Is that correct within the laws of the game?
Is it entirely within the opinion of the umpires to determine how a ball has come to be damaged? As I understand it, to award penalty runs for ball-tampering the umpires have to have seen ball tampering, not just suspect it from the condition of the ball.
I have no opinion one way or another about whether the ball was tampered with, but, it would seem that under the laws, Pakistan have correctly been deemed to have forfeited, whatever the reasons leading up to it.
Posted By: BerlinCanary on August 21st 2006 at 10:20:28
Message Thread
- Cricket Yesterday (General Chat) - Cat and Canary, Aug 21, 09:56:21
- There was little information being given at the ground (General Chat) - Cat and Canary, Aug 21, 10:16:49
- I've taken the umpiring qualification...... (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 10:19:19
- Pity Darryl Hair hasn't n/m (n/m) (General Chat) - Cat and Canary, Aug 21, 10:20:45
- I've taken the umpiring qualification...... (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 10:19:19
- refund available for yesterday (General Chat) - shoddy, Aug 21, 10:13:32
- not correct (General Chat) - fal5taff, Aug 21, 10:13:00
- Can't agree with that....... (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 10:15:07
- Hm.....well I think things are generally better dealt with on a cricket field (General Chat) - fal5taff, Aug 21, 10:28:58
- Is that correct within the laws of the game? (General Chat) - BerlinCanary, Aug 21, 10:20:28
- There has to be evidence of tampering. What that evidence is isn't stated. (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 10:24:44
- Fair enough. (General Chat) - BerlinCanary, Aug 21, 10:31:13
- The protest came about as a result of the umpires report to Mike Proctor the match referee (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 10:39:17
- Aha - that explains that (General Chat) - BerlinCanary, Aug 21, 10:42:14
- The protest came about as a result of the umpires report to Mike Proctor the match referee (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 10:39:17
- what if an umpire sees ball tampering? (General Chat) - mr carra, Aug 21, 10:29:00
- What if it was a game in the local park? (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 10:37:38
- The penalty runs thing is new then? When did they introduce that? (General Chat) - BerlinCanary, Aug 21, 10:40:43
- not sure - must be fairly recently (General Chat) - mr carra, Aug 21, 10:46:08
- As I said, you don't have to have seen anyone. (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 10:49:48
- could have been done by a fan though (General Chat) - mr carra, Aug 21, 10:57:23
- The ball is inspected regularly. (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 11:01:35
- as long as they change the ball England aren't really treated unfairly though (General Chat) - mr carra, Aug 21, 11:11:44
- But Pakistan are. (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 11:14:56
- as long as they change the ball England aren't really treated unfairly though (General Chat) - mr carra, Aug 21, 11:11:44
- The ball is inspected regularly. (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 11:01:35
- could have been done by a fan though (General Chat) - mr carra, Aug 21, 10:57:23
- As I said, you don't have to have seen anyone. (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 10:49:48
- Balls are regularly changed at the request of the fielding side..... (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 10:43:14
- Interesting - have there really been enough instances of ball-tampering to justify it? (General Chat) - BerlinCanary, Aug 21, 11:03:45
- it seems pointless (General Chat) - mr carra, Aug 21, 11:14:40
- It's there to provide some summary justice, to show that it's not allowed. (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 11:16:19
- You have to have some penalty. (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 11:10:10
- it seems pointless (General Chat) - mr carra, Aug 21, 11:14:40
- 2003. (n/m) (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 10:46:33
- Interesting - have there really been enough instances of ball-tampering to justify it? (General Chat) - BerlinCanary, Aug 21, 11:03:45
- not sure - must be fairly recently (General Chat) - mr carra, Aug 21, 10:46:08
- The penalty runs thing is new then? When did they introduce that? (General Chat) - BerlinCanary, Aug 21, 10:40:43
- What if it was a game in the local park? (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 10:37:38
- Although I will check my Tom Smith again as to what constitutes evidence. (n/m) (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 10:27:06
- Fair enough. (General Chat) - BerlinCanary, Aug 21, 10:31:13
- There has to be evidence of tampering. What that evidence is isn't stated. (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 10:24:44
- Can't agree with that....... (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 10:15:07
- Your understanding of the laws of cricket is somewhat wrong. (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 10:11:18
- And a lack of TV evidence does not mean that something was not seen by the umpires..... (n/m) (General Chat) - InTheAbsenceOfAHorse, Aug 21, 10:13:04
- One can only presume that the umpires will present some damning evidence (General Chat) - The Judge, Aug 21, 10:06:25
- I'm sorry i disagree (General Chat) - Jim, Aug 21, 10:06:02
- Yep, totally agree with Jim (General Chat) - LincolnshireCanary, Aug 21, 10:09:21
- There was little information being given at the ground (General Chat) - Cat and Canary, Aug 21, 10:16:49
Reply to Message
In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.
If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.