Should substitution be allowed in Cricket ?

Just before lunch on the 3rd day in the 1st Test match between India and South Africa, fast bowler Morne Morkel injured his right ankle while fielding. On further analysis, he showed a ligament injury and was ruled out for the rest of the test. With India still having almost all its batsman, South Africa were left with a great disadvantage and a daunting task – to bowl out the best batting side without one of their key bowlers. Not to mention, they had to bat again and they ended up almost needing every wicket they had. The incident provokes an interesting question – Should substitution be allowed in Cricket to replace injured players?

A substitution rule already exists, which allows players to be replaced only for fielding and as a runner. In 2005, the ICC announced a rule for tactical substitution similar to that of football but this was quickly dismissed due to widespread criticism by players, commentators and fans. To answer the question on whether substitution should be allowed, imagine this – you can add an extra batsman or bowler depending on the situation. If your batting is collapsing, replace your bowlers with more batsman and while fielding, bring in the bowlers. There would be no need of all-rounders like Kallis when you can have an AB De Villiers on the side and a Dale Steyn as a substitute for him. Yes, it’s outright scary !

But injuries do come in as special cases. They leave teams with a player less. What can be done in such scenarios? Allow a substitute fielder and IF both the captains agree, bring in a new player to bat/bowl from the announced 15 member squad for the series. If the opposition captain disagrees, the injured side should be able to play through with the remaining squad. It may sound unfair, but this is where captaincy and a good team selection comes in handy. The changing of the rules seems far-fetched, so let’s just hope there are no injuries and we get to see more great Test matches like the one we just witnessed.