New Delhi, July 28: The debate around injury substitutions in Test cricket has taken centre stage after India’s gutsy draw at Old Trafford, with India head coach Gautam Gambhir and England captain Ben Stokes offering opposing takes on the matter.
India’s remarkable escape in the fourth Test — having battled through 143 overs in their second innings despite a 311-run first-innings deficit — was made even more impressive by the fact that they did it effectively one player short. Wicketkeeper-batter Rishabh Pant, who fractured his foot after being struck by a Chris Woakes delivery, was unavailable for much of the game and only batted in the first innings under discomfort to score a fighting fifty. On Day 5, Washington Sundar batted at No. 5 in Pant’s place — a clear sign that the latter would only return if absolutely necessary.
Fortunately for India, Pant wasn’t required again as a spirited batting effort from KL Rahul (90), Shubman Gill (103), Sundar (101*), and Ravindra Jadeja (107*) ensured a draw that felt nothing short of a victory. The comeback was even more dramatic after India were reduced to 0 for 2 in the very first over of the innings.
Following the match, Gambhir was asked whether Test cricket should evolve to allow full-time replacements for seriously injured players — much like concussion substitutes or in COVID-19 cases. The former Indian opener backed the idea unequivocally.
“Absolutely, I’m all for it,” Gambhir said during the post-match press conference.
“If the umpires and the match referee feel it’s a major injury, why not? It’s important to allow a substitute, especially in a close series like this. Imagine being forced to play 10 against 11 — that’s unfair.”
Currently, the ICC’s Test playing conditions only permit full replacements for concussions or COVID-19-related absences. All other injuries limit teams to using fielding substitutes without batting or bowling capabilities. However, the ICC has reportedly encouraged some cricket boards to trial full-time injury replacements in domestic red-ball matches — a move that has stirred mixed reactions.
One of the strongest voices against it is Ben Stokes. The England captain dismissed the idea altogether, calling the proposal “absolutely ridiculous” and warning that it could open the door to tactical misuse.
“There would be too many loopholes,” Stokes said.
“Injuries are part of the game. You pick your XI and play. I support concussion replacements for player safety, but injury subs? No. If you MRI-scan any bowler, you’ll find something — inflammation here, tightness there — and use it as an excuse to bring in a fresh player. That’s not how Test cricket should work.”
Stokes pointed to Pant’s recent fitness struggles — including at Lord’s, where Dhruv Jurel replaced him as wicketkeeper after he injured his finger — as an example of how teams already manage players with partial availability. In that match, Pant batted in both innings despite being unable to keep wickets.
As the series now heads to a gripping finale at The Oval with India trailing 1-2 and one match left to level the contest, the injury substitution debate is unlikely to fade. Whether the ICC will eventually embrace the idea or maintain the traditional framework remains to be seen — but for now, the battle between pragmatism and purity in Test cricket rages on, both on and off the field. (Agencies)
