Five Over Yellow Cards, Not Points

Hard earned WTC points should be for keeps

Many of the better legal judges in the world admit to worrying more about fitting the punishment to the crime than whether the defendant is guilty or not. The former is subjective and offers flexibility while the latter depends on an interpretation of evidence which is easier than deciding on an appropriate punishment.

By handing down a custodial sentence to the mother of young children, for example, it is not just the children who suffer – it could be the grandparents and a string of other dependents. If the mother has committed murder, fair enough. But if she’s guilty of shoplifting or tax evasion, probably not.

Cricket’s equivalent is docking the England team two points from their World Test Championship tally for their unacceptably wretched over-rate during the Lord’s Test. It doesn’t just punish Ben Stokes and his team, and their supporters, it punishes every other Test playing nation.

The WTC has established its credentials with India and Australia both of whom treat it with the respect and reverence a global ICC event deserves, despite their odds of reaching the final being compromised by the imbalanced schedule. The ‘smaller’ Test nations have all acknowledged that the Test Championship is most likely their only lifeline to keeping the format alive, never mind healthy.

It may be tempting to think England should be allowed to wallow in their own disinterest but, should they miss out on a place in the final courtesy of a few penalty points, every other nation will know that the punishment exceeded the crime. That’s not to say that England’s turgid pace of play is immaterial – it is embarrassingly disrespectful.

Financial penalties are comically ineffective. Something else has to be tried. In-game run penalties (5-10 runs per over) are an option but will also lead to acrimony and controversy. They will also provide direct ‘evidence’ that a result was changed in the event of a close finish, and nobody wants an over-rate punishment to (be seen to) decide the winner of a Test match.

An answer might be to remove a fielder for five overs for each over behind the required rate. Allowing the fielding captain to choose when to implement the penalty would add jeopardy and some control to proceedings. Captains could manage their own punishment.

Confusion around how over-rates are calculated exacerbates the frustration of fans who witness the blatant time-wasting but the teams understand exactly how the Match Referees’ matrix works and rarely have any complaints. (It would be interesting if the ECB consider an appeal against their two-point penalty on the basis that their sole specialist spinner had a broken finger…!)

But seriously. There may be a perception amongst other Test playing nations that England’s approach to Test cricket is arrogant, they need Stokes and his team to ‘buy in’ to the WTC. It’s hard enough for them to reach the final with five-match series against India and Australia in every cycle – docking them points makes it almost impossible. And that discredits the tournament.

International cricketers need much stricter management on the field. Drinks breaks are scheduled for four minutes. The average was eight minutes during the Lord’s Test. At every unscheduled break in play, and sometimes just overs, 12^th and 13^th men in his-viz bibs ran onto the field with water bottles and whatever else. The players, like teenagers, pushed the boundaries as far as they could – and the umpires did nothing to keep them in check.

But schools don’t dock a grade from pupils’ Matric or ‘A’ levels for smoking behind the bike sheds. Detention or even a week’s suspension usually gets the message home. A sanction which might affect their career prospects is clearly inappropriate. And besides, for all the lost overs it was still a bloody good show.