West Indies v India, 1st Test, Kingston, Jamaica June 24, 2011

Rampaul fined, Sammy reprimanded

ESPNcricinfo staff
30

West Indies seamer Ravi Rampaul has been fined 10% of his match fee for showing dissent and his captain Darren Sammy has been reprimanded for breaching the code of conduct during the first Test against India in Jamaica.

Rampaul was penalised for asking the umpire whether the ball he was dismissed off was a no-ball for height. Ishant Sharma had already bowled a couple of bouncers in the over before another delivery reared up unexpectedly, brushing Rampaul's gloves as he fended at it. The match referee, Jeff Crowe, deemed Rampaul to have breached clause 2.1.3 of the code which relates to "showing dissent at an umpire's decision".

Sammy was warned for pointing to his forearm after a huge appeal for a close-in catch off the first delivery he faced. The appeal was turned down but Sammy was punished for conduct "contrary to the spirit of the game".

There was no official hearing as both players accepted the ruling of the match referee. "Just like India player Amit Mishra in the first innings, Ravi stood his ground and gestured to both the umpires on being given out," Crowe said. "Darren, who was eventually given not out, immediately looked to influence the umpire as to where the ball struck him."

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Fast_Track_Bully on June 27, 2011, 5:27 GMT

    -Obey my order- rule is not good for cricket. ICC should punish match referee for taking action against such incidents!. what a pity.

  • shivdman on June 25, 2011, 17:02 GMT

    @SRP1: Quite nicely said. I honestly don't see the harm in Rampaul asking a question and receiving an answer and then walking off. If he had protested the call, then you could say he was breaching the code of conduct but as far as it looked, and i cannot say more than that because i was not there as a witness to what actually happened, he was told it was a legal delivery and he proceeded to walk off. He might not have agreed with it but he walked off without confrontation and yet he receives a fine for voicing a simple query that, I believe, would not have gotten him in trouble if he was the bowler asking how high the ball was and whether it was a no ball or not, or disputing how close an LBW decision was.

  • WTEH on June 25, 2011, 8:44 GMT

    If the WI board a strong one this would not be the case for Rampaul. Sorry for the lad, but cann't do anything as the WI board will surely not protest against this action.

  • dhurandhar007 on June 24, 2011, 20:13 GMT

    As per TenCricket TV commentators this was not called a no ball because it was not an intended short pitched bouncer, but it jumped unexpectedly from the good length spot. Whatever that is worth.

  • arnabpaul2k on June 24, 2011, 19:57 GMT

    @Metman : Mate as far as I understand, a bouncer is a delivery above the shoulder height (and not head height). So if Rampaul has fended off his throat (according to your statement) then it should be a bouncer. Although the consideration has to be given here that he was bending his back while fending the ball, hence reducing his height. If a batsman ducks under a bouncer, from the umpire's point of view, you have to basically guess the actual height of the batsman where the ball is passing to decide whether it is a bouncer or wide. Basically the controversy over the decision has eclipsed 2 great presentation of skills on part of Ishant (what a delivery!) and Dhoni (what a catch!). This delivery reminded me of a similar one from Shreesanth to Kallis in India's last tour of South Africa, which had Kallis fending awkwardly literally from the air (both feet above the ground level). From a land of medium pacers and spinners like India, these few instances are really heartening to see.

  • SRP1 on June 24, 2011, 18:20 GMT

    DO any one remember, what was the fine Glenn Mcgrath received when he fought with sarwan, had he been punished? i dont remember..

    umpires need to understand smaller incidents on the fields and judge which to punish and which not?

    Whats worng if a batsman checked if it was a no ball or not?

    when a bowler bowls a no ball for over stepping, doesnt he check with the umpire whether he has really over stepped ? similarly a batsman wanted to check if it was a bouncer or not, i dont think the batsman refuses if he was given out, but Umpire and the match referee needs to under stand these situations.

  • Metman on June 24, 2011, 18:18 GMT

    @Rampaul and all others who are in not in favour of the fine!How can it be a bouncer if yu fended it off ,and it hit either yr bat or the glove ?Were the bat and glove above yr head ?It was a short pitched ball that yu fended off yr throat.

  • CricBay on June 24, 2011, 18:18 GMT

    If bowlers and fielders have a right to appeal, who doesn't a batsman be given the same privilege?

  • dhurandhar007 on June 24, 2011, 18:05 GMT

    There is no organization more gutless and brainless than ICC. Better BCCI than ICC. The umpire's decision can be final, no problem, but the players have the right to ask in a decent manner as to why they are being given out. Umpires' stupidities and incapabilities can change the course of a series, not jut a test match, and they can destroy players' careers. So, what is wrong if a player asks for a re-confirmation from the umpire. He is not abusing or assaulting the umpire. This is just players being humans. A bowler running into the danger zone 'can' change the nature of the pitch and that 'can' effect the course of the match and therefore the bowler is banned for the innings after three occurences. How about an umpire changing the course of a match with a stupid decision. Shouldn't the umpire be banned if the replays show it was an incorrect decision.

  • arnabpaul2k on June 24, 2011, 18:04 GMT

    Rules are pretty confusing... when a bowler appeals for LBW and the umpire denies, we often see bowlers asking why it was denied and the umpire clarifying whether it is missing leg or pitching outside leg etc. But the reverse, if a batsman is given out, he cannot question why he is given out. Again, if umpires give a wrong decision, they are human and ICC says: to err is human. But if a batsman shakes his head given out wrongly out of clear human instinct, fine him... pretty absurd.

  • Fast_Track_Bully on June 27, 2011, 5:27 GMT

    -Obey my order- rule is not good for cricket. ICC should punish match referee for taking action against such incidents!. what a pity.

  • shivdman on June 25, 2011, 17:02 GMT

    @SRP1: Quite nicely said. I honestly don't see the harm in Rampaul asking a question and receiving an answer and then walking off. If he had protested the call, then you could say he was breaching the code of conduct but as far as it looked, and i cannot say more than that because i was not there as a witness to what actually happened, he was told it was a legal delivery and he proceeded to walk off. He might not have agreed with it but he walked off without confrontation and yet he receives a fine for voicing a simple query that, I believe, would not have gotten him in trouble if he was the bowler asking how high the ball was and whether it was a no ball or not, or disputing how close an LBW decision was.

  • WTEH on June 25, 2011, 8:44 GMT

    If the WI board a strong one this would not be the case for Rampaul. Sorry for the lad, but cann't do anything as the WI board will surely not protest against this action.

  • dhurandhar007 on June 24, 2011, 20:13 GMT

    As per TenCricket TV commentators this was not called a no ball because it was not an intended short pitched bouncer, but it jumped unexpectedly from the good length spot. Whatever that is worth.

  • arnabpaul2k on June 24, 2011, 19:57 GMT

    @Metman : Mate as far as I understand, a bouncer is a delivery above the shoulder height (and not head height). So if Rampaul has fended off his throat (according to your statement) then it should be a bouncer. Although the consideration has to be given here that he was bending his back while fending the ball, hence reducing his height. If a batsman ducks under a bouncer, from the umpire's point of view, you have to basically guess the actual height of the batsman where the ball is passing to decide whether it is a bouncer or wide. Basically the controversy over the decision has eclipsed 2 great presentation of skills on part of Ishant (what a delivery!) and Dhoni (what a catch!). This delivery reminded me of a similar one from Shreesanth to Kallis in India's last tour of South Africa, which had Kallis fending awkwardly literally from the air (both feet above the ground level). From a land of medium pacers and spinners like India, these few instances are really heartening to see.

  • SRP1 on June 24, 2011, 18:20 GMT

    DO any one remember, what was the fine Glenn Mcgrath received when he fought with sarwan, had he been punished? i dont remember..

    umpires need to understand smaller incidents on the fields and judge which to punish and which not?

    Whats worng if a batsman checked if it was a no ball or not?

    when a bowler bowls a no ball for over stepping, doesnt he check with the umpire whether he has really over stepped ? similarly a batsman wanted to check if it was a bouncer or not, i dont think the batsman refuses if he was given out, but Umpire and the match referee needs to under stand these situations.

  • Metman on June 24, 2011, 18:18 GMT

    @Rampaul and all others who are in not in favour of the fine!How can it be a bouncer if yu fended it off ,and it hit either yr bat or the glove ?Were the bat and glove above yr head ?It was a short pitched ball that yu fended off yr throat.

  • CricBay on June 24, 2011, 18:18 GMT

    If bowlers and fielders have a right to appeal, who doesn't a batsman be given the same privilege?

  • dhurandhar007 on June 24, 2011, 18:05 GMT

    There is no organization more gutless and brainless than ICC. Better BCCI than ICC. The umpire's decision can be final, no problem, but the players have the right to ask in a decent manner as to why they are being given out. Umpires' stupidities and incapabilities can change the course of a series, not jut a test match, and they can destroy players' careers. So, what is wrong if a player asks for a re-confirmation from the umpire. He is not abusing or assaulting the umpire. This is just players being humans. A bowler running into the danger zone 'can' change the nature of the pitch and that 'can' effect the course of the match and therefore the bowler is banned for the innings after three occurences. How about an umpire changing the course of a match with a stupid decision. Shouldn't the umpire be banned if the replays show it was an incorrect decision.

  • arnabpaul2k on June 24, 2011, 18:04 GMT

    Rules are pretty confusing... when a bowler appeals for LBW and the umpire denies, we often see bowlers asking why it was denied and the umpire clarifying whether it is missing leg or pitching outside leg etc. But the reverse, if a batsman is given out, he cannot question why he is given out. Again, if umpires give a wrong decision, they are human and ICC says: to err is human. But if a batsman shakes his head given out wrongly out of clear human instinct, fine him... pretty absurd.

  • bigwonder on June 24, 2011, 17:57 GMT

    Instead of bashing BCCI for UDRS, why not ask for UDRS after all appeals in additions to the on-field umpires? Also add a fine on to Umpires for getting a simple decision incorrect. They had to fine Rampul cause they set an example earlier with Mishra.

  • dhurandhar007 on June 24, 2011, 17:40 GMT

    @PlanetCity: In that case UDRS should be discontinued because it makes the players do exactly that, i.e. "...stand there and ask the Umpire and thus question his decision and also waste everybody's time....."

  • PlanetCity on June 24, 2011, 16:30 GMT

    @Shivdman.. A batsman can go to the dressing room and see the reply or find out how he got out later. It is not right to stand there and ask the Umpire and thus question his decision and also waster everybody's time. Its all fair and square.

  • shivdman on June 24, 2011, 15:26 GMT

    I think the fining of Rampaul is ludicrous. So, are we going to fine everybody who ask a simple question about how they got out? If he actually showed dissent and not just asked a simple question about whether it was a no-ball then by all means ignore my comment but to me it looked like he just wanted to know if he was given out to a legal delivery. Is that too much? Is letting a batsman know why he was giving out so harsh an offence these days?

  • m_ilind on June 24, 2011, 14:49 GMT

    I have seen more iconic players get away with a lot more than these guys did. They did not deserve it!

  • avis1001 on June 24, 2011, 13:38 GMT

    @TheDoctor394 - you are sooo correct. Whos gonna fine the umpires for the wrong decisions?

  • sramjist on June 24, 2011, 12:54 GMT

    Where is the reprimand for the umpire for making an incorrect decision? Isn't that against the spirit of cricket?

  • CricketChat on June 24, 2011, 12:52 GMT

    Neither Ravi or Sammy did anything wrong to be pulled up like children by officials. It is not like they protested to the umpires. I think these punishments and reprimands are going overboard on negligible issues. They should be reserved for more serious issues like, intentional slowing of game, abuse, contract violations, etc.

  • Navin84 on June 24, 2011, 12:46 GMT

    The umpiring in this match was terrible, another reason for the UDRS which India don't want. Why can't the ICC make it compulsory rather than giving the option of the UDRS. As long as the ICC leave the option open the BCCI will never accept it. The BCCI seems to be controlling the ICC.

  • 12kris on June 24, 2011, 12:45 GMT

    Sammy is a benign bloke. The only game he plays is Cricket. For an innocent gesture, when you punish a Cricketer, it is sad. Instead the umpires who make mistakes, take their bias to the field, are tolerated and placed in the elite panel. For example, how could they tolerate Darryl Harper for so long? He is inefficient, arrogant and a racist. Years back, when the SriLankans were physically taunted by the S.Africans, the mild mannered Jayawardane told off Pollock.Yet Harper chose to admonish Jayawardane and not Pollock. After making at least 5 blatant mistakes all against India in the just concluded Test, he was still trying to influenzce his colleague to reverse it when a decision was given in favor of India! To say the least, Cricket administration is inconsistent.

  • kav555 on June 24, 2011, 12:09 GMT

    @Srivallabh: That's a good observation. Worth debating.

  • sanj007 on June 24, 2011, 11:56 GMT

    @ celicabai , Yes mishra did get a fine as well.

  • HarshalBaviskar on June 24, 2011, 11:42 GMT

    Why not just accept DRS without controversial, error prone, not yet mature ball tracking? And better would be if third umpire could reverse the decision taken by field umpire on technical evidence he has at his disposal without even asking for review...

  • Reid84 on June 24, 2011, 11:35 GMT

    @celicabai. Yes Amit Mishra also got a fine for a similar thing. And he was also not out when he was given out in the 1st innings. Check Cricinfo archive for details.

  • NiceTime on June 24, 2011, 11:26 GMT

    From Malcolm to Gould to Harper, this series has probably the worst umpiring I've ever seen. P.S. It just passes the WIvPak series and there is still two matches to go!

  • Srivallabh on June 24, 2011, 11:14 GMT

    Its funny that UDRS - the most blatant system of questioning an umpire's decision - is fine with the "spirit of the game" but in its absence a player is not allowed to question an umpire's decision. Hypocrites. If ICC is serious about avoiding such incidents, then they had better force the UDRS down the throat of the BCCI.

  • celicabai on June 24, 2011, 10:38 GMT

    did Amit Mishra get a fine for doing the same thing?

  • mits6 on June 24, 2011, 10:00 GMT

    Another reason for DRS to be implemented. Atleast everyone will be satisfied .

  • TheDoctor394 on June 24, 2011, 9:23 GMT

    Gee, how terrible of these players to behave like humans.

  • Vivek.Bhandari on June 24, 2011, 9:04 GMT

    Sammy may have tried to influence the umpire but Rampaul was not at fault, at all. He was all correct to suggest the umpire that this could be the third bouncer of the over. This is some area where the DRS could also be used.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • Vivek.Bhandari on June 24, 2011, 9:04 GMT

    Sammy may have tried to influence the umpire but Rampaul was not at fault, at all. He was all correct to suggest the umpire that this could be the third bouncer of the over. This is some area where the DRS could also be used.

  • TheDoctor394 on June 24, 2011, 9:23 GMT

    Gee, how terrible of these players to behave like humans.

  • mits6 on June 24, 2011, 10:00 GMT

    Another reason for DRS to be implemented. Atleast everyone will be satisfied .

  • celicabai on June 24, 2011, 10:38 GMT

    did Amit Mishra get a fine for doing the same thing?

  • Srivallabh on June 24, 2011, 11:14 GMT

    Its funny that UDRS - the most blatant system of questioning an umpire's decision - is fine with the "spirit of the game" but in its absence a player is not allowed to question an umpire's decision. Hypocrites. If ICC is serious about avoiding such incidents, then they had better force the UDRS down the throat of the BCCI.

  • NiceTime on June 24, 2011, 11:26 GMT

    From Malcolm to Gould to Harper, this series has probably the worst umpiring I've ever seen. P.S. It just passes the WIvPak series and there is still two matches to go!

  • Reid84 on June 24, 2011, 11:35 GMT

    @celicabai. Yes Amit Mishra also got a fine for a similar thing. And he was also not out when he was given out in the 1st innings. Check Cricinfo archive for details.

  • HarshalBaviskar on June 24, 2011, 11:42 GMT

    Why not just accept DRS without controversial, error prone, not yet mature ball tracking? And better would be if third umpire could reverse the decision taken by field umpire on technical evidence he has at his disposal without even asking for review...

  • sanj007 on June 24, 2011, 11:56 GMT

    @ celicabai , Yes mishra did get a fine as well.

  • kav555 on June 24, 2011, 12:09 GMT

    @Srivallabh: That's a good observation. Worth debating.