England v West Indies, 1st Test, Lord's, 5th day May 21, 2012

West Indies hit with over-rate penalty

ESPNcricinfo staff
20

West Indies have been hit with a penalty for a slow over-rate during the first Test against England at Lord's, which they lost by five wickets. West Indies captain, Darren Sammy, was fined 80% of his match fee, while his players received 40% fines.

Roshan Mahanama, the match referee, imposed the fines after West Indies were ruled to be four overs short of their target, when time allowances were taken into consideration. Sammy admitted that with fast bowlers Shannon Gabriel and Fidel Edwards struggling he had resorted to bowling part-time spinner Marlon Samuels to try and bring the over-rate up as England closed in on victory.

"Shannon went out with back spasms and Fidel was not at his best, so Marlon had to fill in some overs and make up some time," Sammy said.

The ICC's code of conduct governing minor over-rate offences states that players are to be fined 10% of their match fees for every over their side fails to bowl in the allotted time, with the captain fined double that amount. Sammy could also face a one-match suspension if he is found guilty of one more minor over-rate offence in Tests during the next 12 months.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • sunnyboypuni on May 23, 2012, 19:17 GMT

    Sammy's preference for improving a slow over rate rather than press for a win seemed very difficult to comprehend. As recent against Australia, he conceded a win rather than a draw in fading lights.Where are his captaincy skills? Has he forgotten two bouncers allowed per over in test matches; yorkers; "smell the leather"; occasional rib cage shots and a few aimed to the base of the toe. Last resort beamer would have forced standing umpire to call off play. Sammy's cluelessness and lack of strategies are costing WI dearly.

  • YorkshirePudding on May 23, 2012, 10:45 GMT

    @Puretom, I think they decided on an average of 4 minutes per over and change round, quicks take longer maybe 6-8 minutes but a spinner can often turn an over round in 3-4 minutes. Other options would be to credit the batting side at the end of the Innings with a run/over based on the average RPO during the innings and have it as extras. Most of the time that was spent was the windies constantly changing the field, between deliveries, especially on the friday where they had a tendancy to follow the ball.

  • Patchmaster on May 23, 2012, 3:47 GMT

    If you pay good money to get into a test venue as a spectator, then you should be able to see plenty of overs in an hour. I think the fine is correct.

  • rienzied on May 23, 2012, 3:36 GMT

    The bset thing that could happen is that Sammy could get banned from playing test cricket... then Windies will have a chance

  • AdrianVanDenStael on May 22, 2012, 17:39 GMT

    it's a bit of a shame that Sammy resorted to bowling Samuels to try to reduce possible penalties for a slow over-rate, but he's hardly the first captain to do this: just ask Ricky Ponting, who did it in India at a more crucial stage of a more crucial series.

  • PureTom on May 22, 2012, 11:40 GMT

    @YorkshirePudding I agree the rules are the rules, but this rule is badly thought out and poorly implemented. I'm not saying the past should be changed, but the future could. I don't get the knicker knotting number of 15 per hour. I don't like slow over rates either, but I'd rather watch 12 overs of quality pace than 16 overs of part time spin in an hour. And my ultimate point remains: The match was won, the game ended before time, therefore the over rate is irrelevant.

  • AngryAngy on May 22, 2012, 7:49 GMT

    @noplay That is utter rubbish. The BCCI's total contract pool is three times the one paid by the WICB. The West Indies have 17 players worth less than 90k; India have 17 worth more than 90k. Only Shiv has an A Grade contract reputedly worth $120,000, whereas most of India's Test side make $180,000.

    It's only Grade C contracts where the Indian players are making less; however, the West Indies list is far smaller and could only field half a team from their A and B contracts. Their C grade players are much more essential to the team than the likes of Sreesanth, Karthik, Chawla or Vijay. Many of these players are arguably getting more than they're worth. England don't contract these sorts of fringe players, while Australia or South Africa would probably only pick 4-5 of them.

    The West Indies do have some mediocre players contracted, but the truth is that India have many more.

  • YorkshirePudding on May 22, 2012, 7:25 GMT

    @PureTom, sorry but every team has to abide by the rules and the rules state 15 overs per hour over the course of both innings, less deductions for drinks, wickets and change over, time was that teams bowled 100+ overs a day (which they do in County Cricket). Also we are talking about Match fees which are awarded for takng part in that game, not the retainer fee or expenses that are paid seperately regardless of if they play or not, so Sammy probably lost about £6-8K.

  • PureTom on May 22, 2012, 6:59 GMT

    Quibbling about over rates in a result game is rediculous. The game was won by England in 5 days. They had 5 days to play the game. What's the problem? WI supposedly can't field their best team because of disparate earning power so the ICC decides to exacerbate the problem by making sure the players that do play don't earn anything. If a team has a slow over rate and there is no result they should LOSE points on their test ranking. If there is a slow over rate and the game is a result who cares? The broadcasters and grounds should be happy the game went on longer.

    I would much rather watch the likes of Dale Steyn, James Anderson, Pat Cummins, etc bowl than Marlon Samuels, Jonathon Trott and Mike Hussey.

    This arguement is rediculous and makes no allowance for the spirit of the game. It's all about quantity and has no consideration whatsoever for quality.

  • YorkshirePudding on May 22, 2012, 5:05 GMT

    @Rishi Kemraj, as a spectoator I felt a little cheated on the Friday and Saturday as the WI's team only managed about 13 overs per hour, which over the 6 hours was 12-14 overs short over the course of the day, and thats with a spinner bowling as well. Hopefully the rate will be improved next game otherwise Sammy could be facing a one match ban at Edgbaston.

  • sunnyboypuni on May 23, 2012, 19:17 GMT

    Sammy's preference for improving a slow over rate rather than press for a win seemed very difficult to comprehend. As recent against Australia, he conceded a win rather than a draw in fading lights.Where are his captaincy skills? Has he forgotten two bouncers allowed per over in test matches; yorkers; "smell the leather"; occasional rib cage shots and a few aimed to the base of the toe. Last resort beamer would have forced standing umpire to call off play. Sammy's cluelessness and lack of strategies are costing WI dearly.

  • YorkshirePudding on May 23, 2012, 10:45 GMT

    @Puretom, I think they decided on an average of 4 minutes per over and change round, quicks take longer maybe 6-8 minutes but a spinner can often turn an over round in 3-4 minutes. Other options would be to credit the batting side at the end of the Innings with a run/over based on the average RPO during the innings and have it as extras. Most of the time that was spent was the windies constantly changing the field, between deliveries, especially on the friday where they had a tendancy to follow the ball.

  • Patchmaster on May 23, 2012, 3:47 GMT

    If you pay good money to get into a test venue as a spectator, then you should be able to see plenty of overs in an hour. I think the fine is correct.

  • rienzied on May 23, 2012, 3:36 GMT

    The bset thing that could happen is that Sammy could get banned from playing test cricket... then Windies will have a chance

  • AdrianVanDenStael on May 22, 2012, 17:39 GMT

    it's a bit of a shame that Sammy resorted to bowling Samuels to try to reduce possible penalties for a slow over-rate, but he's hardly the first captain to do this: just ask Ricky Ponting, who did it in India at a more crucial stage of a more crucial series.

  • PureTom on May 22, 2012, 11:40 GMT

    @YorkshirePudding I agree the rules are the rules, but this rule is badly thought out and poorly implemented. I'm not saying the past should be changed, but the future could. I don't get the knicker knotting number of 15 per hour. I don't like slow over rates either, but I'd rather watch 12 overs of quality pace than 16 overs of part time spin in an hour. And my ultimate point remains: The match was won, the game ended before time, therefore the over rate is irrelevant.

  • AngryAngy on May 22, 2012, 7:49 GMT

    @noplay That is utter rubbish. The BCCI's total contract pool is three times the one paid by the WICB. The West Indies have 17 players worth less than 90k; India have 17 worth more than 90k. Only Shiv has an A Grade contract reputedly worth $120,000, whereas most of India's Test side make $180,000.

    It's only Grade C contracts where the Indian players are making less; however, the West Indies list is far smaller and could only field half a team from their A and B contracts. Their C grade players are much more essential to the team than the likes of Sreesanth, Karthik, Chawla or Vijay. Many of these players are arguably getting more than they're worth. England don't contract these sorts of fringe players, while Australia or South Africa would probably only pick 4-5 of them.

    The West Indies do have some mediocre players contracted, but the truth is that India have many more.

  • YorkshirePudding on May 22, 2012, 7:25 GMT

    @PureTom, sorry but every team has to abide by the rules and the rules state 15 overs per hour over the course of both innings, less deductions for drinks, wickets and change over, time was that teams bowled 100+ overs a day (which they do in County Cricket). Also we are talking about Match fees which are awarded for takng part in that game, not the retainer fee or expenses that are paid seperately regardless of if they play or not, so Sammy probably lost about £6-8K.

  • PureTom on May 22, 2012, 6:59 GMT

    Quibbling about over rates in a result game is rediculous. The game was won by England in 5 days. They had 5 days to play the game. What's the problem? WI supposedly can't field their best team because of disparate earning power so the ICC decides to exacerbate the problem by making sure the players that do play don't earn anything. If a team has a slow over rate and there is no result they should LOSE points on their test ranking. If there is a slow over rate and the game is a result who cares? The broadcasters and grounds should be happy the game went on longer.

    I would much rather watch the likes of Dale Steyn, James Anderson, Pat Cummins, etc bowl than Marlon Samuels, Jonathon Trott and Mike Hussey.

    This arguement is rediculous and makes no allowance for the spirit of the game. It's all about quantity and has no consideration whatsoever for quality.

  • YorkshirePudding on May 22, 2012, 5:05 GMT

    @Rishi Kemraj, as a spectoator I felt a little cheated on the Friday and Saturday as the WI's team only managed about 13 overs per hour, which over the 6 hours was 12-14 overs short over the course of the day, and thats with a spinner bowling as well. Hopefully the rate will be improved next game otherwise Sammy could be facing a one match ban at Edgbaston.

  • jmcilhinney on May 22, 2012, 4:09 GMT

    This is kind of adding insult to injury but rules is rules. Over rates are poor pretty much everywhere these days and picking an all-pace attack is always a risk in this regard. @ssdeep, I don't know for sure but I'm guessing that it's not within the rules for the board to cover the fine. It is supposed to ensure that the players on the field make the effort to keep up decent over rates but if the players don't suffer the consequences then they won't be motivated to do so. It's a shame that an effort to improve the over rate may have impinged on WI ability to push for a win on day 5. doubt that they would have made it anyway but you'd like to think that they could have made their best effort.

  • GravyMon on May 22, 2012, 4:03 GMT

    In a strange way, this may actually be a blessing in disguise. Sammy is yet to recognize where he is and what he represents to WI people! Someone should give him a clue.

  • AzyS on May 22, 2012, 3:26 GMT

    the west indies team is simply exciting and is one of the best but i dont know if it is the selectors or the players or the administrators who are in the wrong to keep selecting the wrong team. just imagine a team including gayle,sarwan,pollard,dwayne bravo and smith,darren bravo,sunil narine,fidel edwards,kemar roach,chanderpaul,marlon samuels,adrian barath,kirk edwards,ravi rampaul,shane shilingford,carlton baugh,dinesh ramdin,brendan nash,sammy,andre russel and others.just select them and give them contracts and encourage them and you will have a winning combination pretty soon.also keep sending the west indies A & under-19 teams on regular tours to create a feeder line to the national team.C'mon Maaan u Guys R Winners.

  • noplay on May 22, 2012, 1:48 GMT

    Where on earth did ssdeep hear that West Indies players are paid a pittance. They are better paid than contracted players for India and Pakistan. And they are grossly overpaid for their limited abilities, the fact that they do not attract wide tv audiences and the way they refuse to win. At one point in the recent past they were the second highest paid contracted players in the world

  • Dashgar on May 22, 2012, 1:46 GMT

    4 fast bowlers isn't an excuse. New Zealand have used 4 quicks a fair bit but they never go over time.

  • on May 22, 2012, 0:48 GMT

    So who will captain in Sammy's absence? Bring back Gayle and Sarwan, drop either Powell, Kirk Edwards or Darren Bravo.

  • Sinhaya on May 22, 2012, 0:13 GMT

    Oh no! This is bad. Please drop Edwards and take Rampaul for the next test to bolster the tail.

  • cricketdebator on May 21, 2012, 22:48 GMT

    Sammy, if you want to solve the problem of slow over rate, just drop Fidel Edwards and you'll be alright. He tries hard, but for all intend and purposes he is finished, and really not up to the required standard.

  • on May 21, 2012, 19:44 GMT

    When it rains it pours for the West Indians,what difference does it make,they lost the match with so much time to spare Had it been a close match with fours overs the deciding factor i can understand The shining star ot the Windies is our SHIV,can you imagine for the last decade if Shiv wasn't in the team,WI would have been relegated where Zimbabwe would have been the replacment ,mind boggiling

  • ssdeep on May 21, 2012, 18:48 GMT

    this is really bad,considering they are being paid a pittance anyway,this will further dent their confidence.Hope the WICB covers the fine.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • ssdeep on May 21, 2012, 18:48 GMT

    this is really bad,considering they are being paid a pittance anyway,this will further dent their confidence.Hope the WICB covers the fine.

  • on May 21, 2012, 19:44 GMT

    When it rains it pours for the West Indians,what difference does it make,they lost the match with so much time to spare Had it been a close match with fours overs the deciding factor i can understand The shining star ot the Windies is our SHIV,can you imagine for the last decade if Shiv wasn't in the team,WI would have been relegated where Zimbabwe would have been the replacment ,mind boggiling

  • cricketdebator on May 21, 2012, 22:48 GMT

    Sammy, if you want to solve the problem of slow over rate, just drop Fidel Edwards and you'll be alright. He tries hard, but for all intend and purposes he is finished, and really not up to the required standard.

  • Sinhaya on May 22, 2012, 0:13 GMT

    Oh no! This is bad. Please drop Edwards and take Rampaul for the next test to bolster the tail.

  • on May 22, 2012, 0:48 GMT

    So who will captain in Sammy's absence? Bring back Gayle and Sarwan, drop either Powell, Kirk Edwards or Darren Bravo.

  • Dashgar on May 22, 2012, 1:46 GMT

    4 fast bowlers isn't an excuse. New Zealand have used 4 quicks a fair bit but they never go over time.

  • noplay on May 22, 2012, 1:48 GMT

    Where on earth did ssdeep hear that West Indies players are paid a pittance. They are better paid than contracted players for India and Pakistan. And they are grossly overpaid for their limited abilities, the fact that they do not attract wide tv audiences and the way they refuse to win. At one point in the recent past they were the second highest paid contracted players in the world

  • AzyS on May 22, 2012, 3:26 GMT

    the west indies team is simply exciting and is one of the best but i dont know if it is the selectors or the players or the administrators who are in the wrong to keep selecting the wrong team. just imagine a team including gayle,sarwan,pollard,dwayne bravo and smith,darren bravo,sunil narine,fidel edwards,kemar roach,chanderpaul,marlon samuels,adrian barath,kirk edwards,ravi rampaul,shane shilingford,carlton baugh,dinesh ramdin,brendan nash,sammy,andre russel and others.just select them and give them contracts and encourage them and you will have a winning combination pretty soon.also keep sending the west indies A & under-19 teams on regular tours to create a feeder line to the national team.C'mon Maaan u Guys R Winners.

  • GravyMon on May 22, 2012, 4:03 GMT

    In a strange way, this may actually be a blessing in disguise. Sammy is yet to recognize where he is and what he represents to WI people! Someone should give him a clue.

  • jmcilhinney on May 22, 2012, 4:09 GMT

    This is kind of adding insult to injury but rules is rules. Over rates are poor pretty much everywhere these days and picking an all-pace attack is always a risk in this regard. @ssdeep, I don't know for sure but I'm guessing that it's not within the rules for the board to cover the fine. It is supposed to ensure that the players on the field make the effort to keep up decent over rates but if the players don't suffer the consequences then they won't be motivated to do so. It's a shame that an effort to improve the over rate may have impinged on WI ability to push for a win on day 5. doubt that they would have made it anyway but you'd like to think that they could have made their best effort.