'Did we forget that it was an international match?': R Ashwin questions Harshit Rana's concussion substitution

NEW DELHI: The controversy over Harshit Rana coming in as a concussion substitute for Shivam Dube during the fourth T20I between India and England in Pune has continued to spread, with former players questioning the decision. Even England captain Jos Buttler openly stated that Rana was not a "like-for-like" replacement for Dube.

Rana made history by becoming the first player to make his T20I debut mid-match as a concussion substitute among full-member teams. He replaced all-rounder Dube, who was struck on the back of the head by a Jamie Overton delivery in the final over of India’s innings. While the move played a key role in India's 15-run victory, it also sparked intense debate over its fairness.
Go Beyond The Boundary with our YouTube channel. SUBSCRIBE NOW!
Former India spinner Ravichandran Ashwin strongly criticised the on-field officials and the match referee for allowing the substitution, calling it a case of "pure cricketing miscalculation."
"The game is done. India captured yet another series at home. T20I has been a real juggernaut of a win. What was this game? It was like a replica of the IPL. Supersub was there, and the game was played with an impact player," Ashwin said on his YouTube channel 'Ash Ki Baat'.
"The entire discussion is about how Harshit Rana came in as a concussion substitute for Shivam Dube. Did we forget that it was an international match and play an IPL match? I can understand. It has happened in the past. Ravindra Jadeja got concussed in Canberra, and Yuzvendra Chahal came in as a substitute. I don't understand this. At least previously, Chahal came in for Jadeja, a spinner for a spinner."

Ashwin further argued that Ramandeep Singh should have been the ideal concussion substitute instead of Rana, urging lawmakers to review and refine the concussion rules.
"Here, Harshit came in for Shivam Dube. There is no role of the Indian or England team. If there is no one in the squad, then you can say that Harshit Rana can bat a bit and Shivam Dube can bowl a bit, that's why we brought him in. Like-for-like replacement Ramandeep Singh was sitting outside. I don't understand," he said.
"This is a case of pure cricketing miscalculation, either on the part of the umpires or the part of the match referee. Ramandeep Singh was there, like-for-like for Shivam Dube. But not him. Harshit Rana was chosen as the concussion substitute. I think people in charge should look into this."
Ashwin's concerns echoed those of former India pacer Zaheer Khan, who also questioned the decision. While acknowledging that teams have the right to nominate a player, Zaheer insisted that the match referee should have ensured the replacement met the criteria.
"Maybe Ramandeep [Singh] would have been the ideal choice," Zaheer said. "The match referee’s role was to say, ‘Okay, you have nominated this player, but he doesn’t suit the criteria exactly, so suggest another player who is actually a batter who can bowl, rather than a bowler who can bat.’"
With questions mounting, cricketing authorities may now face calls for a review of concussion substitution protocols to prevent further controversy in international matches.