Matches (19)
IPL (3)
T20I Tri-Series (2)
County DIV1 (5)
County DIV2 (4)
Charlotte Edwards (4)
ENG v PAK (W) (1)
News

Shah on Impact Player rule: 'Not permanent, but not saying that it will go'

The rule has been a topic of big debate during IPL 2024, with many prominent cricketers blaming it for the record-breaking scores

The Impact Player rule, one of the hot topics of debate during IPL 2024, is not "permanent", BCCI secretary Jay Shah has said, and a call on its use in subsequent editions of the IPL will be taken after a discussion with stakeholders after the 2024 T20 World Cup.
"Impact Player is like a test case. We have implemented it slowly. The biggest advantage of it is that two Indian players are getting a chance [in each game], which is the most important," Shah told reporters at the BCCI headquarters in Mumbai on Thursday. "We will consult with the players, franchises, broadcasters [and take a call]. This is not permanent [but] I am not saying that it will go.
"[We'll see] if it's making the game more competitive or not. Even then, if a player feels that this is not right, then we will talk to them. But no one has told us anything yet, so it will be decided after the World Cup."
The Impact Player rule has been cited as one of the key reasons for the massive scores recorded in IPL 2024. Rohit Sharma, for one, has said that the rule has been hampering the growth of allrounders in the country. He was the first high-profile Indian player to criticise the rule, which came into the IPL in 2023 after being trialled in the domestic Syed Mushtaq Ali Trophy T20 tournament, allowing teams to bring in a 12th player at any point in a match to replace a player from the original XI announced at the toss.
Among others to speak out against the rule were Axar Patel and Mukesh Kumar of Delhi Capitals (DC).
Chennai Super Kings (CSK) batting coach Mike Hussey had said that the rule had made IPL games "fun" to watch, but admitted that it was "scary" from a bowler's point of view, with the rule allowing batting orders to be lengthened.
"Whoever is making the rules, they are thinking that everything will work as per the batters' convenience," Axar had said. "Obviously, it has been difficult [for the bowlers]. Because of the Impact Sub rule, everyone gets one more batsman so they think that they will use the batsman in case the batting unit doesn't go well. And whosoever comes to play, they don't take much time and start [hitting] from the first ball because they know that they have a player in seventh or eighth place.
"That is why I am not a big fan of the rule, because as an allrounder, I know that they will either take a proper batsman or a bowler, not an allrounder."
Mitchell Starc, Kolkata Knight Riders' (KKR's) Australia fast bowler, had also said that the Impact Player rule had played a part in bowlers' poor numbers this season.
"The Impact Player rule changes things a fair bit," Starc, who has conceded runs at 11.37 so far, had said. "Everyone gets to bat a lot deeper having a batting and a bowling XI. There's a lot made of that rule throughout the tournament and there's been a lot of high scores, which is the nature of the wickets and the grounds we play on here. When you have batters and batting allrounders come in at Nos. 8 or 9, it's a long batting line-up."
Delhi Capitals head coach Ricky Ponting, however, had said he was happy for the IPL to retain the Impact Player if it was making the tournament a "better spectacle". But from his perspective as a coach, he admitted he wasn't too keen on the rule, calling it a "nightmare".
The Impact Player rule has also been used in the ILT20 and the Abu Dhabi T10. In response to reports about the rule's potential introduction at the SA20, league commissioner Graeme Smith said on Friday: "Nothing has been discussed and all is on the table for our cricket committee meeting pre season 3."