Like for like injury replacements

[TheJediBrah]

Bump.

Been a lot of discussion about this recently. I've been swayed a it by some arguments. Still don't think it would be worth the trouble it would cause but good points being made on both sides

 

[Coronis]

Bump.

Been a lot of discussion about this recently. I've been swayed a it by some arguments. Still don't think it would be worth the trouble it would cause but good points being made on both sides

What I don’t like is the seemingly double standard in sports (not just cricket) of concussion subs being allowed but not other injuries.

 

[TheJediBrah]

What I don’t like is the seemingly double standard in sports (not just cricket) of concussion subs being allowed but not other injuries.

Makes sense as a safety issue though. You're more likely to play through a concussion and risk more serious injury/death than other injuries

 

[Coronis]

Makes sense as a safety issue though. Your more likely to play through a concussion and risk more serious injury/death than other injuries

Oh I completely understand why it was implemented but it still feels you know, off.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Oh I completely understand why it was implemented but it still feels you know, off.

I figure it's a case of "we don't really want subs at all, but legally we will be ****ed if someone concussed keeps playing and can end up suing us"

 

[ataraxia]

I figure it's a case of "we don't really want subs at all, but legally we will be ****ed if someone concussed keeps playing and can end up suing us"

It also deters trying to concuss the opposition which is always nice.

 

[Shady Slim]

bad idea with the exception of concussions imho, totally against the ethos of test cricket and especially a long series
need look no further than stokes saying he'd have played the fifth test if he could cark it and get substituted if need be

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Injuries happens and that makes the test even harder.

It’s like war. One of your men down, pull yourself up by the bootstraps. Improves morale.

People had similar feelings about runners in the game when Inzi was abusing it.

 

[Molehill]

At what point will the concussion rule start getting abused though (like the runner did)? If Woakes had said he'd got a bit of a headache, he'd have been allowed a sub. Leach did get one after a similar boundary diving incident (I can't remember what other injuries he had, if any).

 

[GIMH]

If Woakes had said he'd got a bit of a headache, he'd have been allowed a sub.

are you sure about this

 

[Molehill]

are you sure about this

I was probably being slightly facetious, but I found this from the Leach incident.

However, after subsequent examination from the ECB medical team, the decision was taken to withdraw him from the match. "Jack Leach has symptoms of concussion following his head injury whilst fielding," read an ECB statement. "As per concussion guidelines, he has been withdrawn from this Test."

It strikes me that no independent doctor made this decision, it was entirely on the ECB.

Another interesting quote was this:

Brendon McCullum, England's new Test coach, had made a point of asking players to keep chasing every ball before this Test. "Brendon said one basic thing for his mindset is: you chase every ball to the boundary as hard as you can until it's at the boundary edge," Stuart Broad said on Tuesday. "That is just a mindset of positivity, all the time - that you are going to give everything to this game."

Eng v NZ 2022 - Jack Leach withdrawn from Test after suffering concussion symptoms during fielding incident | ESPNcricinfo

 

[GIMH]

Fair enough, but a bit of a headache isn't the same as concussion symptoms

 

[Migara]

No.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

bad idea with the exception of concussions imho, totally against the ethos of test cricket and especially a long series
need look no further than stokes saying he'd have played the fifth test if he could cark it and get substituted if need be

What?!! Did he really say that? If he carked it during a test they'd call the whole thing off. The players wouldn't continue and they'd start preparing for the funeral

 

[Fuller Pilch]

At what point will the concussion rule start getting abused though (like the runner did)? If Woakes had said he'd got a bit of a headache, he'd have been allowed a sub. Leach did get one after a similar boundary diving incident (I can't remember what other injuries he had, if any).

Should've tripped over and banged his head while walking walking out to bat

 

[Fuller Pilch]

At what point will the concussion rule start getting abused though (like the runner did)? If Woakes had said he'd got a bit of a headache, he'd have been allowed a sub.

Just get cricketers to read "Warne vs Murali", "the value of runs at no 8", 1st chance average etc.

"I've got a terrible headache. Panadol doesn't help"

 

[Coronis]

What?!! Did he really say that? If he carked it during a test they'd call the whole thing off. The players wouldn't continue and they'd start preparing for the funeral

More inflation of his ego

 

[Fuller Pilch]

More inflation of his ego

Posthumous knighthood perhaps though

 

[honestbharani]

I am all for it. ICC can surely fund one medical advisor being there along with the referee and the 4th umpire, preferably a neutral guy just to help with the optics and avoid accusation of bias in case mistakes are made. The rest of the rules today cover everything else you need to enable this. Just make it a part of the game already. I shudder to think how worse it may have been had Woakes had to face a ball and somehow worsened his injury or created an actual risk/threat to his own life.

 

[Justo]

IMO there should be injury replacements in Tests. A bowler going down early in the first innings is a big disadvantage for any team for something that can be completely out of any teams control.

I'd potentially only offer injury replacements for different halves of a game. E.G. if a player goes down in the first or second innings they can't be replaced until the third innings so you can't end up with 12 batsmen in one innings or an extra bowler. Injuries would still hinder a team but not as much at least. If someone gets injured in the third or fourth innings then no replacement available. This also potentially allows for some time for someone to be flown in for local teams if possible.

As for who authorizes injury replacements I think just have the captains of both teams being able to OK it. Could add the umpires to the list as well. There would be incentive for captains to work together for it since players could go down on both teams.

Before each game teams would need to name their replacements ahead of time and it can't be changed unless they are needed. (E.G. below for Aus from the recent WI series).

Marnus - Replacement for Batters 1 - 5
Inglis - Replacement for Webster, Carey
Boland - Replacement for Starc, Hazlewood, Cummins
Kuhnemann - Replacement for Lyon

If a replacement is used then another like for like player will need to be named at the time. Replacements also need to be like for like so no Kuhnemann for a batsmen or pace bowler to potentially take advantage of changing conditions.