|Photos||Video & Audio||Blogs||Statistics||Archive||Shop||Mobile|
It only serves to devalue the next game, especially if it's a crucial one
Andrew Fidel Fernando
February 17, 2013
In Sri Lanka's final Super Eights match in the 2012 World Twenty20, Kumar Sangakkara strode out for the toss in place of Mahela Jayawardene. "Mahela has lost three tosses in a row," was the line Sangakkara tried to peddle, but it was clear that trickery was afoot. When Sri Lanka came out to field, Jayawardene directed the fielders, changed the bowlers and generally called the shots.
Social media quickly figured Jayawardene was dodging a possible second over-rate infringement, which would lead to a suspension, and lit up with debate. Some condemned Sri Lanka's captain for flouting the rules, others praised him for it. After the match, Jayawardene confirmed, with more than a hint of glee at having cheated the system, that the switch had aimed to ensure he did not miss the semi-final.
As the rule stands, if a captain oversees two over-rate offences in the same format within 12 months, he is forced to miss his next match in the same format. In addition, the entire team is docked 10% of their match fee for every over that is deemed to be tardy, and the captain is fined twice that amount.
Sri Lanka's ruse had been conceived by the team manager because in the previous match they were found to be one over short of the minimum over rate. Their match against West Indies was not noticeably duller because of a slightly slower pace of play, nor had there been any inkling an infringement had occurred until the ICC's release came through. Yet if Sri Lanka had transgressed equally indiscernibly under Jayawardene's watch in their next game against England, or indeed in the semi-final against Pakistan, they would have lost their captain and best T20 batsman for a crucial match in a major tournament. The penalty seems too severe for the crime.
More frustratingly, the rule actually seems to defeat the purpose for which it was drawn up. If the rule-makers had hoped to make cricket more watchable by requiring quick play, they cannot punish violations by compromising the quality of the next match, which they do when they ban a key player.
In June last year, Pakistan lost Misbah-ul-Haq for the first Test against Sri Lanka for an over-rates infringement. What followed in Galle was their only Test loss of the year. There is no guarantee that Misbah would have made any difference to the result, but as their coach Dav Whatmore pointed out, Sri Lanka couldn't claim to have beaten Pakistan's best team.
The rule is likely born of broadcasters' demands, but perhaps harsher fines can serve as an acceptable deterrent for captains instead. Whatever the solution, the current rule, which aims to enhance the game, ends up devaluing it.
Andrew Fidel Fernando is ESPNcricinfo's Sri Lanka correspondent. He tweets hereFeeds: Andrew Fidel Fernando
© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.
|Comments have now been closed for this article
When you spend your childhood in the shadow of a magnificent cricket ground, you tend to take it for granted. Revisiting helps put things in perspective
Numbers Game: Pakistan have notched up some fine wins under Misbah's leadership, but they haven't been consistent outside the UAE
Modern Masters: Rahul Dravid and Sanjay Manjrekar discuss Steve Waugh's adaptability
Nicholas Hogg: It's one way to keep in touch with the game in the long, dark English winters
Plays of the day from the fifth ODI in Ranchi
Former Sri Lanka batsman Asanka Gurusinha talks about playing and coaching in Australia, and tactics during the 1996 World Cup
Plays of the day from the fourth ODI between India and Sri Lanka in Kolkata
He's past his use-by date as a Test captain and keeper. India now have a chance to test Kohli's leadership skills
Mahela Jayawardene reflects on his Test career, and the need to bridge the gap between international and club cricket in Sri Lanka
His autobiography merely endorses the public image of the man, instead of giving us the insights we've been craving