[ad_1]
Indian physio Nitin Patel’s absence on the sector of play simply after Ravindra Jadeja obtained hit on the pinnacle by a Mitchell Starc bouncer within the last over of the innings is a “breach” of concussion protocol, feels former India batsman-turned-commentator Sanjay Manjrekar. Jadeja, who had additionally suffered a hamstring damage, was changed by Yuzvendra Chahal, who obtained three for 25 to information India to a 11-run victory within the first T20 International towards Australia in Canberra on Friday. “There is one important breach of protocol that has happened,” Manjrekar stated after the match on Friday.
“I am sure the match referee will raise with India but one of the main things with that protocol, the moment you get hit on the head, they (physio) have to spend time with the batsman out there, asking how he feels.”
“The physio (Nitin Patel in this case) has to come in and there are a certain set of questions that need to be asked. With Jadeja, it just happened, there was hardly any delay and he continued playing,” Manjrekar stated.
In truth, former Australia cricketer Tom Moody additionally raised doubts concerning the severity of Jadeja”s damage because it did not require medical consideration.
“I have no issue with Jadeja being substitute (sic) with Chahal. But I do have an issue with a Doctor & Physio not being present after Jadeja was struck on the helmet which I believe is protocol now?” requested former Australia cricketer Tom Moody, who’s now a coach and a commentator.
Manjrekar on his half stated that Jadeja persevering with to bat did not give any huge benefit to India as they added solely 9 runs after that however the credibility of his damage may be questioned.
“He added just 9 runs, it wasn’t a massive advantage. But after that (hit), there should have been at least 2-3 minutes where India support staff should have come out. And then it would have looked a little more credible.”
However, Manjrekar agreed that match referee David Boon had no possibility however to permit India a concussion substitute.
“I would say one thing though, David Boon had no choice but to give India the concussion substitute because he would not have the courage to say he wouldn’t allow it because, at the time of impact, no attention was given,” he stated.
“He had to give the concussion substitute once the request was made.”
Manjrekar stated that whereas the principles are made with good intentions, some thought must be put in in order that groups do not misuse it.
“After this, there is going to be a lot of thought given to concussion substitute and the whole concept, because we, as players, there are rules made with good intentions, but we’re masters at just trying to find a loophole in the rule to our own advantage.
“Whether India took benefit, I do not know however there’s one thing that ICC will begin ,” Manjrekar said.
Manjrekar believes that ICC will have a look at the fact that the physio didn’t come out to attend Jadeja.
“You know what ICC or referee may have an issue with that is there was no go to by the physio, no person got here, no time was taken to see him, he carried on taking part in.”
Promoted
The concept of like-for-like replacement can also be questioned since Jadeja had a hamstring injury.
“ICC may even ensure that no crew makes use of it unfairly, I’m not suggesting India used it unfairly and obtained an unfair benefit. They need the like-for-like alternative. In this case, Jadeja, with the hamstring, will not be the identical bowler, as Chahal was,” Manjrekar stated.
Topics talked about on this article
(This story has not been edited by Newslivenation employees and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)