Gavaskar blasts concussion sub rule as promoting “incompetence”
Legendary cricketer and former India captain Sunil Gavaskar has delivered a scathing critique of the ICC’s current concussion substitute regulations, accusing the governing body of enabling what he bluntly labeled as “incompetence.” His comments come in the wake of Rishabh Pant’s foot injury during the ongoing India vs England Test series, which has reignited a broader discussion around the legitimacy and fairness of substitution rules in international cricket.
“I’ve always felt that you are giving a like-for-like substitute for incompetence. If you are not good enough to play short-pitched bowling, don’t play Test cricket; go and play tennis or golf. You are giving a like-for-like substitute for somebody who can’t play the short ball and gets hit,” Gavaskar said during a discussion on Sony Sports Network.
This isn’t the first time Gavaskar has criticized the substitution system introduced in 2019. He has long argued that allowing a replacement for a player struck by a short ball penalizes bowlers and rewards batters who lack the skill to handle genuine pace and bounce.
The Pant injury sparks fresh scrutiny
Gavaskar’s comments were triggered by the situation involving Rishabh Pant, who suffered a fractured foot during the Manchester Test. Despite the severity of the injury, Pant was still required to bat for India in the first innings. While Dhruv Jurel took over wicketkeeping duties, the rules did not allow for a full substitute.
This distinction — where concussion allows a like-for-like replacement, but other external injuries do not — is what Gavaskar finds unacceptable.
“Here, it is a clear injury (Pant); there has to be a substitute. I want some sort of committee appointed to take a call on this. There is a cricket committee, ICC has a cricket committee, but at the moment, that’s headed by Sourav Ganguly, the ICC chairman is Jay Shah, and the ICC CEO is Sanjog Gupta,” he stated.
Gavaskar calls for independent panel, not led by Indian officials
Highlighting concerns over perceived bias or future controversy, Gavaskar advocated for a completely independent committee to handle decisions regarding non-concussion injuries. He emphasized the need for impartiality to ensure the credibility of the system, particularly given the growing skepticism among international media.
“We don’t want a situation for the media here in particular and in Australia to say, ‘Oh, because it’s an Indian situation, they have started to do that’. So, let it be a totally different committee to look at these injuries, maybe with doctors, etc., and let that committee come to a call,” Gavaskar added.
The former captain’s pointed reference to Sourav Ganguly, who currently heads the ICC Cricket Committee, underlined his concern about potential conflicts of interest — particularly when high-stakes matches involve India.
ICC’s concussion rule under increasing scrutiny
The concussion substitute rule was introduced in 2019 and came into the spotlight when Marnus Labuschagne replaced Steve Smith during the Ashes after Smith was struck by a bouncer from Jofra Archer. While the rule was initially praised for its player safety intentions, voices like Gavaskar’s have since challenged its consistency and fairness.
With the cricketing world split over substitution protocols and India’s high-profile clash with England hanging in the balance, Gavaskar’s hard-hitting remarks have once again forced the ICC to revisit a rule that remains deeply polarizing.
