• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** Sri Lanka Tour of West Indies 2018

SillyCowCorner1

SillyCowCorner1

Request Your Custom Title Now!
First the Nihadas Trophy.( No, it was first in that serious in India where the Lankans had surgical masks on)


Now this.
 
Beamer

Beamer

International Vice-Captain
You can't have a team hijack a test match like this, it's awful. Why can't they appeal afterwards like everyone else does?

It's difficult but if Sri Lanka get away with this it will set a terrible precedent.
 
Black_Warrior

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
Going by the Oval fiasco, bad communication and too many decision makers is what aggravates the matter. Looks the same here. Utter chaos.
 
Daemon

Daemon

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Beamer said:
You can't have a team hijack a test match like this, it's awful. Why can't they appeal afterwards like everyone else does?

It's difficult but if Sri Lanka get away with this it will set a terrible precedent.
Click to expand...
They won't get away with it imo. Pakistan had to give up a winning position because they were deemed to have forfeited the game when they refused to step out post tea. That's the precedent at least, although I suspect it's all up to the match ref.
 
Black_Warrior

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
Beamer said:
You can't have a team hijack a test match like this, it's awful. Why can't they appeal afterwards like everyone else does?

It's difficult but if Sri Lanka get away with this it will set a terrible precedent.
Click to expand...
The main issue is the lack of clarity and consistency on this matter. Most players, coaches and teams are not even clear on what the process is and when and why umpires decide to change the ball?

There wasn't anything caught on camera but I believe the ball did not meet the test umpires have but this begs question on why they decided to check in the first place?
Is it a random check? Do they do it in every match?

Unless these things are cleared and made public, this sort of thing will continue to happen.

It's like this, when you're called for a no ball, you can't argue with the umpire because everyone knows the rules about overstepping. The one time a no ball created a similar fracas was when it was not called for overstepping. Because until then ICC had never faced that situation and hence never laid down their policy.

Similarly there's a lot of confusion and lack of clarity when it comes to the ball. From just going by random instances, it's just all over the place now with no one knowing much about it.

Even in this match, it's another case of massive inconsistency. At Oval 2006, Pakistan came about 10 minutes late to protest and the match was declared forfeited. Sri Lanka here did not come on the field for over 2 hours and we're still having a match.

The match officials themselves don't know what the due process is
 
cnerd123

cnerd123

likes this
Black_Warrior said:
The main issue is the lack of clarity and consistency on this matter. Most players, coaches and teams are not even clear on what the process is and when and why umpires decide to change the ball?

There wasn't anything caught on camera but I believe the ball did not meet the test umpires have but this begs question on why they decided to check in the first place?
Is it a random check? Do they do it in every match?

Unless these things are cleared and made public, this sort of thing will continue to happen.
Click to expand...
WTF It's literally in the MCC Laws:

41.3 The match ball – changing its condition

41.3.1 The umpires shall make frequent and irregular inspections of the ball. In addition, they shall immediately inspect the ball if they suspect anyone of attempting to change the condition of the ball, except as permitted in 41.3.2.

41.3.2 It is an offence for any player to take any action which changes the condition of the ball.

Except in carrying out his/her normal duties, a batsman is not allowed to wilfully damage the ball. See also Law 5.5 (Damage to the ball).

A fielder may, however

41.3.2.1 polish the ball on his/her clothing provided that no artificial substance is used and that such polishing wastes no time.

41.3.2.2 remove mud from the ball under the supervision of an umpire.

41.3.2.3 dry a wet ball on a piece of cloth that has been approved by the umpires.

41.3.3 The umpires shall consider the condition of the ball to have been unfairly changed if any action by any player does not comply with the conditions in 41.3.2.

41.3.4 If the umpires consider that the condition of the ball has been unfairly changed by a member or members of either side, they shall ask the captain of the opposing side if he/she would like the ball to be replaced. If necessary, in the case of the batting side, the batsmen at the wicket may deputise for their captain.

41.3.4.1 If a replacement ball is requested, the umpires shall select and bring into use immediately, a ball which shall have wear comparable to that of the previous ball immediately prior to the contravention.

41.3.4.2 Regardless of whether a replacement ball has been chosen to be used, the bowler’s end umpire shall

- award 5 Penalty runs to the opposing side.

- if appropriate, inform the batsmen at the wicket and the captain of the fielding side that the ball has been changed and the reason for their action.

- inform the captain of the batting side as soon as practicable of what has occurred.

The umpires together shall report the occurrence as soon as possible after the match to the Executive of the offending side and to any Governing Body responsible for the match, who shall take such action as is considered appropriate against the captain, any other individuals concerned and, if appropriate, the team.

41.3.5 If the umpires agree that in the match there has been any further instance by that team of unfairly changing the condition of the ball, they shall

41.3.5.1 repeat the procedure in 41.3.4.1 and 41.3.4.2.

If the further offence is committed by the fielding side, additionally the bowler’s end umpire shall

41.3.5.2 - direct the captain of the fielding side to suspend immediately from bowling the bowler who delivered the preceding ball; he/she shall not be allowed to bowl again in the match.

- inform the batsmen at the wicket and, as soon as practicable, the captain of the batting side of the reason for the action.

- if necessary, the over shall be completed by another bowler, who shall neither have bowled any part of the previous over, nor be allowed to bowl any part of the next over.



I don't know how much clearer you want the ICC to be.
 
cnerd123

cnerd123

likes this
Like fair enough the players and coaches etc may not be aware of how the laws and procedures work on this, but surely that on them and not the match officials or the ICC

We have no idea what conversations were going on, to simply assume incompetence on the end of the officials is incredibly unfair. Ian Gould, Aleem Dar and Javagal Srinath are seasoned veterans with decades of experience. Dinesh Chandimal is a 20 smth year old kid who still can't figure out how to bat consistently. If you're asking me who I think was in the wrong here, I'm going to lean towards the latter.
 
Migara

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
I am interested to find out if this match ties (or windies win by about 1 wicket) and SL comes out clean. Will the penalty runs awarded taken back?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top