Champions Trophy 2013 June 10, 2013

Ramdin suspended for two ODIs

ESPNcricinfo staff

West Indies wicketkeeper Denesh Ramdin has been suspended for two ODIs, and fined 100% of his match fees, for breaching the Code of Conduct when he claimed a catch off Misbah-ul-Haq during the Champions Trophy game against Pakistan at The Oval.

Ramdin has decided not to appeal the decision, a West Indies team spokesperson told ESPNcricinfo, which means he will miss their last two group matches against India and South Africa.*

"This is regarded as a serious offence as it is the responsibility of all players to act in the spirit of the game," ICC match referee Chris Broad said. "I hope Mr Ramdin has learnt his lesson from this incident and that we will not see such behaviour by him or any player in the future."

The incident took place in the ninth over of Pakistan's innings, when Misbah bottom-edged a Kemar Roach delivery to Ramdin. The wicketkeeper initially appeared to have caught the ball but lost control of it as he fell forward, and it slipped out of his gloves on to the grass. Instead of bringing his mistake to the notice of the umpires or his team-mates, Ramdin returned the ball to the square-leg umpire and joined his team-mates in the celebratory huddle.

Square-leg umpire Nigel Llong, however, alerted the third umpire and the replay revealed the chance had been dropped. Misbah, who was on 0, was called back and went on to hit an unbeaten 96.

Misbah had said that Ramdin's actions were not in the spirit of the game. "What can I say about that?" he said when asked about the catch. "I think he should have told them what happened, but I don't know what he was thinking at that time. I would not be very happy if my wicketkeeper did that. If we don't know anything, then it's fine, but if you know clearly that it's not a catch, you should not claim that because it's not in the spirit of the game."

West Indies captain Dwayne Bravo, however, had defended Ramdin, saying the wicketkeeper did not act deliberately. "Unfortunately, he did not catch it," Bravo said. "He's a very honest player, and as I said, history shows if you check the records that we don't have any stigma or negatives around us as a team. We have been true in our cricket careers and history has shown that we play the game in true spirit of the way it should be played. I don't think we did something like this deliberately."

The charge - under article 2.2.11 of the ICC Code of Conduct which relates to "conduct that is contrary to the spirit of the game" - was laid by the on-field umpires Steve Davis and Llong, third umpire Tony Hill and fourth umpire Richard Kettleborough. Ramdin had pleaded not guilty and attended a hearing adjudicated by Broad on Monday.

*1915 GMT This article was updated to mention that Ramdin was not going to appeal the ban and fine.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Jon on June 13, 2013, 11:55 GMT

    Two things here: 1. Does anyopne know how long you need to hold on to a ball before it is deemed a catch? 2. The so "called spirit of the game". Is there clear guidelines or is it open to interpretation? For example what consitutes to not being in "the spirit of the Game"? Sledging, Balll tampering, kicking the ball at other players, Falling to walk knowing full well you edged the ball. To be fair, why not let Umpires/referees make decisions just like in other sports. I do not believe appealling for a catch is such a bad crime that warrants a two match ban.

  • Rahul on June 12, 2013, 1:48 GMT

    I dont think a batsmen nicking it and a fieldsman dropping a catch can be considered the same. When batsmen nick it, they wait for umpire, it's not like they point to the pad saying they didn't nick it. If in fact, it's obvious that the batsmen nicked it and he insists that it went off the pad, then ya he deserves the same punishment as Ramdin. I should also add that the punishment to Ramdin was way too harsh. Against the spirit of the game shouldn't result in a match ban, the fines are wholly justified though. I consider bans to be appropriate only upon multiple breaches of the spirit of the game.

  • Jason on June 12, 2013, 0:45 GMT

    Anyone suggesting Ramdin might not have realized he dropped the catch should watch the replay on YouTube. As he gets up from his dive he actually picks the ball of the ground and tosses it towards the square leg ump. Impossible that he didn't know he'd fumbled it, else how come the ball wasn't in his gloves?!

    That's also a critical difference with batsmen who nick a catch but don't walk. Unlike Ramdin's case there is no similarly clear indication to show whether a batsmen actually knows that he has nicked the ball. In Ramdin's case it's obvious he knew. If there was a way to tell if a batsman knows he has nicked the ball and hasn't walked he should also get a similar penalty.

    Bravo's comments reflect badly on him as a captain. As a national captain and senior player it'd be good to hear him upholding good sportsmanship above defending his team-mate when he has clearly made a mistake.

  • Derek on June 11, 2013, 20:06 GMT

    Players committing worst offences are now KNIGHTED so there is hope for Ramdin to redeem himself. Just get him a stint at either Somerset or Durham and put him out to GRASS...

  • miguel on June 11, 2013, 18:00 GMT

    I am not saying that what ramdin did was right but we should remember that batsmen don't go to the umpire and report that they did in fact edge the ball or that it hit their gloves when they are ajudged not out it those cases

  • Kodi on June 11, 2013, 13:42 GMT

    Hi I totally agree with Narkovian... This is really double standards. A batsman can stand at his crease after nicking the ball but the keeper gets penalized for a catch he thought he caught. This code of conduct needs to change or same should apply to a batsman. I can name so many players that stood at their crease after they nicked the ball like nothing ever happened. In the heat of the moment we all think we are correct unless otherwise we are proven incorrect.

  • Benazir on June 11, 2013, 12:31 GMT

    If all the players have to make all the decisions whether they are out or not, then what is the necessary of on field umpires? However, for the limitation of eyesight umpires cannot be always certain whether a catch is clean or not even with the help of cameras. Imagine where there is no camera on the filed and a fielder takes a diving near the boundary, how can the umpires be certain about the catch when they failed to do so in 30 yards in that match. Umpires do need assistance from the players when it comes to catching, otherwise the game will be even more dirtier. 100 % players know had they lost control over the ball.

    @Narkovian what about that 0.1%, should he also be banned? Rules have to be fair for everyone.

  • Dale on June 11, 2013, 10:55 GMT

    So a batsman nicking it now and not walking is going to be banned? Especially when DRS is being used and batsman can no longer use the 'good and bad decisions even out in the end' argument. If reviews are used properly then the batsman shouldn't have to walk off knowing they inside edged that LBW or clearly missed that caught behind. But we still see batsman quite happy to stand there knowing they nicked it but trying to see if hotspot may have missed it. To me, I see little difference between that and what Ramdin did. Both are wrong, both look bad on TV, but unfortunately both are part of modern cricket.

  • Carl on June 11, 2013, 8:58 GMT

    One can't erase the image of screaming, leaping fielders from the sub-continent bawling in the face of an umpire...despite the fact that the batsman has merely executed a perfect forward defensive. Hardly "in the spirit of the game", is it...?