Buttler raises the eligibility of Harshit Rana as concussion sub by saying it is not a “like for like” replacement.
Buttler raises the issue after the match that Harshit Rana did not fit the definition of a like-for-like replacement.
Kevin Pietersen and Nick Knight, the television analysts who were broadcasting at the time of the switch, had also raised concerns about the move. After being hit on the helmet as he was reaching 53 off 34 balls, Dube did not take the pitch in the chase.
“It is not a like-for-like replacement. We don’t agree with that,” Buttler said after India completed a 15-run win. “Either Shivam Dube has put on about 25mph with the ball or Harshit has really improved his batting. It’s part of the game and we really should have gone on to win the match, but we disagree with the decision.
“There was no consultation [with us]. That’s something I was thinking as I came out to bat – who is Harshit on for? They said he is a concussion replacement, which I obviously disagreed with. It is not a like-for-like replacement. They said that the match referee had made the decision. We had no say in it or any part of it. But we’ll ask Javagal [Srinath] some questions just to get some clarity around it.
“Like I said, it was not the whole reason why we did not win the match. We had our chances to win the game which we could have still taken. But I’d like to have a bit more clarity on that.”
As per the ICC’s playing conditions for men’s T20Is, “The ICC Match Referee should ordinarily approve a Concussion Replacement Request if the replacement is a like-for-like player whose inclusion will not excessively advantage his/her team for the remainder of the match. In assessing whether the nominated Concussion Replacement should be considered a like-for-like player, the ICC Match Referee should consider the likely role the concussed player would have played during the remainder of the match, and the normal role that would be performed by the nominated Concussion Replacement.”