Image: RevSportz
Rohan Chowdhury, Oval
Just when Karun Nair was about to take the fourth run off the last ball of the 56th over, he noticed Chris Woakes in visible pain—and he stopped.
Nair had played a crisp drive that Woakes chased from mid-off. In an attempt to stop the ball with a dive, Woakes seemingly dislocated his shoulder (though there’s no official confirmation yet). The England pacer was seen clutching his left hand in support of the shoulder as he walked off the ground in tears—clearly in significant distress.
Just a few days ago in Manchester, it was Rishabh Pant who suffered a toe injury—later diagnosed as a fracture—that ruled him out of the fifth Test. Yet, he played through that almost inhuman pain, scoring 17 critical runs the following day, to complete his half-century.
According to current ICC regulations, apart from a concussion substitute, no player can be replaced mid-match due to injury. A substitute fielder is allowed, but they cannot bat or bowl under any circumstances.
This long-standing debate—on whether injury substitutes should be allowed in cricket—has resurfaced. Questions of fairness and potential loopholes have been raised by some, while others argue that the game must evolve to accommodate unavoidable, genuine injury cases.
The ongoing England versus India Test series has seen a spate of injuries—some occurring during practice, others during play. If we focus solely on in-match injuries, they often fall into two broad categories: Accidental incidents and fitness-related breakdowns.
Yet, regardless of the type, the result is the same—the injured player is benched, and a replacement is limited to just fielding. This limitation has been a topic of discussion in multiple press conferences throughout the series.
Also Read: Mr dependable Gus Atkinson to take charge after Chris Woakes suffers shoulder injury
England skipper Ben Stokes, who is himself out injured, is firmly against allowing broader substitution. “Absolutely ridiculous,” he said in a press conference. “There will be too many loopholes to go through,” he added.
“I completely understand the logic behind a concussion sub,” Stokes continued, “but otherwise someone might walk in with an MRI report or show a swollen knee and get a fresh bowler into the game.”
In contrast, Indian head coach Gautam Gambhir supports the introduction of injury substitutions. “I’m absolutely up for it,” he said. “If the umpires feel it’s a major injury, then there should be a provision to bring in a proper substitute.”
Given the situation with Woakes—one of England’s key pacers—his absence on Day 2 and possibly for the remainder of the Test will be deeply felt. “It doesn’t look good,” Gus Atkinson said during the post-Day 1 press conference at The Kia Oval.
In a scenario where ICC rules permitted a like-for-like replacement, England might not have been hit as hard by Woakes’ injury. But for now, they’ll have to manage without him.
In my opinion, there should be a clear distinction between accidental injuries and fitness-related issues. For the former, a like-for-like substitution—one who can bat and bowl—should be allowed. Cricket must strike a balance between fairness and flexibility, especially when it comes to preserving the spirit of competition and player welfare.
Note, in a recent report by the TOI, in the next ICC Committee meeting, there might be an agenda on this burning topic, which might bring a change to the existing law, but for now, it’s only a concussion sub and not an injury sub.
Follow Revsportz for latest sports news