Tourists protest over Harmison incident

[King]

The West Indies have lodged an official complaint after Steve Harmison opened the bowling for England in the third Test at Old Trafford. More...

[gator]

hmm.... was never aware of this law...

[King]

I wasn't aware of this law but I was fully aware you can't practice on the square after the game's started. That is stupid of Harmison not to know. Even Plunkett was practicing along side. The bloody umpires wanted SL to bat the remaining overs the next day in the finals of a world cup because the rules said so but didn't know this rule, what a farce? Why the heck is there a match referee, 3rd umpire, 4th umpires and rest of the officials for? In fact the 4th umpire came out while Harmison was practicing and asked him to not bowl in the square. It is more of a common sense than anything else not to practice on the square. I guess these folks lack that common sense.

[Ram]

How could internationel cricketers like Harmison and Plunkett even contemplate practising in the square while the match is in progess ? For God's sake this is in an intnl match.. not some freakin club fixture... Beats all logic have to say..

[King]

Even if we do in a club fixture the opponent or the umpires will thrash us. BTW Allan Donald was also present there taking Harmison and Plunkett through the practice.

[Donny]

That is stupid of Harmison not to know. Even Plunkett was practicing along side.

Ravi added, "BTW Allan Donald was also present there taking Harmison and Plunkett through the practice.". Andy Flower was also out there and it's reasonable to assume Vaughan and Moores were aware. Apart from the ludicrous situation of two coaches supervising two Test bowlers 'to get their rhythm right' during a Test match and on the center square, it was clearly in contravention of the match regulations. Law 17.1 states: "There shall be no bowling or batting practice on the pitch, or on the area parallel and immediately adjacent to the pitch at any time or any day of the match. There shall be no bowling or batting practice on any other part of the square on any day of the match, except before the start of play on that day." Consequence: Bowlers found guilty of breaking the rule should be prevented from bowling for 30 minutes playing time after the offence. The match referee Alan Hurst decided against enforcing the penalty. "The matter was dealt with at the time," he said in a statement. "There will be no further action. Common sense prevailed and the players were asked to move off the square." Common sense? The Law is there in black & white. Where does it say, ".. at the discretion of the match referee' ?

[CC1981]

Hey Donny, are you the same Donny who once started an Aussie cricket board many many moons ago ? Does the ID 'sandrocottus_eh?' sound familiar to you ?

[Donny]

Certainly does!! We miss you Sandro. Please come back. All is forgiven. :wink_smile:

[CC1981]

Certainly does!! We miss you Sandro. Please come back. All is forgiven. :wink_smile:

Forgiven ? i didnt know i did a crime ! :cantstop: PS: Its so good to meet you again Donny ! i shall certainly visit soon !

[King]

Ravi added, "BTW Allan Donald was also present there taking Harmison and Plunkett through the practice.". Andy Flower was also out there and it's reasonable to assume Vaughan and Moores were aware. Apart from the ludicrous situation of two coaches supervising two Test bowlers 'to get their rhythm right' during a Test match and on the center square, it was clearly in contravention of the match regulations. Law 17.1 states: "There shall be no bowling or batting practice on the pitch, or on the area parallel and immediately adjacent to the pitch at any time or any day of the match. There shall be no bowling or batting practice on any other part of the square on any day of the match, except before the start of play on that day." Consequence: Bowlers found guilty of breaking the rule should be prevented from bowling for 30 minutes playing time after the offence. The match referee Alan Hurst decided against enforcing the penalty. "The matter was dealt with at the time," he said in a statement. "There will be no further action. Common sense prevailed and the players were asked to move off the square." Common sense? The Law is there in black & white. Where does it say, ".. at the discretion of the match referee' ?

Donny you have played fair bit of cricket as I have too. How often do you hear the opponents telling ya to keep away from the square or even one of your own blokes asking to keep away from the square? I've heard it often and I've said that often too. I can't believe Allan Donald, Flower and the bowlers didn't know they can't practice on the square :whatchutalkingabout

[CC1981]

I can't believe Allan Donald, Flower and the bowlers didn't know they can't practice on the square

They obviously did know...they just thought they could get away with it. All in all, its not that big of a deal. As long as there is no 'Afridi dance' on the pitch, i don't particularly mind.

[Donny]

Reasonable point except for one thing: Who decides which Laws are to be enforced and which ones are to be dealt with by 'common sense'?

[CC1981]

Reasonable point except for one thing: Who decides which Laws are to be enforced and which ones are to be dealt with by 'common sense'?

Nono, i am not saying this law shouldn't have been enforced. If its a law, it must be followed, period. As such, Harmy got away scot-free. I was mulling over the importance of this law if anything.

[King Tendulkar]

The law is the law. Why were they not stopped from bowling for the period required as per the rules. Would India have got the same treatment, just a warning!! Its like saying you stepped over the line and its a no ball but I will only warn you and not NO ball you! Why were the laws of cricket not enforced?

[The Outsider]

I don't see how the incident is much different from Afridi's dance.

[King Tendulkar]

I don't see how the incident is much different from Afridi's dance.

Err would not go that far. harmy and co were ignoraant of the rules and to fair it is pretty harmless what they did. Afridi took advantage of the distraction of a suspected bomb to dig up the pitch. Massive difference!

[Donny]

Since when has ignorance been an excuse? The difference is proportionate. Afridi copped a ban for one Test and 2 ODIs. Harmison faced only a 30 minute ban.

[CC1981]

Since when has ignorance been an excuse? The difference is proportionate. Afridi copped a ban for one Test and 2 ODIs. Harmison faced only a 30 minute ban.

So Harmy's offence is 1/90th as heavy as Afridi's ? I gotto see this 'offence-o-meter' that ICC has that can work out proportions so well. :cantstop:

[CC1981]

harmy and co were ignoraant of the rules

Bullsheet. Harmy & Co. cannot be ignorant of such a rule. Anybody who's played club cricket knows this rule. This is like saying a F1 driver is ignorant of the rule about lifting on all 5 solid green. Or Roger Federer is ignorant of the net-cord rule. Sorry but i don't buy it. Can't practice on the pitch in play is a rule no half-cricketer forgets,let alone hard-boiled pro cricketers. They did it coz they thought they could get way with it. Finito.

[Donny]

And they did. :wink_smile: It wouldn't surprise if Harmy was ignorant of the Law as he has little between the ears but Donald & Flower? Having said that, there's one startling example of top level cricketers and umpires being ignorant of a fairly obvious Law. Dean Jones was bowled by Courtney Walsh and, as it was in the Windies, the deafening roar of the crowd meant the umpire's no-ball call wasn't heard by Deano. He didn't see the raised arm because he was looking down, in disappointment. Because the Aussies' dressing room entrance was square of the wicket, Deano headed off in that direction. Carl Hooper, seeing the no-ball signal, picked up the ball, removed the bails and appealed. Up went the finger (Cumberbatch at square leg). Out. Run out. The Aussie skipper, Allan Border was the other batsman. He was yelling for Deano to get back but really should have been reminding the umpires it should not have been out. There is a Law protecting the batsman from such a 'dismissal'. Both umpires were unaware of it, as was Border. Interestingly, and somewhat sheepishly, the Windies skipper, Viv Richards, admitted he DID know of the rule and could/should have called Jones back.