Concussion Substitution in Cricket - My take
What’s my take on the
Concussion Substitution controversy?
England Vs
Australia – Second test at Lords - 2019
In the first innings, Steve
Smith was batting on 80 and was well placed for a longer one. One of Jofra
Archer’s deliveries bowled at 148 kph rose menacingly to hit the batsman on the
neck. A dazed Smith languidly walked off with uncertainty looming over his
further participation in the match. He later returned to add 12 more runs to
his tally before he was trapped leg before on 92.
Cricket Australia
announced that Smith will not able to participate in the match any further.
The Australians took
advantage of the new rule of ‘Concussion Substitution’ allowing them to make a
like-for-like replacement of the injured player. Steve Smith was thus replaced
by another batsman Marnus Labuschagne.
In the second innings,
needing 264 to win, the Australians were in a precarious position when
Labuschagne walked in the middle. He scored a patient 59 to help his team draw
the match.
Steve Smith incidentally
was the first Concussion Substitute ever.
What is a
Concussion injury?
The Hindu quotes a statement
made in 2012 by the 4th International Conference on ‘Concussion in
Sport’ which defines the Concussion injury as – A brain injury that may be
caused either by a direct blow to the head, face, neck or elsewhere in the body
with an ‘impulsive’ force transmitted to the head.
Is this serious? Yes,
it is.
Australia Vs
India – T20 match
Ravindra Jadeja batted
brilliantly with a hamstring injury to score a 23 ball 44. He was stuck on the head
by a Mitchelle Starc bouncer. The delivery bowled at a fierce pace had taken a
piece of his bat before ricocheting it towards backward point.
Jadeja did not ask for
medical help and played on to score 9 more runs for his team. India replaced him
under the Concussion Substitution rule with Yuzvendra Chahal who helped India
win the game.
What was ‘cagey’
in this case?
Jadeja not being given
a concussion test on the spot and a doubt that he was being replaced due to
hamstring injury created a controversy.
Why did the player not
seek medical help when hit? The answer to that question possibly is that whether
to ask for a doctor or not is his decision.
That brings another question
to the fore –
Did match referee have
any other option?
There could be arguments
but I believe the options with the match referee are limited.
The rule says that the
injured player needs to be medically examined and has to be declared unfit. The
onus would lay on the match referee who can take the final call to allow a
replacement for a like-for-like player after considering the role the injured
player could perform in the reminder of the match.
Jadeja in this case
was medically assessed later on and was declared unfit. The symptoms in such
injuries can develop later.
At best, the match
referee could assess the situation the teams are placed in before taking a
decision on which player they want to bring in. He may not have allowed a spinner
to be replaced by a fast bowler for instance.
Moreover, in this
match, the first innings had concluded and Jadeja was an important bowler whose
absence could have gone in Australia’s favor.
It’s a fair call
considering a grey area the match referee is looking at and the injured player should
get a benefit of doubt.
What if the
referee didn’t allow a substitution?
Let’s just imagine
this - the match referee doesn’t allow substitution and a player wanting to
prove his grittiness continues to participate in the match.
I am sure the match
referee would be exceedingly disappointed if the situation leads to serious
implications as brain injury symptoms can develop later on.
I am not assuming
anything but Concussions are Concussions.
We may argue the in
such a case it was a voluntary decision of the player to continue playing but
could the match referee wash off their hands off it if things go awry in
Concussion injuries?
Smith was hit on the
neck and fell on the pitch. The English players had swarmed around him bringing
back memories of Phillip Hughes who too was hit on the neck by a Sean Abbott
bouncer in a Sheffield Shield match. We know what happened later.
Whether India took an
unfair advantage should not be the discussion here because the inclusion of
Chahal could have gone either way since the Australians had played Chahal well
in the ODI series. The match wasn’t a decider either. Australians are playing
at home and can still bounce back in the tournament.
The makers of the rule
have given ample thought to it taking into account the loopholes and have decided
that a Concussion could be a serious injury later. We should amply trust the
injured player.
There will be rules
and there will be loopholes leading to breaches but the we have to adhere to
the process to ensure there are no further incidents like Phil Hughes.
After all it was only
a game and lives of the sportsmen should matter.
Comments
Post a Comment