Gavaskar Slams ICC's Concussion Rule, Calls for Injury Sub Reforms
So, here’s what’s been stirring up quite a bit of debate in the cricketing world—Sunil Gavaskar, one of India’s most respected former captains, has taken a strong stand against the ICC’s current concussion substitute rule. And honestly, the way he put it has sparked a real conversation.
During the ongoing India vs England Test series, Gavaskar voiced his concern over what he believes is an unfair and inconsistent policy. His main argument? If the ICC allows a substitute for someone who gets hit on the head and suffers a concussion, why isn’t there a similar rule in place for other obvious injuries—like Rishabh Pant’s fractured foot? Gavaskar feels there’s a big gap in logic here, and frankly, it’s hard to disagree.
Also Read:- Kerry Dazzle as They Clinch 39th All-Ireland Title Over Donegal
- Spain vs England – A Final for the Ages at Women’s Euro 2025
In his usual no-nonsense style, Gavaskar said, and I quote, “If you are not good enough to play short-pitched bowling, don’t play Test cricket; go and play tennis or golf.” His point is that we’re offering a like-for-like substitute for someone who got hit because they couldn’t handle a bouncer, yet when a player like Pant suffers a legitimate injury—one that clearly wasn't caused by technical incompetence—he’s expected to continue or be sidelined with no replacement. Pant even hobbled out to bat and scored a brave fifty, despite that fractured foot.
Now, Gavaskar isn't just venting frustration—he’s calling for structural change. He suggested that the ICC should create a new, independent committee made up of medical experts and neutral voices to assess injury situations. That way, the decision to allow or deny a substitute won’t be left to subjective interpretation or perceived biases.
Interestingly, former England skipper Michael Vaughan backed Gavaskar on this. He made a solid analogy, saying, “If a footballer breaks a leg, they’re subbed off immediately—so why should cricket be any different?” And that’s really the core of the debate. Cricket is evolving, and if player safety is truly a priority, the rules need to reflect that.
This whole discussion might be coming to a head now, but it’s clear that voices like Gavaskar’s are going to put pressure on the ICC to rethink the current framework. If they’re serious about fairness and protecting players, some kind of revision seems inevitable.
Read More:
0 Comments