3 major criticisms of the Impact Player rule

The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) will introduce a new tactical substitution rule - the Impact Player - from IPL 2023.

Details haven't been revealed yet, but it is expected to be similar to the system used in this year's Syed Mushtaq Ali Trophy, where one of the four pre-announced substitutes could replace any player after the 14th over of either innings.

The Impact Player could bat in place for a batter who has already been dismissed, given the team only uses 11 batters in total, or can bowl four overs after replacing a bowler who has already delivered his full quota of overs.

Although the move is a huge tactical addition to the game, it has not quite been received gladly by observers and fans. Below are its three broad criticisms:

---

#3 Unfair for a few IPL teams

The first concern is regarding the timing of the announcement. Impact Player rule almost makes cricket a 12-player game, changes how a team looks at its balance, and how they should invest their resources across the playing XI and the bench.

Such a major tactical revelation comes weeks in the leadup to the IPL 2023 auction, but not before the teams have made their trades and retentions. Each team has a different budget. There's a gap of ₹35.2 crore in the budgets of Kolkata Knight Riders (₹7.05 crore) and SunRisers Hyderabad (₹42.25 crore).

The Knight Riders have a good first XI in place. Without this rule, they would have looked only for decent, value options for their bench. Now, they'll also have to think of another first-choice player who could add value as their Impact Player in most games. In this regard, SunRisers will have much more flexibility in adapting to the change.

Moreover, as Gurkirat Singh Gill mentioned in the tweet above, teams like Punjab Kings (PBKS), who had quality but lacked balance in their team last year, would benefit more from this rule than, say, Chennai Super Kings (CSK), whose situation was the opposite.

Teams who didn't have balance now have an outside measure to help them bring in at par with teams who used their resources to make a well-rounded first XI.

How Impact Player changes dynamics is a different topic, but it's worth noting that its introduction now doesn't quite keep all teams on a level playing field.

---

#2 "Imitating football" is the most prevalent criticism of the Impact Player rule

Like any other sport, cricket has always been resistant to change, especially if that change makes it similar to another sport.

Without Impact Player, substitutes in cricket teams are only about replacing an injured or tired player as a fielder whose maximum contribution could be taking an important catch or affecting a run-out. Bench strength only matters in the run of a tournament, where teams adjust their XIs according to the opposition, pitch, etc.

Now, the direct involvement of a substitute in the match takes cricket closer to sports like football and basketball, where players coming off the bench can make a huge difference. This, for some fans, is too fundamental a change for the sport, which makes it "unlike cricket" and is a direct hit at the "beauty" of it.

Some say that this rule is trying to "fix something which is not broken" while others feel it is complicating an already nuanced sport. The general consensus has been that it is ignoring other improvements that can be brought to make it more entertaining and inviting for a young audience.

---

#1 Promoting one-dimensional players

In every ICC tournament India have played of late, having too many players with just one specialized skill has been a major constraint. Fewer multi-skill players deprive teams of balance and flexibility and make them more predictable.

The post-14th over rule means the Impact Player will likely be a hard-hitting batter or a death-over bowler. More and more young players will tune their skills accordingly, instead of being utility players with multiple skills.

This can only be tested over time but the concern can't be discounted.

---