Will Australia be hauled up for a poor over rate?
Slow over rates
are one of my favourite gripes about cricket. It isn't about a specific team. India, especially when Ganguly was captain, have been guilty on several occasions, and have rightly copped the penalties. It's about giving value to the paying public (including those in the comforts of their living rooms). The ICC has a responsibility to ensure that the game is played for the maximum time possible (without being dogmatic about start and end times, especially when there is enough light), and when weather conditions aren't ideal, then alternate arrangements (floodlights, for e.g.) need to be made. Teams have a responsibility to ensure that they bowl as many overs as are mandated.
One of the indicators that Australia were in trouble with the over rate yesterday was when Hussey bowled 8 overs
, having bowled only 11 overs in his previous 27 tests
. Someone please tell me how Ponting was planning to speed up the over rate with Hussey, when Clarke bowled just one over. In fact, a few tests ago at Perth
, Ponting was forced to bowl Clarke and Symonds in tandem to do something about the over rate during India's second innings. As a result, India went from 182/6 after 45 overs (a lead of 300) when Symonds & Clarke started bowling in tandem to 234/6 after 61 overs (a lead of 350+). It was to prove crucial in the context of the match. Despite the attempts to speed things up, there was a monetary penalty imposed
Overall, during the Mohali test
, this is how the over rate table looked. The ICC's code of conduct specifies that the minimum over rate for tests should be 15 overs per hour, and allowances can be made for wickets falling, drinks breaks, medical treatment, TV referrals, etc. I don't have details about time spent on medical issues or third umpire referrals. I suspect there weren't too many, at least not significant enough to impact the over rate substantially. The weather wasn't oppressively hot and humid requiring frequent drinks, including in-between overs.
|Team bowling||Inning #||Overs||Time taken (min)||# of wickets taken||# of drink breaks||Net time taken (min)||Over rate bowled||# of overs short|
So, Australia were at least 1.4 overs short at the end of the game. Clause 5 (c) (i) of the ICC's code of conduct for players & officials
for each of the first 5 overs short of the minimum overs required 5% of each Player's match fee in the fielding side, in the case of the Captain the amount shall be 10% of the match fee
Hence, Ricky Ponting must forego 10% of his fee while the rest of the players (does it only refer to the playing XI?) should each fork out 5% of their match fee.
Actually, failure to ensure the minimum over rate is maintained is a level 2 (2.11) offense. A repeat of a level 2 offense within 12 months automatically upgrades the new offense into a level 3 offense, which carries bans (2-4 tests or 4-8 ODIs). Since Australia have already been hauled up earlier this year, Ricky Ponting should be banned for 2-4 tests or 4-8 ODIs.
But will it actually happen? Chances are it won't. At Perth and during the one-day triangular series that followed, Australia benefitted when the number of overs short was incorrectly determined
. Even worse, a repeat offense wasn't even factored in.
Labels: aus v ind 2008, over rates