Manchester: England captain Ben Stokes and India head coach Gautam Gambhir on Sunday expressed contrasting views on the use of injury replacements in Test cricket, with the former dismissing the debate as "ridiculous".
The question on the subject was asked in the light of injury to Rishabh Pant in the Manchester Test where he batted despite a broken foot. However, he was in no position to keep wickets and Dhruv Jurel stood behind the stumps to cover for Pant.
"I think it is absolutely ridiculous there is a conversation around an injury replacement. There would be too many loopholes for a team to go through. You pick an 11 for the game, injuries are part of it. I think that conversation should be shut down," said Stokes.
Gambhir, however, is all for the injury substitute.
A concussion substitute was introduced in the wake of Australian opener Phil Hughes' untimely death in 2014 after being hit on the head but there is no such provision in case of any other serious injury.
"Absolutely, I'm all for it, if the umpires and the match referee sees and feels that there's a major injury. It's very important to have this rule, where you can get a substitute. That is, if it's very visible, there's nothing wrong in doing that. Especially in a series like this, where it's been such a closely fought series, in the previous 3 Test matches," Gambhir said.
"Imagine if we would have had to play with 10 people, 10 men against 11. How unfortunate would this be for us."
Tensions over not calling off the game before start of mandatory overs
Stokes wanted to shake hands when 15 overs were left in the game and the only possible result was a draw. However, India did not accept the offer as Jadeja and Washington were closing on hundreds after batting for more than two sessions. The decision did not sit well with the England camp.
"We took the game as far as we could with our frontline bowlers to think we have a real chance of winning it. As soon as it got to the point where a draw was inevitable I was never going to risk any of my frontline bowlers with the short turnaround.
"The only other person who has got some bowling workload into them was Harry Brook (laughs) but I did have to tell him, don't do anything stupid."
Gambhir had an entirely different take on the developments of the last hour.
"If someone is batting on 90 and the other one is batting on 85, don't they deserve a hundred? Would they have walked off if someone from England's side would have been batting on 90 or 85? ," Gambhir asked.
"If someone has the opportunity to get his first Test hundred, won't you allow him to do it? They weathered the storm. It's up to them.
"If they want to play that way, that's up to them. I've got nothing more to say. I think both those guys deserved a hundred, and fortunately they got it," he added.
The question on the subject was asked in the light of injury to Rishabh Pant in the Manchester Test where he batted despite a broken foot. However, he was in no position to keep wickets and Dhruv Jurel stood behind the stumps to cover for Pant.
"I think it is absolutely ridiculous there is a conversation around an injury replacement. There would be too many loopholes for a team to go through. You pick an 11 for the game, injuries are part of it. I think that conversation should be shut down," said Stokes.
Gambhir, however, is all for the injury substitute.
A concussion substitute was introduced in the wake of Australian opener Phil Hughes' untimely death in 2014 after being hit on the head but there is no such provision in case of any other serious injury.
"Absolutely, I'm all for it, if the umpires and the match referee sees and feels that there's a major injury. It's very important to have this rule, where you can get a substitute. That is, if it's very visible, there's nothing wrong in doing that. Especially in a series like this, where it's been such a closely fought series, in the previous 3 Test matches," Gambhir said.
"Imagine if we would have had to play with 10 people, 10 men against 11. How unfortunate would this be for us."
Tensions over not calling off the game before start of mandatory overs
Stokes wanted to shake hands when 15 overs were left in the game and the only possible result was a draw. However, India did not accept the offer as Jadeja and Washington were closing on hundreds after batting for more than two sessions. The decision did not sit well with the England camp.
"We took the game as far as we could with our frontline bowlers to think we have a real chance of winning it. As soon as it got to the point where a draw was inevitable I was never going to risk any of my frontline bowlers with the short turnaround.
"The only other person who has got some bowling workload into them was Harry Brook (laughs) but I did have to tell him, don't do anything stupid."
Gambhir had an entirely different take on the developments of the last hour.
"If someone is batting on 90 and the other one is batting on 85, don't they deserve a hundred? Would they have walked off if someone from England's side would have been batting on 90 or 85? ," Gambhir asked.
"If someone has the opportunity to get his first Test hundred, won't you allow him to do it? They weathered the storm. It's up to them.
"If they want to play that way, that's up to them. I've got nothing more to say. I think both those guys deserved a hundred, and fortunately they got it," he added.
You may also like
Cash haul row: SC questions Justice Yashwant Varma over his petition against impeachment; posts plea for hearing on July 30
Supreme Court stays Calcutta HC order on West Bengal OBC list
Crete issues urgent warning for TODAY in Brit holiday hotspot
2025's Coolest Ear Trends: From LED Jhumkas to AI-Powered Ear Cuffs
Donald Trump LIVE: Huge blow for Keir Starmer hours before talks even start
