Jump to content

Double standards by match referee

champ

By champ
in Cricket Talk

Recommended Posts

Temujin Khaghan Newbie

Temujin Khaghan

Posted
Posted

Kumble wants suitable punishment for provocateurs Anil Kumble wants the principles of natural justice followed by the ICC.[© AFP]Former India captain and India's highest Test-wicket taker, Anil Kumble has said that the ICC's match referees aren't punishing the instigators of on-field altercations severely enough, and that the ones who have provoked incidents escape with a none-too-heavy fine, while players who have been provoked and thus react strongly are heavily penalised. Kumble's views came in a syndicated column after the conclusion of the ill-tempered Perth Test between Australia and West Indies, which saw three Australians reported and fined, but West Indian Sulieman Benn banned for two ODIs. While Benn, Haddin and Johnson even had some physical contact, it appeared that none of the men was at fault for it, since it seemed accidental. However, Haddin had inflamed the situation to its ugly levels by pointing his bat at Benn, when Benn and Johnson had got into a tangle while Benn was going for the ball and Johnson for a run. "There doesn't seem to be any punishment forthcoming for someone who provokes and that to me is against the principles of natural justice," Kumble wrote. "The Australians always seem to get away. Whatever their transgressions on the field, invariably it is their opponents who end up paying a price. Somehow or the other, teams playing against the Aussies seem to invite the match referee's wrath." Shane Watson was the other Aussie fined, and Kumble recalled an incident the bowler had against India, in what turned out to be Kumble's last Test before retiring in Delhi in 2008. Watson had then continuously provoked Gautam Gambhir, and when Gambhir set off for a run, Watson had clearly invaded his personal space by gesturing in front of his face while he was running. In retaliation, Gambhir had elbowed Watson, while turning for his second run, upon which match referee Chris Broad had banned Gambhir for a Test. Gambhir had also had a violent argument with Simon Katich on the field. "In the Delhi Test against us, my last, the one that earned Gautam Gambhir a ban for having a go at Watson, the same umpire and the match referee were officiating," Kumble wrote. "At that time, the umpire Billy Bowden didn't see it fit to report Simon Katich who had later obstructed Gautam and the match referee Chris Broad too didn't bother to act on his own or follow it up with the on-field umpires even though it was very much evident on TV. And as on that occasion, the provocateurs got away in Perth too, with Haddin and Johnson receiving minor reprimands." ============================================ http://www.cricbuzz.com/cricket-news/22604/kumble-wants-suitable-punishment-for-provocateurs-/?utm_source=ig&utm_medium=news&utm_campaign=gadget

Link to comment
Jadoo Newbie

Jadoo

Posted
Posted

The thick planks at ICC need to sort this out, how can you start dishing out bans for minor on field scraps. This sort of incident is not going to be the first or the last - these guys are out there playing for their country with passion, it's what the spectators want to see. If anyone is at fault then its the on field unpires, they should have settled the issue on field so that it did not go any further. These sort of confrontations happen all the time in footbal matches, if footballers were handed out bans for them then football clubs would find it hard to field 11 players.

Link to comment
Ram Newbie

Ram

Posted
Posted

The thoughtful man that Anil is, in generic terms, he is quite right in what he says. I forgot what exactly happened in the Gautam/Katich incident because it was while ago but since the whole Benn/Haddin/Johnson incident is still quite fresh in memory, I think i am going to side with the match referee on this one. Benn was the one who started it. He literally man-handled Johnson when Johnson attempted to take the single from the non-strikers's end. I mean, we have seen the bowlers and non-striker get all mangled during a quick single, but Benn went way over the limit. Haddin obviously saw it and was upset. Now, would I be upset if I see one of team-mates being roughed up by an opposition player? Of course....! Would I respond to that situation by brandishing the bat at him angrily? Probably not, at least when it happened the first time. I would exchange some glares and maybe some words, but I wouldnt go to the extent of brandishing my bat at him. Till now, its probably safe to say both Benn and Haddin were equally culpable.. At this point is when it starts to go downhill for Benn. He let loose a mid-pitch verbal barrage at Haddin (which was clearly picked up the stump microphone..). Haddin showed good restraint, merely laughing away Benn's niceties. And, after the end of the over, Benn went even more over the top, by advancing towards Haddin, with his finger pointed towards him in an aggressive manner. Even at this point, the Aussies showed good restraint. We cannot have people having mid-pitch confrontations and suffer from verbal diarrhea in front of millions of viewers. And that is where i think Benn overstepped the limit. And, if the Windies really think they got the rough end of the deal, there's a proper appeals process in the ICC and they can contest the charges. They have chosen not to do so, which sort of tells what they themselves make out of this decision. Lets not also forget, being a match referee is a tough job. You always get second guessed on decisions that you made based on evidence that sometimes you, and not the general public, have access too. Besides, every decision the referee makes is viewed though racially tainted glasses, which makes his job that much harder.

Link to comment
Macj Newbie

Macj

Posted
Posted
And, if the Windies really think they got the rough end of the deal, there's a proper appeals process in the ICC and they can contest the charges. They have chosen not to do so, which sort of tells what they themselves make out of this decision.
They didnt appeal but they are taking this forward and have written to the ICC directly.
Link to comment
Ram Newbie

Ram

Posted
Posted
They didnt appeal but they are taking this forward and have written to the ICC directly.
Source? And why would they 'write' to the ICC? If you forcefully believe justice wasnt served, appeal. Else, just keep quiet. Btw, why cricket match referees always ex-players? It does not have to be that way. You need a match referee to interpret written law and maintain order. You do not need to have played at a professional level to do that job. I'd be interested to know what kind selection process that the ex-players go through before being appointed match referees.
Link to comment
Macj Newbie

Macj

Posted
Posted
Source? And why would they 'write' to the ICC? If you forcefully believe justice wasnt served, appeal. Else, just keep quiet. Btw, why cricket match referees always ex-players? It does not have to be that way. You need a match referee to interpret written law and maintain order. You do not need to have played at a professional level to do that job. I'd be interested to know what kind selection process that the ex-players go through before being appointed match referees.
http://www.dnaindia.com/sport/report_west-indies-lodge-protest-against-ban-on-spinner-sulieman-benn_1325535 You would 'write' to the ICC if you believe a sort of punishment was fair, but in the context of instigation didnt fit the crime. In other words WI are aware that Benn would be reprimanded but not as much as he was compared to the other 2 parties.
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...