Cricket Australia wants to throw open idea to replace all injured players with substitutes

CRICKET Australia wants to throw open the idea of widening the substitution proposal to incorporate all injuries suffered on the field.

SPORT — Test Cricket. 2nd Test. Day 2. Australia v New Zealand at the WACA. Photo by Daniel Wilkins. PICTURED — Australian fielder Usman Khawaja leaves the field with a suspected hamstring injury

YOU can’t fake being hit in the head.

Not the sickening initial blow itself or the potentially serious repercussions that can follow.

The alarming long-term dangers of concussion are as real as it gets and batsmen who are hit in the head should be allowed to be replaced by a player who can take their place at the crease.

Australia’s push for concussion replacements in elite cricket is a no-brainer, but there is a line.

In starting a dialogue with the International Cricket Council later this month on concussions, Cricket Australia also wants to throw open to the table the idea of widening the substitution proposal to incorporate all injuries suffered on the field.

CA in fact did this back in 2012, believing that losing a fast bowler on morning one of a Test match, wasn’t necessarily fair or safe practice in modern sport.

The proposal was rejected.

Later this month, CA will at least initially narrow down their proposal to the ICC to the most pertinent issue outlined in the report into Phillip Hughes’s death — adequately caring for players who receive blows to the head.

But make no mistake, Cricket Australia will also argue to the ICC that concussions and regular cricket injuries like broken bones and fractured backs perhaps shouldn’t necessarily be treated differently.

Respected former Test keeper and noted hard man Brad Haddin for one disagrees.

“I’m 100 per cent with that. I think concussion and head trauma is different because we’ve seen the long-term effects that has on athletes,” Haddin told ESPN cricinfo.

“Studies have shown the impact it can have on people’s lives.

Usman Khawaja walks off after injuring his hamstring against New Zealand in a Test match last summer. Picture: Daniel Wilkins

“But if someone tears a hamstring or breaks a finger, that’s just part of the game.”

CA believes the game should at least debate whether it has a duty of care for all injuries — but a player like Arjuna Ranatunga, with those dodgy hamstrings that magically came good, might see that broadbrush approach as an opportunity to exploit the system.

Allowing injury replacements could also tempt teams to roll the dice on injured stars, knowing that they have a fresh reserve sitting on the bench anyway.

Before the merits of compensating for regular injuries are even discussed, the concussion substitute should be something that is immediately implemented by the ICC — not just in domestic cricket, but internationals too.

Without this mechanism, batsmen will continue to feel undue pressure to bat on through a head knock so as not to leave their team short.

Incredibly, the ICC does not have a concussion policy, or a chief medical officer, for that matter, which simply isn’t good enough in 2016.

How can the game’s governing body properly care for player welfare, and make decisions on rules to protect players when they don’t even consider it to be their responsibility? Eighteen months after Hughes’ death and still nothing has changed.

Cricket Australia CEO, James Sutherland (left) and Cricket Australia Sports Science and Sports Medicine Manager, Alex Kountouris speak after releasing recommendations from the independent review into the death of Phillip Hughes.

The ICC better get its ducks in a row because there are big decisions to be made.

Head trauma cannot be faked and substitutes ought to be common sense, but replacements for other types of injury?

Many would argue that’s just not Test cricket.

WHAT THE CURTAIN REPORT INTO PHILLIP HUGHES’S DEATH SAID:

WAS HUGHES’S HELMET ADEQUATE?

“The helmet was compliant with an Australian Standard, which has since been withdrawn, but was not compliant with the more recent British Standard. Essentially the difference ... involves the grille protecting the face being extended further to the rear of the helmet. I do not believe that the new helmet would have afforded additional protection against the blow given the location of where Phillip was struck, as the protection to the neck, at the rear, is no different.”

WAS THERE AN AMBULANCE DELAY?

Ambulance arrived 20 minutes and 10 seconds after Hughes was struck.

“Although there was apparently a delay in the ambulance arriving, Phillip was being cared for appropriately in the interim ...”

DID HUGHES GET SUFFICIENT MEDICAL ATTENTION?

“Subject to the coronial enquiry, I am of the opinion that the attention received by Phillip after being struck had no role whatsoever on his subsequent demise, due to the nature and severity of his injury.” ” ... The level of care provided pursuant ... is of a high standard and (I) commend it.”

Phillip Hughes tragically passed away in 2014.

WHAT WAS THE CAUSE OF DEATH?

“In my opinion Phillip’s death was occasioned by a blow to the back of the neck in the vicinity of the vertebrae, below the helmet line, such blow being received at considerable force, and having the effect of causing a traumatic basal subarachnoid haemorrhage.”

WHAT’S THE ONGOING RISK TO PLAYERS?

“Data indicates that blows to the head are relatively common, and that concussion is either identified or suspected in many cases.”

DO PLAYERS NEED AN ATTITUDE CHANGE?

“Of concern to some is the fact that players who have been struck on the head and have suffered some symptoms may not admit to this as they would not want to prejudice the team by leaving it effectively a man short in batting and/or bowling.”

DO THE NEW STEM GUARDS (attached to back of helmet) WORK?

“This device seems to be capable of being worn without unduly interfering with freedom of movement by a batter but at the time of writing this report, it has not been evaluated for efficacy and safety. I would recommend that this device be properly evaluated for functionality and comfort as well as to determine if it materially increases player safety, before making any recommendation as to its use.”

Originally published as Cricket Australia wants to throw open idea to replace all injured players with substitutes