In the ongoing T20 series between India and England, controversy has erupted following India’s victory in the fourth match held in Pune. With the series already decided in India’s favor after a 15-run win, serious allegations of dishonesty have emerged. The center of the controversy is the concussion substitute rule, which facilitated the inclusion of Harshit Rana after Shivam Dube sustained an injury. Former Indian batsman and renowned commentator Aakash Chopra has openly questioned the legitimacy of the substitution, prompting discussions about cricketing ethics.
What Happened in the Pune T20 Match?
On January 31, a pivotal T20 match took place in Pune where the Indian team set a respectable total. Shivam Dube was a standout performer, scoring an impressive 53 runs. However, the match’s turning point came when Dube was struck in the head by a fast bouncer in the final over of India’s innings. After assessing Dube’s condition, the physiotherapist cleared him to complete the last two balls. Yet, when it was time for India’s bowling, Harshit Rana emerged as a substitute player.
Initially, it appeared that Rana was merely filling in for Dube temporarily for fielding duties. However, as the match progressed, roughly around the ninth over of England’s innings, Rana was officially recognized as a concussion substitute, while Dube was ruled out of the contest. This moment also marked Rana’s T20 international debut, and he made an immediate impact, capturing the wicket of Liam Livingstone in his first over. Following that, he took two additional wickets, playing a crucial role in India’s eventual victory.
Concerns Raised by Aakash Chopra and Michael Vaughan
As soon as Rana was brought on as a concussion substitute, debates ignited, raising serious questions about the legitimacy of the decision. Former England batsman Kevin Pietersen pointed out the irregularities during the commentary. After the match, former England captain Michael Vaughan took to Twitter to express his astonishment, questioning how a bowler could replace a batsman who occasionally bowls.
How can an out & out bowler replace a batter who bowls part time !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! #INDvsENG
— Michael Vaughan (@MichaelVaughan) January 31, 2025
Criticism didn’t only come from English cricket analysts; Indian commentator Aakash Chopra also deemed the replacement unjustified and highlighted who would have been an appropriate substitute. In his tweet, Chopra stated, “It’s not really a like-for-like replacement if Harshit bowls, which he should. Ramandeep was the ideal concussion replacement for Dube.”
It’s not really a like-for-like replacement if Harshit bowls, which he should.
Ramandeep was the ideal concussion replacement for Dube. https://t.co/QQyTkLRGGT— Aakash Chopra (@cricketaakash) January 31, 2025
What Do ICC Rules State?
In 2019, the ICC introduced the concussion policy, which allows teams to replace a player who suffers from a concussion. The team must request approval from the match referee, and only a ‘like-for-like’ replacement is permitted. The situation surrounding Dube and Rana raises questions because Dube is primarily a batsman who occasionally bowls, while Harshit Rana is primarily a bowler and typically bats down the order. This discrepancy has naturally led to significant contention regarding the appropriateness of the replacement.