The first criteria for sending in a concussion substitute is that a player should legitimately have suffered a concussion. The second is that he or she must be a like-for-like replacement for the player being replaced (obviously in skills, we are not manufacturing clones here). In the fourth T20I against England, India met the first criteria and evoked controversy over the second.
Shivam Dube was hit on the helmet on the second-last ball of the innings. Although he managed to pass the on-field concussion test, he complained of a headache in the innings break. Indian management was quick to make a decision and requested a concussion substitute to be sent in.
However, the substitute nominated and eventually allowed to bowl in place of Shivam Dube, who has only 12 wickets in his 38-match-long international career, was a 6-foot-tall, hit-the-deck pacer Harshit Rana, whose maiden international wicket was none other than Travis Head.
As per the ICC rules, only a like-for-like replacement, after being approved by the match referee, can be sent in to replace the injured player.
“The ICC Match Referee should ordinarily approve a Concussion Replacement Request if the replacement is a like-for-like player whose inclusion will not excessively advantage his/her team for the remainder of the match. In assessing whether the nominated Concussion Replacement should be considered a like-for-like player, the ICC Match Referee should consider the likely role the concussed player would have played during the remainder of the match, and the normal role that would be performed by the nominated Concussion Replacement.”
The decision was bound to raise eyebrows and safe to say, it did more than that. Jos Buttler and the television commentators at the time of Harshit’s entry were the first to express their surprise, but definitely not the last. Talking to the media in the post-game conference, the English skipper made no bone about his dissatisfaction with the decision made by the match referee, Javagal Srinath.
“It is not a like-for-like replacement. We don’t agree with that. Either Shivam Dube has put on about 25mph with the ball or Harshit has really improved his batting. It’s part of the game and we really should have gone on to win the match, but we disagree with the decision.
“There was no consultation [with us]. That’s something I was thinking as I came out to bat – who is Harshit on for? They said he is a concussion replacement, which I obviously disagreed with. It is not a like-for-like replacement. They said that the match referee had made the decision. We had no say in it or any part of it. But we’ll ask Javagal [Srinath] some questions just to get some clarity around it.
Like I said, it was not the whole reason why we did not win the match. We had our chances to win the game which we could have still taken. But I’d like to have a bit more clarity on that.”
Perhaps, a better, less controversy-sparking replacement would have been Ramandeep Singh, who is a batting all-rounder, much like Dube himself. India’s assistant coach, Morne Morkel said that the team only suggested the name, and the final decision was taken by the match referee.
“Shivam came off the field in the innings break with mild headache symptoms. We took a name forward to the match referee in terms of a suitable substitution, and from there it is up to the match referee to make the decision. When the decision was made, Harshit was having dinner. So we had to get him ready as quickly as possible to go on the field and bowl.
“It goes to the powers above me – match referee makes the decision. We can only take the name forward and from there it is out of our hands.”
India are 3-1 up in the five-match T20I series, with the last game set to be played tomorrow at Wankhede Stadium.
