Australia helped by ICC rules?

Australia was fined for a slow over-rate in yesterday's ODI against India at Sydney. Ricky Ponting copped a 20% match fee fine under Clause J-5 of the ICC code of CONduct which prescribes a 5% match fee cut for the players (and 10% for the skipper) for the each of the first 5 overs short of the minimum overs which should have been bowled.

So far so good. Except, Australia were well in excess of 2 overs short. They bowled 49.1 overs in 225 minutes. Being 2 overs short implies they overshot the time allocation by ~ 10 minutes. Which is obviously untrue since they overshot it by 25 minutes!

During the Perth test match last month, Australia were fined for being 2 overs short. This, when they bowled 98 ov in 450 min (> 45 min delay => at least 10 ov lag) and 80 ov in 360 min (> 30 min delay => at least 7 ov lag). Yet, the penalty was for being 2 ov slow.

The code of conduct considers a 5 over lag in a test and a 2 over lag in a ODI as a level 2 offense (50% or more of the match fee as penalty and/or a 1 test/2 ODI ban). The match referees' decisions to report that Australia were lagging by 2 overs implied that Australia couldn't be charged with a level-2 offense. Further, a repeat of a level-2 offense within 12 months upgrades the 2nd offense to a level-3 offense which warrants a 2-4 tests or 4-8 ODIs ban.

Ergo, Ricky Ponting should have actually been banned after this hearing. Yet, like we've pointed out here, some get away, and some don't. Maybe the fact that the penalty for the Perth game isn't even listed on the ICC website in the 2008 breaches & penalties section means that he managed to get away thanks to yet another ICC administrative screw-up.

PS: Were you surprised when Ponting made runs on the best batting track in the one-day series? I'm not! You can also vote in the new poll: "Are Ricky Ponting and Andrew Symonds cricket's worst whiners?"

Labels: australia, ban, Commonwealth Bank Series, icc, india, match referee, over rates, umpires