Concussion Sub Rule

[Need4Speed]

Who prepares for CT.. I Pee L.. is the King...Practicing for IPL super Sub rule..Lets do that next match as well..

 

Infact..BCCI flex your muscles..lets force super sub in Internationals too.. we lack quality ARs..lets address it this way  :D

[bowl_out]

1 hour ago, tapandrun said:

 

Yes agreed Raman would have been more of a like-to-like, was talking about the rule in general. the rule does not stop replacing a better player who is filling the same role. 

 

yes teams may misuse it but what is the better way of dealing with this ???

 

 

Match referee should nominate the replacement, not the team.. And both teams should agree with whoever he picks

[bowl_out]

1 hour ago, tapandrun said:

 

Yes agreed Raman would have been more of a like-to-like, was talking about the rule in general. the rule does not stop replacing a better player who is filling the same role. 

 

yes teams may misuse it but what is the better way of dealing with this ???

 

 

Match referee should nominate the replacement, not the team.. And both teams should agree with whoever he picks

[Bigg Brother]

6 hours ago, vvvslaxman said:

May be they should remove the rule of substituting like they do for other injuries.

Easier thing would be at the toss time team submitting in a sheet to referee about who can substitute whom if concussion happens and then it is upto referee's approval.. 

[vvvslaxman]

If i were SKY i would open the bowling with DUbe and troll them in the next match lol

[Manucrick]

1 hour ago, vvvslaxman said:

If i were SKY i would open the bowling with DUbe and troll them in the next match lol

Should sent Rana to top six 

[Lord]

Don't know why a sub is allowed only for concussion

[Chamsi]

2 hours ago, vvvslaxman said:

If i were SKY i would open the bowling with DUbe and troll them in the next match lol

Or make Harshit bat at No. 5.

[Lord]

this rule is recipe for disaster. Imagine a concussion sub winning a ICC final exploiting the rule

[goose]

horrible from India 

[BacktoCricaddict]

Is this a sign that T20Is could/should start moving towards the IPL impact player system. RIP all-rounders :-).

[lemsip]

The rule is OK as it is a positive step to dissuade concussed players from risking their health by keeping on playing. What needs to happen is a more common sense application by the match referee who should have the power to approve the player as well as the role they are allowed to play in the remaining match. So a fair application would have been that the match referee says if India insist on using Harshit then he is not allowed to bowl. As it was yesterday, India played with 12 men with a batsman replaced by a bowler which made a mockery of the contest. For those cheering India's move , it will come and bite India too if all teams start doing this.

Edited February 1 by lemsip

[BacktoCricaddict]

12 minutes ago, lemsip said:

The rule is OK as it is a positive step to dissuade concussed players from risking their health by keeping on playing. What needs to happen is a more common sense application by the match referee who should have the power to approve the player as well as the role they are allowed to play in the remaining match. So a fair application would have been that the match referee says if India insist on using Harshit then he is not allowed to bowl. As it was yesterday,

 

India played with 12 men with a batsman replaced by a bowler which made a mockery of the contest.

 

I am conflicted. The rational part of me agrees with you. The jazbaa junoon emotional Indian cricket fan who hates all things Ozzie/Pak/Pommie cricket is feeling elated that - after suffering against such tactics used by these teams for decades - India is now giving them the middle-finger.

 

Duvidha.

[Lord]

28 minutes ago, lemsip said:

The rule is OK as it is a positive step to dissuade concussed players from risking their health by keeping on playing. What needs to happen is a more common sense application by the match referee who should have the power to approve the player as well as the role they are allowed to play in the remaining match. So a fair application would have been that the match referee says if India insist on using Harshit then he is not allowed to bowl. As it was yesterday, India played with 12 men with a batsman replaced by a bowler which made a mockery of the contest. For those cheering India's move , it will come and bite India too if all teams start doing this.

 

Why would a concussed player keep on playing? And why subs on another injuries are allowed to field only?

[Lord]

13 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

 

I am conflicted. The rational part of me agrees with you. The jazbaa junoon emotional Indian cricket fan who hates all things Ozzie/Pak/Pommie cricket is feeling elated that - after suffering against such tactics used by these teams for decades - India is now giving them the middle-finger.

 

Duvidha.

 

An eye for an eye makes everyone an eyewitness

 

 

[vvvslaxman]

I am happy to see Rana makes a freak debut in T20 :). To be honest i never expected Rana to be the difference. Even now he was not the difference. Livingstone got out to a loose ball.  Then he picked a couple of cheap wickets. Real turning point was Varun's over. But given that they cry over everything they were expected to make a big deal about it much like Deepti mankading. Pierce morgan had choice words against Indian team for that incident.

[BacktoCricaddict]

1 hour ago, Lord said:

 

Why would a concussed player keep on playing?

First, athletes always want to push the boundaries. Second, concussions are not easily diagnosed, especially right after it occurred.

 

So, a player who just got hit by the ball may not even know they are concussed and will insist on going back on the field. But the physio may want to hold them back to protect them because you may not even know someone is concussed until the next day or later. 

[Lord]

7 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

First, athletes always want to push the boundaries. Second, concussions are not easily diagnosed, especially right after it occurred.

 

So, a player who just got hit by the ball may not even know they are concussed and will insist on going back on the field. But the physio may want to hold them back to protect them because you may not even know someone is concussed until the next day or later. 

 

The concussion check can always be done. It should be done immediately and player should be off. But the sub should be like for other injuries i.e. just a fielder.

[vvvslaxman]

This like for like varies all the time. If Kohli is injured  he can be replaced with another tailender like Siraj. Both can run out others or themselves out. Both don't score runs to save their lives. So like for like.

[BacktoCricaddict]

11 minutes ago, Lord said:

The concussion check can always be done.

But it is not always conclusive. The rule should be that - if you are hit above the shoulder by the ball - you are off, no questions asked.

 

11 minutes ago, Lord said:

But the sub should be like for other injuries i.e. just a fielder.

I would argue in the totally opposite direction. Each team should be allowed up to 2 substitutions that can be used strategically or in case of injury. No like for like subjectivity.

 

But, if you use both strategically and then there is an injury ... too bad, you field with 10 guys.  Risk management.

Edited February 1 by BacktoCricaddict