Controversy erupted in the fourth T20I match between India and England when the Indian team replaced pacer Harshit Rana with all-rounder Shivam Dube as the concussion substitute in the 5-match series in Pune.
Dube, who had earlier scored 53 runs for India, was struck on the helmet by a Jamie Overton delivery in the final over of India’s innings. After undergoing a mandatory concussion test, Dube was cleared to play.
However, in a surprising turn of events, Rana was called upon as a ‘like-for-like’ concussion substitute for Dube, who had been playing as an all-rounder. Rana, a specialist fast bowler, made his T20 debut in the match, replacing Dube, despite the latter’s all-rounder role.
Rana, who had previously played in the Border-Gavaskar Trophy against Australia, took to the field in the 12th over and immediately made an impact by dismissing Liam Livingstone for 9. He went on to take three wickets in the match.
England’s captain, Jos Buttler, was visibly displeased with the substitution decision and was seen engaging in a discussion with the umpires on the field. Buttler openly stated that he doesn’t agree with India’s call to introduce Rana as Dube’s concussion substitute.
“It is not a like-for-like replacement. We don’t agree with that. Either Shivam Dube has put on about 25 mph with the ball or Harshit’s 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,” Buttler said after the match, as quoted by ESPN Cricinfo.
The move was also criticized by former England batter Kevin Pietersen, who argued that a specialist fast bowler like Rana could not replace an all-rounder like Dube under the concussion substitution rule.
“Jos Buttler got out in frustration because he was not happy with the substitution. Ask anybody in the world if Harshit Rana is a like-for-like replacement. I am not so sure that anybody would say that he is,” Pietersen remarked in the commentary box.
Commentators Ravi Shastri and Harsha Bhogle also weighed in on the matter, with Bhogle suggesting that Ramandeep Singh would have been a more appropriate ‘like-for-like’ replacement for Dube, as he is a batting all-rounder.
The concussion rule
Rule 1.2.7.3 of the ICC playing conditions for concussion substitution states: “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 team for the remainder of the match.”
Rule 1.2.7.7 states: “The decision of the ICC Match Referee in relation to any Concussion Replacement Request shall be final and neither team shall have any right of appeal.”
Backlash on social media
The decision to field Harshit Rana as a concussion substitute did not sit well with many on social media, with some accusing the BCCI of cheating. One user questioned how Rana could be considered a like-for-like replacement for Dube, especially since Dube is a part-time bowler.
Previous controversies
This is not the first time that India has faced criticism for concussion substitute decisions.
In 2020, during India’s T20I series against Australia, the use of Chahal as a concussion substitute for Jadeja led to a heated argument between Australia’s head coach Justin Langer and the match referee.
Chahal had taken three wickets in that game, leading India to an 11-run victory.
Dube named Man of the Match
India posted 181/9 after being sent in to bat. The hosts won the match by 15 runs, taking an unassailable 3-1 lead in the five-match series.
Ironically, Shivam Dube, who was replaced due to concussion, was named Player of the Match for his half-century.
