Last Updated on 3 months by Charbel Coorey
Whether Test cricket should have an injury substitute has been a hot topic of debate after Rishabh Pant suffered a foot injury in the fourth Test against England. According to Indian Express, scans showed a fractured toe, and debates are rife as to whether Test cricket’s injury rules require adjusting.
Currently, if a player gets injured and is unable to partake in the remainder of the game, he or she will be replaced only by a substitute fielder. That replacement player cannot bat or bowl. It is a rule that former England captain Michael Vaughan is not a fan of.
Michael Vaughan and Alastair Cook discuss injury replacement in Tests
“I don’t like the fact now that we’ve got four days left of the game [2025 Old Trafford Test]… over four days of action where we’ve had an incredible series where we’re going to have 10 vs 11. I prefer that you have a sub,” said Vaughan on BBC Test Match Special.
“Once they brought in concussion subs, I was crying out saying let’s have substitutions in the first innings of a game,” he continued. However, Vaughan was mindful that this change should happen only in the first innings.
“If it goes into the second innings of the game… I feel that teams might break the rules,” Vaughan said. “But a clear and obvious… when someone breaks a hand or they break a foot, or they rupture a calf.. so obvious that someone’s in absolute pain and can’t carry on, I think it’s very, very clear to me you should be allowed a sub.”
Alastair Cook presented a different argument. The former England opener and captain said there could be confusion as to what the threshold of injuries should be to allow for a substitute.
“I’m not sure I agree,” Cook said. “Just say [hypothetically]… we’ve seen Pant walk off there, looks in all kinds of pain, but it’s not broken. So there’s nothing on the X-Ray that says it’s broken. It’s just a bruise.
“Then he has to play on, but he says ‘I can’t walk, I can’t walk on it, I’ve got a bruise.’ If he’s broken his foot then it’s a different thing, but if you get hit on the arm… ‘I can’t move my hand, I’m bruised.’ So then you get replaced because it is discomfort and you can’t hold the bat the way you’d like, but you only have a bruise.”
Debates online as to whether there should be an injury substitute in Test cricket
Arguments for the injury substitute
Full Member countries recently agreed to trial like-for-like injury replacements in domestic First Class competitions from October 2025. It will be interesting to see what comes of it.
“Time has come to allow a fair injury replacement. Let a panel ascertain the extent of injury and give a go-ahead. This can’t be a tactical substitution,” wrote Cricket Producer and Analyst Sarang Bhalerao on X (formerly Twitter).
Arguments against the injury substitute
Former England fast bowler Steven Finn believes an injury substitute can open a can of worms.
“There should not be injury substitutes in Test cricket. The game is played over 5 days for a reason. (Some) teams bat long in order to wear a bowling unit down. If you could substitute a fresh bowler in because of injury it would just be wrong,” he wrote on X (formerly Twitter).
“Also, how on earth do you determine what an injury is? MRI scanners at every ground to check a muscle tear?”
Rishabh Pant, who retired hurt on 38*, bravely came out to bat on day two. He struck a fighting 54, helping India reach 358 in conditions aiding swing and seam bowling.
Dhruv Jurel will keep wickets for the remainder of the Manchester Test.
