“One of the worst rules in the game” - Former batter’s scathing attack on India over concussion controversy in IND vs ENG 2025 4th T20I

Former opener Sunil Gavaskar has lambasted the concussion substitute rule that allowed India to benefit massively in their fourth T20I win over England in Pune. Batting all-rounder Shivam Dube was struck on the helmet by a short delivery from Jamie Overton in the penultimate ball of India's innings.

While he played the final ball of the innings, Dube was off the field in the second half of the game and pacer Harshit Rana replaced him as the concussion substitute. The allowance of the move had several former England players and even the Indian fans and ex-players stunned, sparking a major controversy.

Considering the concussion substitute rule calls for a like-to-like replacement, it was baffling to see a specialist pacer in Rana replacing someone like Dube, who bowls only occasionally.

Blasting the whole concussion substitute rule and India's unfair usage of the same, Gavaskar wrote in a column for the Mid-Day:

"The concussion substitute, which allows teams to bring on a like-for-like replacement on the field, is one of the worst rules in the game. It rewards ineptitude. If a batter can’t play a bouncer and gets hit on the helmet and goes off the field and the team doctor thinks he needs to rest because of concussion, then someone else who is not in the XI who does pretty much what the concussed guy does can replace him."

He added:

"Firstly, if you can’t play the bouncer then don’t play at the highest level. Play weekend club cricket and smash the bowlers all round the park to your heart’s content. Secondly, if someone breaks a finger or a wrist and obviously cannot take any further part in the game is not allowed a like-for-like replacement, then why allow one for some guy who gets hit on the helmet."

After Dube scored a crucial half-century, his concussion replacement Rana produced a game-changing spell of 3/33 in four overs with the ball. India won the contest by 15 runs to take an unassailable 3-1 lead in the best-of-five series.

"Allowing a concussion substitute itself was not correct" - Sunil Gavaskar

Gavaskar did not mince words in his attack on the concussion substitute controversy [Credit: Getty]

Sunil Gavaskar also questioned India being allowed a concussion substitute in the first place after Dube continued batting after being hit on the helmet in the fourth T20I against England.

As mentioned above, the tall left-hander played the final ball of the innings after the physio conducted the concussion test.

"In the Pune game, Dube batted right till the end after having got hit on the helmet earlier, so clearly, he was not concussed. So, allowing a concussion substitute itself was not correct. Yes, there could have been a substitute in case he had strained a muscle while batting, but that would have been only for fielding and he could not have bowled," wrote Gavaskar in the aforementioned column.

He also disagreed with Rana being allowed as the concussion substitute for Dube during India's bowling innings.

"Even by the most generous stretching of the like-for-like term, there was nothing such between Dube and Rana. With tongue firmly in cheek, one can say that they are the same height and have the same standard in fielding. Otherwise, there’s nothing like-for-like as far as they are concerned," added Gavaskar.

The Pune defeat and the subsequent series loss seemingly played on the England players' minds as they went on to suffer a 150-run hammering in the series finale in Mumbai to end with a 1-4 series defeat.

Dube was cleared to play in the contest and enjoyed bowling figures of 2/11 in 2 overs, much to England's frustration.