Mumbai Indians v Somerset, 2nd semi-final, CLT20, Chennai October 7, 2011

'Recovered' Suryakumar Yadav returns to Mumbai Indians squad

ESPNcricinfo staff

Allrounder Suryakumar Yadav has been permitted to return to the Mumbai Indians squad ahead of the Champions League T20 semi-finals after having originally been withdrawn due to injury. As a result, the Champions League has withdrawn the concession given to Mumbai Indians to field five foreign players in each game, and the franchise will have to stick to the four foreigners that other sides are allowed.

Yadav was originally one of eight Indian players reported injured by Mumbai Indians, leaving them with just seven Indian players in their squad. However, on September 29 he played in an under-22 tournament in Mumbai and scored 191 for Chandrakant Pandit XI against Dlip Vengsarkar XI. Following that, the Champions League has announced in a statement that: "Yadav had originally been replaced in the squad due to injury, however given he has recovered and Mumbai has a shortage of Indian players in their squad he is now permitted to return to the group."

Out of Mumbai Indians' 23 contracted players, eight were declared unfit for the Champions League - Yadav, Sachin Tendulkar, Rohit Sharma, Dhawal Kulkarni, Munaf Patel, Ali Murtaza, Aditya Tare and Pawan Suyal. That meant the final 14-member squad had an equal number of Indian and overseas players, without a buffer to handle any potential injury to an Indian player. The organisers then allowed Mumbai Indians to field five overseas cricketers in their playing XI, though other other IPL sides continued to be limited to four.

Mumai Indians suffered another blow during the tournament when South African wicketkeeper-batsman Davy Jacobs was ruled out after picking up a hip injury. With him out of the squad and Yadav returning, Mumbai Indians have six foreign players and eight Indians.

Despite their injury problems, Mumbai Indians were the first side to make it through to the semi-finals, where they will face Somerset on October 8 in Chennai.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Rohit on October 8, 2011, 14:13 GMT

    I note that Surya Kumar Yadav has become very famous among cricket fans these days because of this particular episode. I must confess, until all this happened, I didn't even know who Surya Kumar Yadav was. This just goes on to prove the old adage: bad publicity is better than no publicity.

  • John on October 8, 2011, 13:25 GMT

    @Pratik Nikam: So your solution is to break another rule? Mumbai had enough Indian players to follow the rules of the tournament and play only 4 overseas players. If an Indian player of the 7 available had got injured, then would have been the time to apply for an exemption, and even then the exemption they should have applied for was to bring in another Indian player, not to play more than the permitted number of overseas players. Mumbai wanted to sneak another overseas player in and give themselves an advantage and the tournament organizers let them do it. Now it has turned out to be not such an advantage, they have backtracked. Cheap and shoddy tactics.

  • Dummy4 on October 8, 2011, 1:48 GMT

    @bobmartin. You, damn right! I can't put it any better

  • Andrew on October 8, 2011, 1:01 GMT

    LOL! He gets a ton & now he's back in the team!

  • Dummy4 on October 7, 2011, 20:31 GMT

    Why all dis people r not understanding dat d rule was 'Only d players who played or represented d team in ipl r only allowed to participate in d tournament & d franchise wasn't allowed to play any other playr than those.' So the thing is dat mumbai were having 7 indian & 7 foreign such players at dat any injury to a indian playr (e.g few min b4 start of match)means they wud have 2 play wid 10 playr.. but nw they have got d 8th concessn withdrawn..

  • rahul on October 7, 2011, 18:44 GMT

    go bhajji go!!! God is with you......

  • Bob on October 7, 2011, 18:00 GMT

    No matter what the excuses are or what the results of the matches were after MI were granted that concession... the principle remains that if Yadav was fit to play cricket on the 29th September, then that is the date the concession should have been withdrawn. Whether or not the concession should have been granted in the first place in another matter. I don't think it should have been. Injuries are part of the game and if a player is injured the regulations should state that you can only substitute him with like for like. i.e Overseas for overseas or local for local. It makes not a jot of difference that the concession didn't give MI a distinct advantage... it's the principle that matters. Totally unprofessional conduct by the powers that be and a blot on the spirit of the game.

  • Dummy4 on October 7, 2011, 17:59 GMT

    2 Satanswish: That is why they manged to get the BCCI changed the rule back to a maximum of 4 overseas players. Sheer Opportunism! Dump Symonds ( lose the worm) and get Yadav ( catch the fish, in Symond's own fishing terminology) as replacement. This is something which they could very well have done when the tournament started, without going through the unpalatable farce! But who thought Symonds will be a disaster (and Yadav would score a near double ton -- though against a much inferior attack)

  • Hulk on October 7, 2011, 17:35 GMT

    Playing 5 foreign players did nothing good for MI. Andrew Symonds is a passe now & should be sent back fishing permanently.

  • Renju on October 7, 2011, 15:48 GMT

    funny to see those comments. Would you guys say MI played foul if Sachin or Rohit joins the team tomorrow?

  • No featured comments at the moment.