India’s decision to introduce Harshit Rana as a concussion substitute for Shivam Dube during the fourth T20I against England in Pune has sparked a major debate in the cricketing world.
Controversy over Harshit Rana’s inclusion as a concussion substitute
The match saw Dube playing a pivotal role, smashing 53 off 34 balls, as India set a competitive total of 181/9. However, in the final over of India’s innings, Dube was struck on the helmet by a Craig Overton bouncer, forcing him to leave the field under concussion protocols. In a move that has since drawn heavy scrutiny, India replaced him with Harshit Rana, a medium-fast bowler, instead of a like-for-like all-rounder.
Rana made an instant impact, delivering a match-winning 3 for 33 on his T20I debut. His crucial breakthroughs – including Liam Livingstone, Jacob Bethell and Craig Overton – helped India bowl England out for 166, securing a 15-run victory. With this win, India took an unassailable 3-1 lead in the series ahead of the final match in Mumbai. England captain Jos Buttler did not hold back in questioning India’s move, openly stating that Rana was not a like-for-like replacement for Dube.
Ravichandran Ashwin’s stance on India’s decision
Indian spin legend Ravichandran Ashwin has now voiced his strong disapproval of the decision, criticizing both the match officials and the Indian team’s handling of the situation. Speaking on his YouTube channel, Ashwin did not mince his words, comparing the decision to the IPL’s Impact Player rule rather than an international cricket regulation.
“The game is done. India capture yet another series at home. T20I has been a real juggernaut of a win. What was this game? It was like a replica of the IPL. Supersub was there, and the game was played with an impact player,” Ashwin remarked, expressing his disbelief over the situation.
He further referenced the 2020 concussion substitution incident in Canberra, where Yuzvendra Chahal replaced Ravindra Jadeja after the latter suffered a concussion. Ashwin pointed out that at least in that case, a spinner was replaced by another spinner, making it a reasonable decision. In contrast, bringing in a pacer for a batting all-rounder like Dube seemed completely unjustified.
“The entire discussion is about how Harshit Rana came in as a concussion substitute for Shivam Dube. Did we forget that it was an international match and play an IPL match? I can understand. It has happened in the past. Ravindra Jadeja got concussed in Canberra, and Yuzvendra Chahal came in as a substitute. I don’t understand this. At least previously, Chahal came in for Jadeja, a spinner for a spinner,” the 38-year-old stated.
Also READ: Did India follow ICC rules in replacing Shivam Dube with Harshit Rana during 4th T20I against England? Explained
Ashwin’s perspective on Ramandeep Singh as a possible replacement
Ashwin strongly criticized the match officials, arguing that Ramandeep Singh, a batting all-rounder, was a perfect like-for-like replacement for Dube, yet was overlooked. Ashwin further emphasized that this decision set a dangerous precedent, as it could allow teams to exploit the concussion rule in future matches.
“Here, Harshit came in for Shivam Dube. There is no role of the Indian or England team. If there is no one in the squad, then you can say that Harshit Rana can bat a bit and Shivam Dube can bowl a bit. That’s why we brought him in. Like-for-like replacement Ramandeep Singh was sitting outside. I don’t understand. This is a case of pure cricketing miscalculation, either on the part of the umpires or the part of the match referee. Ramandeep Singh was there, like-for-like for Shivam Dube. But not him. Harshit Rana was chosen as the concussion substitute. I think people in charge should look into this,” Ashwin concluded.
