IND vs ENG Test: Substitution in cricket? Michael Vaughan has an idea after Rishabh Pant's injury

Rishabh Pant went off the field after injuring his right foot on Day 1 of the fourth Test between India and England. (AP)

Rishabh Pant suffers right foot injury in India vs England Test; taken off in an ambulance

BBC's Test Match Special

Rishabh Pant’s painful exit from the fourth Test at Old Trafford on Wednesday reignited a larger debate in world cricket — should like-for-like substitutes be allowed for injuries? Pant, batting on 37, was struck flush on his right foot while attempting a reverse sweep off Chris Woakes. The ball crashed into his toe, causing visible swelling and bleeding. While England went up in appeal for leg-before, replays showed a faint inside edge, sparing Pant the dismissal. But there was no escaping the physical damage. After receiving on-field treatment and struggling to stand, India's wicketkeeper-batter was ferried off in a mini ambulance, visibly in pain and limping, and was later taken for scans It has now emerged that Pant will out for a lengthy period and is unlikely to return for the fourth or fifth Test of the Anderson-Tendulkar Trophy.As India cope with the loss of their X-factor batter, former England captain Michael Vaughan questioned the fairness of continuing a high-stakes Test series with one team effectively reduced to ten players.In a social media post he said, "Clear and obvious injuries in the first innings of Tests we should allow like for like Subs .. we have concussion subs so surely we can have subs for injuries like Rishabhs..."Earlier onhe had said , “I don't like the fact that we've got four days left in the game — four days of action in what has been an incredible series — where we are going to have ten versus eleven.”Calling for a rule change, Vaughan said the game should evolve to accommodate injury substitutions during the first innings.“Once they brought in concussion subs, I was crying out, saying, ‘Well, just have substitutions then in the first innings of a game.’ That would be my stepping point,” Vaughan said.“If someone breaks a hand or a foot, it’s so evident that they are in real pain and can’t carry on. I think it’s very clear — you should be allowed a sub.”Vaughan’s argument is based on fairness and player safety — if teams can field substitutes for concussions, why not for clearly visible injuries suffered during live play?However, not everyone agrees.Former England captain Alastair Cook was more cautious, pointing to the grey areas that could complicate such a rule. He cited scenarios where players could feign or exaggerate injuries to gain tactical advantage.“Say we’ve just seen Pant walk off — he looks in all kinds of pain. And then it turns out it’s not broken. There’s nothing on the X-ray — it’s just a bruise. Does he have to play on then?” Cook asked.“If he’s broken his foot, that’s a different thing. But there will be cases where someone gets hit on the arm, says ‘I can’t move my hand,’ and then it’s just a bruise. So do you get replaced because of discomfort?”Pant’s injury, incidentally, is the second one he has suffered this series. He had previously bruised a finger during the third Test at Lord’s, which prevented him from donning the gloves.While the debate continues, one thing is clear: Pant’s absence could hurt India — both strategically and emotionally. As Sai Sudharsan noted in the post-match briefing, “He was in a lot of pain. His presence makes a difference — on and off the field.”The call for like-for-like substitutions in Test cricket — at least for “clear and obvious” injuries — is bound to intensify after this incident. Whether the ICC chooses to act or not, Vaughan’s proposal has put a new spotlight on a long-standing gap in the game’s evolving rulebook.

Click here to read article