New Delhi: Although it wasnt the debut he thought it was certainly a memorable one for Indian pacer Harshit Rana who made his appearance for India in the 4th T20I against England on Friday. By stepping onto the field as a concussion substitute Rana made history as the first Indian player to make his T20I debut in this unique capacity. However the pacer proved to be a valuable replacement delivering an impressive spell of 3/33 which helped India secure a 15-run victory. India overcame a tough start with the bat a setback caused by England pacer Saqib Mahmoods remarkable three-wicket maiden and managed to post 181 runs to stay competitive in the match. Outstanding half-centuries from Hardik Pandya and Shivam Dube were the turning points for India as the pair put together a thrilling 87-run partnership to stabilize and propel Indias innings. Rana initially not part of Indias playing XI was called in as a concussion substitute for Dube after the all-rounder took a heavy blow to the head from a Jamie Overton bouncer during the final delivery of the first innings. This allowed Rana to take the field at the beginning of the second innings as a debutant. It didnt take long for the pacer to make his mark as he dismissed Liam Livingstone in his very first over marking a successful debut in T20I cricket for India. However the substitution sparked a lot of debate among fans online with many questioning whether Ranas inclusion followed the proper guidelines for a concussion substitute. Rule 1.2.7.3 of the ICC playing conditions for concussion substitution states: The ICC Match Referee should ordinarily approve a Concussion Replacement Request if the replacement is a like-for-like player whose inclusion will not excessively advantage his team for the remainder of the match. Rule 1.2.7.7 states: The decision of the ICC Match Referee in relation to any Concussion Replacement Request shall be final and neither team shall have any right of appeal. Given that the match referee raised no concerns about Rana’s replacement it is believed that India was fully within their rights to bring him in as a bowler.