Rishabh Pant's injury and Michael Vaughan's appeal: Time for Test Cricket Reform?

Rishabh Pant: India's beating heart in Test cricket

In the last two years, Pant has proved himself to be the pillar of Indian Test cricket. He has not only scored centuries in overseas conditions, but has also shown the ability to turn the game around during that time. In this series against England, he has also scored two centuries and two half-centuries. Even in this match he was nearing a fifty before he was injured. He not only scored runs but also worked to take India out of trouble.

The aggression in Pant's batting is what gives sleepless nights to the opposition bowlers. His agility behind the wicket, his agility in stumping, and the habit of constantly advising the captains have become a big plus point for India.

One player less, and that too Pant: What will be the effect on India?

If Pant is unable to play in the remaining three innings, then India will not only have to bear the brunt of the wicketkeeper's role, but the edge of the middle order will also weaken. Pant is the player who can turn the match around at any time. In his absence, the hope of aggressive batting in the middle order will fade away.

India may now have to compete with 10 players for the remaining four days. In a Test match where every run, every catch and every session is important, the lack of a player can directly affect the result. England's batting line-up is deep, and the bowlers are also in form. In such a situation, the lack of a player will affect the team's planning and have India in a serious disadvantage.

Michael Vaughan's point: Should Test cricket change the rules?

Former England captain Michael Vaughan took on the ICC on this issue. He argued that it is unfair that one team plays with 11 players and the other with 10. He suggested that if a player is seriously injured in the first innings, he can be replaced by a suitable player.

“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 10 versus 11,” Vaughan said to BBC Sports.

“I prefer that you’d have a sub. You know, 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,” the former English skipper added.  

Vaughan went on to talk about how in the case of a major injury a team should be allowed to make a sub. He said, “But if it’s clear and obvious when someone breaks a hand or a foot or ruptures a calf it’s so evident that someone is in real pain and can’t carry on. I think it’s very clear to me: you should be allowed a sub.”

The main point of his talk was that if a substitute is allowed in case of a head injury, then why not in case of a broken arm or leg? If a player's injury is obvious and serious, like Pant's, then it would be logical to allow a substitute.

Rishabh Pant Ruled Out

Prior to the day’s play on the second day of the fourth test, it was announced that Rishabh Pant suffered a toe fracture and would be sidelined for at least six weeks. The left-handed batter could be replaced by Dhruv Jurel in the fifth test. Jurel would be expected to keep wickets in Manchester as well, but will not be able to bat as per the ICC substitution rules. 

Rule change: What could be the benefits?

1. Player safety and team balance

Such a rule will give teams a fair chance. If a player is out due to a serious injury, then replacing him with a substitute will maintain the strength of the team.

2. Better competition for fans

Spectators will be able to see a balanced 11 vs 11 match. No match will seem one-sided, and the fun of the game will remain.

3. Less burden on players

This will give the players mental assurance that if an injury occurs for any reason, the team will not suffer a huge loss.

Rule changes: What problems can arise?

1. Possibility of abuse

If a team knows that a substitute will be available in place of an injured player, then it is possible that the team management may declare a minor injury as a major one and field a strong substitute. This may change the very purpose of the rule.

2. The nature of the match may change

The beauty of Test cricket is its strictness and challenge. Every player has an important role. The substitute rule may affect the natural flow of the match.

3. Impact on the selection process

If the substitute is allowed, then teams can work on additional strategies, which may reduce transparency in selection.

Cricket needs balance, not laxity

Rishabh Pant's injury is really sad. The absence of such a player will not only weaken the Indian team but will also reduce the excitement of the Test match. Michael Vaughan's words should be taken into consideration, but the rules should not be changed on the basis of emotions.

The ICC needs a practical and precise policy, in which the severity of the injury is clearly examined, and only then is the substitute allowed. It is important that the rules maintain the fairness of the game, along with the team.

Conclusion

In a game like Test cricket, where every session is valuable, the absence of a player can change the entire strategy. Pant's injury will be a big blow to India. Michael Vaughan's advice is strong, but it should not be implemented blindly. Every change should be made keeping in mind the spirit of the game, so that neither the teams are treated unfairly, nor the dignity of the game is reduced.