Tony Becca
WHEN the ICC's Chief Executive Committee meets at Lord's on June 24 and 25 it will have a number of recommendations from the ICC Cricket Committee to deal with including one which could change the face of cricket.
At the end of a meeting in Dubai recently, the Cricket Committee, chaired by former India captain Sunil Gavaskar and comprising 12 other members with international playing experience, made a number of recommendations that it hopes will improve the game, and along with those dealing with the composition of bats, the use of technology, and fielding restrictions in one-day cricket is one that calls for substitutes in international cricket.
In a move that would bring cricket in line with soccer, the Cricket Committee is recommending that a player can be substituted at any time during a match.
According to the recommendation, the substitution, as it is in soccer, could take place at any time during a match, the player substituted would be ruled out for the remainder of the match, and both the substituted player and the substitute would receive a cap as a player during the match.
The Cricket Committee, which includes David Holford of the West Indies, would like this recommendation to be introduced in time for the Johnnie Walker Super Series in Australia in October, and according to Gavaskar, "it will be interesting to see how sides adapt to the tactics of introducing a substitute and to see what impact this will have on selection issues."
As is the norm when changes are recommended, former players and especially so some of those of long ago, are against this change. According to them, it will make a mockery of a game in which the ability to 'read' a pitch, to select a team accordingly, and to decide whether to bat first or to bowl first has been part of the intrigue for well over 100 years.
SUBSTITUTION
Like so many changes, however, substitution, one or two players, could be good for the game, hopefully the ICC Chief Executives will accept it, and if for nothing else, for one simple reason.
While the idea of sticking with the 11 selected before the toss is good because it ensures that a team cannot correct a mistake after it has lost the toss, because it has mis-read the pitch, or because, with the opposition running through its batting or piling up runs, it finds itself in need of another batsman or another bowler, the availability of a substitute would be better. In fact, it would be better than that. It would be a wonderful move one that should have happened decades ago.
As great a game as cricket is, it has always been strange that a bit of bad luck an injury to a top batsman or a top bowler during a match could have been allowed, for so long, to decide the fate of a match.
Right now, if a team ends up with an injured batsman or an injured bowler early in a match, it has to bat one short or bowl with one bowler short in both innings, and certainly in this age of professional sport when so much is at stake, when it should be the best versus the best, that is not fair.
According to Gavaskar and company, a substitute player will make the game more interesting because a team in trouble will then have a chance to bring in someone who can change things, and that, as it is in soccer, is good for the game as a contest.
What is more important, however, is that the availability of a substitute will protect or can protect a team that has suffered an injury, and that is great for the game.
As it is in soccer, so is it in cricket: a team that is one short is at a great disadvantage.
