• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

ICC introduces penalities for poor pitches



ICC introduces penalities for poor pitches

Cricinfo staff

March 20, 2006

The ICC board of directors meeting in Dubai decided, as expected, to end the unloved trial of the Supersub with immediate effect. It also announced a new pitch-monitoring process, endorsed an anti-doping policy and received a report from Peter Chingoka on the state of play in Zimbabwe.

Among other items were an agreement on the minimum number of matches required for a team to be ranked in the official ICC One-Day Championship, and an agreement to revert to full recognition of the administration of the United States of America Cricket Association (USACA) subject to certain conditions.

The briefest discussion surrounded the agreement not to continue with the Supersub experiment, introduced in haste last June and widely lambasted ever since. Indeed, it would not be right to describe it as a discussion so much as a rubber-stamping exercise.

The board endorsed the adoption of an ICC anti-doping policy for all major ICC-run events. The proposed policy complies with the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) Code and will be introduced in time for the Champions Trophy in India in October.

The board also proposed the first formal pitch-monitoring process for international cricket. This process, which has been adopted with immediate effect, includes potential sanctions ranging from a formal warning to a fine, or even suspension of international status for venues that produce substandard pitches.

The continuing problems in Zimbabwe were discussed, with a presentation by Chingoka, the chairman of the interim board. An ICC statement said that the board were told that an independent auditor had been appointed to conduct a forensic audit and that a new constitution would be in place by the middle of the year. Chingoka was told that Zimbabwe Cricket would be required to provide a report to the ICC board at its October 2006 and March 2007 meetings reviewing the on-field performances of its teams ahead of any decision regarding its resumption of Test cricket.

With regard to the ICC One-Day Championship, the board decided that the minimum number of matches needed to be played by a side to qualify for a ranking should be eight matches. That meant that Kenya have now played sufficient matches in the qualifying period. The two matches it played in the ICC Champions Trophy 2004 have a 50% weighting, while their recent four matches against Zimbabwe and the opening two matches of its series against Bangladesh take it to the eight-match threshold. Kenya is ranked 11th on the table with a rating of 18 points. It needs to win both remaining matches of its four-match series against Bangladesh to climb to tenth and claim the last qualifying spot for the ICC Champions Trophy.

Another board that had been a thorn in the ICC's side, the USA Cricket Association, has again been recognised subject to certain conditions. The only one specified in the media release is that it must conduct independently-monitored elections before November 30, 2006. The USACA has been at odds with the ICC since a split last year challenged the existing board's right to run the game.

© Cricinfo[/b]


Havnt put any news up here for a while, just thought this would interest some people. not many but some :)
Well I'm interested ;)

It's going to be so hard to draw the line on what is a poor pitch and what is not. There are a lot of variables.

And by suspension of international status does that mean that if we had a poor pitch at Jade that New Zealand would not be a test playing nation until it was up to standard or just that international games can not be played at that ground?

It's a good iniative but I think it will be hard to monitor.
yeah well i think it is just saying that ground. not the nation. (and Lancaster Park is always good)

I agree it would be hard to point out if its a bad pitch, if it is like coregated iron thats understandable, but each pitch has different conditions, and thats what makes this game great. No 2 pitches are the same over the world. is it a bad pitch if ball dominates bat? the batting team could have just had a bad day, is it a bad pitch if there are no wickets falling during the day? the batting team could have been lucky, or bowling could have just been poor who knows.

i would like to know what constitutes a bad pitch :)
I'd imagine that if the pitch was falling apart (huge cracks, loose dirt etc.) then that might constitute a poor pitch. Sort of like that one that was produced up North during a tour by a team (India I think?) a few years ago. The one that both sides said was **** house.
hamilton? the one where they were bowled out for 70 or something? and we got it with 2 or 3 wickets down? then had a 20twenty on it (or was it 10 overs each)

that the one you talking about? aparently that pitch is VERY good now, it was like coregated iron aparently, and that was the one i was thinking about :) also there was a pitch like that in the west indies, where they were playing a test and it ended up being abandoned because of the pitch
Yeah, I think that was it. New Zealand Cricket came down on them and said that if they didn't fix the pitch, then Hamilton wouldn't host anymore games, didn't they?
Hamilton was also home to the test match that had the huge 'crater'. It was this big arse hole in the pitch that was there from like day 2. Vetori was having a field day.
If anyone knows anything about english county cricket, an inspection of a pitch is used if more than 15 wickets or so fall in a day and at umpires request.

If the pitch is deemed poor by the ECB, points are taken away from that season county championship. The only problem is that clubs are less likely to use 'out grounds', which are non first class club pitches.

I can only see a similar set of actions to be taken by the ICC


Latest posts