is visible and prevents a player from fulfilling their role on the field. Gambhir referred to the introduction of concussion substitutes after the tragic death of Australian cricketer Phil Hughes in 2014 and suggested that a similar provision for serious injuries would be beneficial.
'I'm all for it, if the umpires and match referee see and feel that there's a major injury. It's important to have this rule, where you can get a substitute,' Gambhir said. He pointed out the unfairness of playing with 10 men in a crucial match, highlighting that teams should not be penalized for a player's injury. In a closely contested series like the one between India and England, Gambhir argued, such a rule could level the playing field.
The debate over injury replacements remains unresolved. While Stokes' concerns about potential misuse are valid, Gambhir's argument for fairness in case of genuine injuries also carries weight. As cricket evolves, the ICC may have to re-evaluate its stance on injury substitutes to ensure that the game remains competitive and equitable, especially in longer formats like Test cricket, where injuries can have a significant impact on a team's performance.