Australia v Sri Lanka, CB Series 2nd final, Adelaide March 6, 2012

Jayawardene fined for arguing with umpires

ESPNcricinfo staff

Sri Lanka captain Mahela Jayawardene has been fined 10% of his match fee for arguing with the umpires during the second final of the CB Series in Adelaide. Jayawardene was found to have breached Article 2.1.3 of the ICC Code of Conduct which relates to "showing dissent at an umpire's decision during an international match".

The incident happened during the 44th over of the Australia innings when Farveez Maharoof bowled a waist-high full toss to Michael Clarke, who pulled it to the square-leg boundary for a four. The umpire declared it a no-ball after a delay, but Jayawardene wasn't pleased and had an animated discussion with both the on-field umpires, Asad Rauf and Bruce Oxenford.

Jayawardene said after the match that he wasn't disputing the no-ball, only that the umpires took too long to call it.

"I think I was the culprit, dragging it for too long. I thought initially the umpire didn't make a call, and took too long," Jayawardene said. "I had no issue with the no-ball. waist high or whatever. But I felt that after Michael (Clarke) had spoken to him, that's when he had made the call. So I have been fined for that. That puts something in my report. That's all."

The ICC match referee, Chris Broad, said that Jayawardene pleaded guilty to the offence and apologised.

"It is understandable that Mahela Jayawardene felt disappointed after Farveez Maharoof's delivery, which had been dispatched for a boundary, was also declared as a no-ball for a full toss above waist height," Broad said.

"But as one of the senior most players in world cricket today and also as the captain of his side, Jayawardene must maintain a certain level of self-control and clearly his actions went beyond what would be deemed acceptable."

Edited by Kanishkaa Balachandran

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • M on March 8, 2012, 0:27 GMT

    Can I add that it was Mahela that pointed out to the umpires the no-ball for too few players inside the circle in the first final... also a call that came only after it was referred for a replay as both onfield umpires missed the play. More than anything, his behaviour after Clarke did much the same thing looked worse. Win some and lose some as far as I'm concerned... Dilshan got a definite edge on that ball from Watson and the umpires missed that in fact gave a clanger of a wrong decision... that is cricket. In this day and age of technology when it can be shown beyond all doubt, does not walking on those decisions compare to claiming a close catch that is reviewed and replays show it may have turfed just before the hands? Lets leave some chance and humanity in the game of cricket. Win some and lose some.

  • Dhushan on March 7, 2012, 9:27 GMT

    I feel for Mahela in this case. The fielding was not up to standard & his frustration came out in this incident. But how come the umpires decide the no ball when the batsmen tell them? They should have called earlier or not called at all. End of story. Good that Sri Lanka won or else it would have been salt on the wounds.

  • Viraj Lakshitha on March 7, 2012, 7:52 GMT

    Mahela will not angry if umpires did their job in a decent way. They already made a mistake, didnt call a no-ball until batsmen ask. Once they realize their mistake, they should go to the opposition's captain first and should update him. I think MJ got fined because of another's mistake. A bit shameful i guess!!!.

  • Yasas on March 7, 2012, 7:13 GMT

    @straight_drive4 mahela was only angry because the umpires descision was only changed because clarke asked for it to be. watsons one wasnt a player influenced descision. dilshan had the right to stay in his crease and he did, whether it complied with the spirit of cricket or not, its not in the rules.

  • dilan on March 7, 2012, 4:08 GMT

    I couldn't accept both mahela and umpire what did they at middel of the pitch . but mahela should respect the umpire decision . that is not really decent , umpire gave signal as a "No ball" after ball was death . but some batsmen ask about "No ball" when they out from High fulltoss . that time also ball was death . but umpire can make a decision what times was cost to make a right decision. Mahela should understand this . this is not hidden secret, any team who plays at Australia against them have to face this type of circumentance. . we remember we had to face same like 1995 regarding marali's no ball. if they do it is right , if others do , it is totally wrong . MIddle of the cricket is not fair for other everytime. good luck sri lankan boys u have a 1 nice games to win.No need to worry top 2 batsmen will not comes from opposite side warner and clerk , that will be really benefits.

  • manoj on March 7, 2012, 4:02 GMT

    @straight_drive4. I and many others who watched the game, would beg to disagree with you when you say that after Watson's appeal for caught behind was rejected he "played in the spirit of the game and didn't say a word to the umpire". I don't know which game you were watching but even an inexperienced lip reader could clearly identify the invectives directed toward the umpire by Watson. Secondly concerning the Mahela incident you say "I don't even know why he blew up- the umpire changing his call to a no-ball after the delivery is a common occurrence". I'd like to point out that there is a big difference between umpires conferring with each other and changing the decision as opposed to an umpire changing his decision after conferring with the opposition captain! This is what Mahela was objecting to and rightfully so!!

  • manoj on March 7, 2012, 3:37 GMT

    I'm in no way defending Mahela's actions and I feel the fine was justified. However, I feel there are too many grey areas and inconsistencies in the interpretation of the rules in cricket. For example it did not take an expert lip reader to determine what Shane Watson said to Asad Rauf when his appeal for caught behind against Dilshan was turned down. I suppose it's OK to direct abusive language towards an umpire and somehow that doesn't count as dissent but rather just frustration on Watson's part. I'm sure there must be an article in the code of conduct that applies to this. If the player had been Kohli (someone with a reputation of being a hot-head) instead of Watson, would the incident have been ignored? I wonder.

  • Ajith on March 7, 2012, 2:56 GMT

    It is for the umpires to decide on NO-BALLS and there is no appeal available for batsman to get a no ball called. So in this instance the umpires decision was was first questioned by Clarke as he is the one who pointed out that the umpires decision was wrong. Then why don't they fine him ?

  • Sriraj on March 7, 2012, 2:40 GMT

    I see many SL fans are conveniently forgetting some facts and talking about one-sided umpiring. (1) Mahela is not the first to be fined for this act. Ponting was fined before and reprimanded during the Ashes. The only person I can remember getting away is MS Dhoni in this series. (2) The umpires called a late no-ball in the 1st final after Sangakkara asked them to look at the field and count the fielders outside the circle. Clarke didn't protest - he nodded and brought third-man in. I know Mahela is a passionate person but his on-field demeanour has deteriorated sharply in the last 2 years. I remember he volleyed some verbals at Clarke in the last test series when Clarke correctly claimed Mahela's low catch.

  • udendra on March 7, 2012, 2:18 GMT

    IMO the umpiring falted. we saw on tv how Clark and the other batsman asked for the No ball. that's gentleman-like?

  • No featured comments at the moment.