The debate over the substitution of Ravindra Jadeja by Yuzvendra Chahal in the first T20I between India and Australia seemed to die down after the Indian all-rounder was ruled out of the rest of the series. However, Moises Henriques did raise questions about the entire episode once again.
But now, a completely new viewpoint on the issue has been put forward by Indian great Sunil Gavaskar. He brushed off the entire controversy from the first T20I by saying that if an Australian match referee, David Boon, didn't find anything wrong with the substitution of Jadeja, then there is no issue with the legality of the move.
But he raised a larger question about the whole concussion substitute rule. According to the legendary former batsman, getting hit on the helmet and suffering because of it is an outcome of poor technique. Hence, a team should not be rewarded for the techinical deficiency of one of their batsmen by giving them a substitute.
"On the business of concussion substitute itself, I don’t agree with it. May be I am old fashioned and I have always believed that if you are not good enough to play the bouncer and get hit on the helmet, then you don’t deserve a substitute. I am sorry," Gavaskar told India Today network in an interview.
The rule for concussion substitute was brought in last year and has been in effect several times. But never has it generated as much controversy as it did on Thursday when the substitute, in this case Chahal, proved to be the match winner for his team.
What also angered the Australian camp, especially their coach Justin Langer, was the fact that Jadeja initially seemed fine and added another nine runs himself in the final over after getting hit. But the extent of the concussion having come to light later, there is likely to be no more discussion on that issue from the side of either team.
Gavaskar's point of view, on the other hand, merits serious attention. There is a general consensus among cricket experts that batsmen around the world have become more susceptible to short-pitch bowling. Whether a concussoin substitute is justified or not needs more elaborate discussion.
Powered by Froala Editor
Powered by Froala Editor