LONDON — The use of runners in Test cricket has long been a topic of debate among players, officials, and fans. While the practice was once common, modern regulations have significantly restricted its use. But can a batter still have a runner in Test cricket today? BBC Sport's Ask Me Anything breaks down the rules.
What is a runner in cricket?
A runner is a substitute fielder who runs between the wickets on behalf of an injured batter. Historically, runners were permitted if a batter sustained an injury or became ill during their innings. The runner would take the injured player's place while running, allowing the batter to continue batting without exacerbating their condition.
However, the International Cricket Council (ICC) abolished the use of runners in all international cricket, including Test matches, in October 2011. The decision was part of a broader effort to maintain the integrity of the game and prevent potential misuse.
Why were runners banned in Test cricket?
The ICC's decision to ban runners stemmed from several concerns:
- Fairness: Allowing a fresh runner could provide an unfair advantage, especially in long innings where fatigue plays a role.
- Misuse: There were instances where teams exploited the rule, with batters feigning injury to gain a runner.
- Clarity: The rule often led to confusion, particularly when determining run-out decisions involving the runner.
Former ICC Chief Executive Haroon Lorgat explained the reasoning behind the change: "The playing conditions regarding runners have been a subject of discussion for some time. We felt it was time to remove the ambiguity and ensure a level playing field."
Are there any exceptions to the rule?
Under current regulations, no exceptions are made for runners in Test cricket. If a batter is injured or unwell during their innings, they must either:
- Continue batting without assistance.
- Retire hurt and return later if they recover.
- Be substituted out of the match entirely (though this is rare in Test cricket).
The only scenario where a substitute may take the field is as a concussion substitute, introduced in 2019, but this is strictly for head injuries and does not involve running for the batter.
Notable incidents involving runners
The 1987 World Cup controversy
One of the most infamous uses of a runner occurred during the 1987 World Cup, when England's Graham Gooch employed a runner after suffering from dehydration. Critics argued that the rule was exploited, as Gooch went on to score a match-winning century.
Sachin Tendulkar's runner debate
In a 2011 Test match against the West Indies, Indian legend Sachin Tendulkar was denied a runner despite suffering from cramps. The incident reignited discussions about the fairness of the rule before its eventual abolition later that year.
What do players think?
Opinions among players have been divided. Former Australian captain Ricky Ponting once remarked: "Runners were part of the game for so long, but the rule change makes sense. If you're injured, you shouldn't have an advantage over the fielding side."
However, some traditionalists argue that removing runners has made the game less accommodating to genuine injuries. Former England batsman Michael Vaughan noted: "There’s no room for sympathy in modern cricket, but sometimes a runner was just common sense."
Conclusion
The short answer is no—batters cannot have runners in Test cricket under current ICC regulations. The rule change, implemented in 2011, was designed to uphold fairness and eliminate ambiguity. While the debate may continue among purists, the modern game prioritizes consistency and competitive integrity.
As cricket evolves, so do its laws. The removal of runners is just one example of how the sport adapts to maintain balance between tradition and progress.