INDIA VS. REST OF THE WORLD

NOTE: All the information on the cases mentioned in this blog post (except for the last one) comes from a singular source - this page on the official website of the International Cricket Council (ICC). Thank you to @HomerTweets for tweeting this link.

NOTE AGAIN: I have just quoted whatever information I deemed was relevant from the above-mentioned webpage. Whatever comments I wanted to make have been made after all the cases have been quoted.

So here goes...

Case 1: South Africa v India, 3rd Test, January 5, 2011, Cape Town

"Sreesanth kicked the boundary kicked the boundary rope after his two LBW appeals were turned down in the previous over. A charge was brought by Ian Gould and Simon Taufel of the Emirates Elite panel of ICC Umpires, third umpire Brian Jerling and fourth umpire Shaun George. Action: Sreesanth pleaded guilty to contravening Level 1 offence (Section 2.1.2) of the ICC Code of Conduct for Players and Team Officials which relates to "abuse of cricket equipment or clothing, ground equipment or fixtures and fittings". Sreesanth has been fined 10 per cent of his match fee.Sreesanth accepted the decision without contest, there was no need for a hearing."

Case 2: Australia v Zimbabwe, 21st Feb, Ahmedabad

"Roshan Mahanama of the Emirates Elite Panel of ICC Match Referees charged Australia captain Ricky Ponting after an incident was brought to the ICC's attention through the Board of Control for Cricket in India and the Gujarat Cricket Association. He was found to have breached clause 2.1.2 of the code which relates to "abuse of cricket equipment or clothing, ground equipment or fixtures and fittings during an international match". The charge was brought by the chairman of the Event Technical Committee David Richardson on behalf of the ICC Chief Executive, in accordance with the regulations. The incident occurred shortly after Ponting was run out in the match when he caused some damage to a television set in the team dressing room. The damage occurred when he threw down a piece of equipment which bounced off his kit bag and hit the corner of the television. Action: Ponting accepted the Level 1 charge and the proposed sanction. He was officially reprimanded. As Ponting accepted the offence and the proposed sanction, there was no need to convene a formal hearing. Level 1 offences carry penalties ranging from an official reprimand to 50 per cent of a player's match fee."

Case 3: India v England, 27th Feb, Bengaluru

"The incident took place on the last ball of the 49th over when Tim Bresnan, after he was clean bowled by Piyush Chawla, hit the stumps with his bat. Bresnan pleaded guilty to contravening Level 1 offence (Section 2.1.2) of the ICC Code of Conduct for Players and Team Officials which relates to "abuse of cricket equipment or clothing, ground equipment or fixtures and fittings". The charge was brought by on-field umpires Billy Bowden and Marais Erasmus, third umpire Rod Tucker and fourth umpire Aleem Dar who are all from the Emirates Elite panel of ICC Umpires. Action: As Bresnan accepted the decision without contest, there was no need for a hearing. All Level 1 breaches carry a minimum penalty of an official reprimand and/or a maximum penalty of the imposition of a fine up to 50 per cent of a player's match fee."

Case 4: Bangladesh v England, 12th Mar, Chittagong

"England off-spinner Graeme Swann was charged with a Level 1 offence under article 2.1.4 of the code which relates to, 'Using language or a gesture that is obscene, offensive or insulting during an international match.' The charge was brought by on-field umpires Rod Tucker and Daryl Harper and third umpire Aleem Dar, all from the Emirates Elite Panel of ICC Umpires. Action: Swann pleaded guilty to the charge and as such, under the provisions of the code, the matter was determined by Jeff Crowe of the Emirates Elite Panel of ICC Match Referees and so there was no requirement for a full hearing. Swann was charged with a Level 1 offence under article 2.1.4 of the code which relates to, 'Using language or a gesture that is obscene, offensive or insulting during an international match.' He was fined 10 per cent of his match fees."

Case 5: England v Sri Lanka, 2-6 June, Lord's

"England wicketkeeper Matt Prior was reprimanded for breaching the ICC Code of Conduct during his team's Test match against Sri Lanka at Lord's. He was found to have breached clause 2.1.2 of the code which relates to "abuse of cricket equipment or clothing, ground equipment or fixtures and fittings during an international match". The charge was brought by on-field umpires Billy Doctrove and Rod Tucker as well as third umpire Aleem Dar and fourth official Richard Illingworth. The incident occurred shortly after Prior was run out in the match when his actions caused the window to break. Action: Prior accepted the Level 1 charge and the proposed sanction from Javagal Srinath of the Emirates Elite Panel of ICC Match Referees after an incident where a window was broken in the England team dressingroom. As Prior accepted the offence and the proposed sanction, there was no need to convene a formal hearing. Level 1 offences carry penalties ranging from an official reprimand to 50 per cent of a player's match fee."

Case 6: West Indies v India, 20-24 June, Kingston, Jamaica

"India spinner Amit Mishra has been fined 10 per cent of his match fee for a Level 1 breach of the ICC Code of Conduct during his team's first Test against the West Indies in Jamaica. Mishra was found to have breached Article 2.1.3 of the code which relates to "showing dissent at an umpire's decision by action or verbal abuse". The charge was brought by on-field umpires Ian Gould and Daryl Harper as well as third umpire Norman Malcolm. Action: After play concluded on day two, the player accepted the proposed sanction offered to him by Jeff Crowe of the Emirates Elite Panel of ICC Match Referees. All Level 1 breaches carry a minimum penalty of an official reprimand and a maximum penalty of 50 per cent of a player's match fee."

Case 7: England v India, 29 July-2 August, Nottingham

"India bowler Praveen Kumar has been fined 20 per cent of his match fee after pleading guilty to a Level 1 breach of the ICC Code of Conduct during England's innings on the first day of the second Test at Trent Bridge, Nottingham. The charge related to an incident at the end of the 18th over of the day during which Kumar had an appeal for leg before wicket against England batsman Kevin Pietersen turned down and at the end of the over he then engaged in a debate with umpire Marais Erasmus about the decision. Action: Kumar was found to have breached Article 2.1.3 of the code which relates to arguing or entering into a prolonged discussion with the umpire about his decision. After play concluded for the day, the player admitted the offence and accepted the proposed sanction offered to him by Ranjan Madugalle the chief referee of the Emirates Elite Panel of ICC Match Referees. As such, there was no need for a formal hearing. The charge had been laid by the on-field umpires Asad Rauf and Marais Erasmus and third umpire Billy Bowden of the Emirates Elite Panel of ICC Umpires as well as fourth umpire Tim Robinson."

Case 8: England v India, 29 July-2 August, Nottingham (Source)

"Graeme Swann has been reprimanded for a level one breach of the ICC Code of Conduct during the second day of the second Test match between England and India at Trent Bridge. Swann was found to have breached Article 2.1.2 of the code which relates to abuse of cricket equipment or clothing, ground equipment or fixtures and fittings during an international match. After play concluded, the player admitted the offence and accepted the proposed sanction offered to him by Ranjan Madugalle, the chief referee of the Emirates elite panel of ICC match referees. As such, there was no need for a formal hearing. The charge had been laid by the on-field umpires, Asad Rauf and Marais Erasmus, as well as third umpire Billy Bowden, of the Emirates elite panel of ICC umpires, and fourth umpire Tim Robinson. The charge related to an incident at the end of the 80th over of the India innings when the England bowler kicked the stumps in frustration and dislodged the bails. He immediately apologised to the on-field umpires for his actions."

Now, here are a few points to note:

1. Sreesanth (Case 1), Ponting (Case 2), Bresnan (Case 3), Prior (Case 5) and Swann (Case 8) were all pulled up for the same offence, i.e. "abuse of cricket equipment or clothing, ground equipment or fixtures and fittings during an international match". Ponting, Bresnan, Prior and Swann were reprimanded. Sreesanth was fined 10% of his match fees. And though this isn't necessary, I should mention that kicking a boundary rope does not result in as much monetary damage as breaking a television or a window.

2. Mishra (Case 6) and Kumar (Case 7) were fined 10% and 20% of their match fees respectively for breaching Article 2.1.3. The Article 2.1.3 includes (pdf):

"(a) excessive, obvious disappointment with an Umpire’s decision; (b) an obvious delay in resuming play or leaving the wicket; (c) shaking the head; (d) pointing or looking at the inside edge when given out lbw; (e) pointing to the pad or rubbing the shoulder when caught behind; (f) snatching the cap from the Umpire; (g) requesting a referral to the TV Umpire (other than in the context of a legitimate request for a referral as may be permitted in such International Match); and (h) arguing or entering into a prolonged discussion with the Umpire about his decision. It shall not be a defence to any charge brought under this Article to show that the Umpire might have, or in fact did, get any decision wrong."

Given what Stuart Broad did on Day 5 of the 1st Test of this series at Lord's, I wonder why that was not classified in clauses (a) and (h) of the above-mentioned Article. Sitting on haunches after an appeal is turned down should easily classify as "excessive, obvious disappointment with an Umpire’s decision" and slipping in a word to the umpire at the end of that over / start of next over about that decision should classify as "arguing or entering into a prolonged discussion with the Umpire about his decision". Broad might want to argue that it was not an argument or a prolonged discussion, but if he is talking more than the umpire (for his lips seemed to move more than Billy Bowden's), it is "arguing"; and if that discussion continues at the end of the over, it is a "prolonged discussion".

3. As per Article 7.3 of the ICC Code of Conduct (pdf), if a Level 1 Offence is committed for the second time within a span of 12 months, then the penalty shall be "the imposition of a fine of between 50-100% of the applicable Match Fee and/or two (2) Suspension Points."

Swann was charged of a Level 1 offence (Case 4) on 12th March 2011. Only 4 months and 18 days have passed since that occasion and Swann has been charged with another Level 1 offence (Case 8). So why was he just reprimanded and not fined 50% of his match fees, which is the minimum penalty to be imposed.

And if my aforesaid argument of Broad's behaviour in the 1st Test holds good, then he too should have faced strict sanctions since he has already been pulled up and fined 50% of his match fees for a Level 2 offence on 1st July 2011, merely 29 days ago! Given that the earlier offence was Level 2, I daresay that he should have missed the current Test match at Nottingham!

PONTING SHOULD BE CHARGED WITH A LEVEL 1 OFFENCE

Might once again get away without punishment

It is all over the news that Ricky Ponting reportedly smashed the glass of the LCD TV in the Australian team's dressing room after watching the replay of his run out dismissal during their first World Cup 2011 game against Zimbabwe on February 21, 2011 at Ahmedabad.

We all know that this is not the first time that Ponting has been involved in an act that is not worthy of a sportsman, let alone the captain of the three-time defending champions! His most recent tryst with ICC's Code of Conduct was when he was involved in a heated argument with Aleem Dar during the Ashes 2010-11 after the third umpire upheld the ground umpire's decision to rule Kevin Pietersen not out. He was fined 40% of his match fees back then... a punishment too light, in my opinion.

But the media reports suggest that Ponting might well get away with his glass-breaking act this time. Reports state that Ponting apologised for this incident and claimed that it was an accident and not an intentional act of smashing the glass on the TV set. The Australian media manager has also claimed that the glass has not been shattered, but just a corner of the screen has suffered a blackout due to unintentional impact with Ponting's box, which flew up to the screen as he threw it into his kit bag.

Whatever the case may be, the possibility that Ricky Ponting will get away with his apology is a depressing news to hear. I have never been a fan of Ricky Ponting's behaviour on the cricket field... and even though this act came in the dressing room, it was a direct result of what happened in the field.

I will be very surprised if eventually, Ponting escapes with no punishment for his act. Ayaz Menon tweeted that while ICC may be able to frame codes to regulate the players' conduct on the field, there isn't much that can be done for what happens in the change rooms. But he is wrong here.

Level 1 Point 1.2 offence in the ICC Code of Conduct is defined as "Abuse of cricket equipment or clothing, ground equipment or fixtures and fittings."

Isn't the television in the dressing room a part of the ground equipments? Matthew Hayden had been charged with this offence and fined accordingly when he had broken a piece of glass in his team's dressing room after his dismissal during the 5th Ashes Test at Sydney in January 2003. Why isn't Ponting being charged with a similar offence?

At the risk of sounding like a frustrated Asian ranting out against the Aussies, I have to pose a question for the readers to ponder - had Sreesanth broken the glass of the LCD TV in the dressing room after his bad spell of bowling against Bangladesh and then apologised, would he have been let off?

IF PRAVEEN KUMAR DOES NOT RECOVER...

There are rumours that Praveen Kumar may not recover in time for the World Cup. It was reported in the Times of India that Praveen will be flying to the UK for further treatment.

I can already see Sreesanth waiting in eager anticipation of the diagnosis. But from the team point-of-view, it will be a major setback to India. Praveen Kumar can swing the ball with good control when it is new, but the most impressive thing that I find in him is that pressure does not get on to him. It almost seems to me that he is impervious to it. If the batsmen attack him, he gets back to his mark with just a shrug of his shoulders.

Sreesanth is also a swing bowler and can get wickets with the new ball, but he does not offer good control. He may vary from exceptional to horrible! Sreesanth's career economy rate is 6.01 as compared to a 5.07 for Praveen Kumar. That will be India's biggest loss if Praveen were to be ruled out.

India may then well have to employ the services of Munaf Patel in the XI, who offers an even better career economy rate of 4.78, but is a liability on the field and no good with the bat. "No good with the bat" is the point I was going to come to next.

Praveen is a very handy character with the bat. He almost carried India to win in that Hyderabad ODI where Sachin scored that 175. He batted very well in that series. It was because he got run out that Australia were able to seal the game! He has opened in First Class cricket for Uttar Pradesh and his batting is clearly a cut above Munaf's and Sreesanth's.

The reason why I am placing so much of importance of Praveen's batting is that India may well be fielding a 6 batsman - 5 bowler combination sometime during this World Cup (even though I am dead against it). Nothing else explains Piyush Chawla's inclusion in the 15! If India does play 5 bowlers, Praveen Kumar's and Harbhajan Singh's batting becomes very crucial at No. 7 and No. 8, because both of them are way better with the bat than Piyush Chawla, especially when it is time to go for the big hits. I have already mentioned it earlier on this blog that I don't think Chawla has it in him to be able to attack the faster bowlers in front of the wicket. The best he can do is guide the ball behind the wickets, but if he doesn't find the gaps, it will just result in singles.

Harbhajan and Praveen, on the other hand, can hit even the faster bowlers in front of the wicket on the up. Even Zaheer Khan can do that better than Piyush Chawla, which is why it is very important for India to beef up the lower order batting if indeed the 5-bowler strategy is going to be used.

I just hope that Praveen Kumar recovers well in time for the World Cup... he definitely is an essential cog in India's cricket team.

INDIAN BOWLERS WERE DISAPPOINTING

Mahendra Singh Dhoni celebrated the New Year by winning the toss... an occasion almost as rare as the New Year itself. Incidentally, this was just the 2nd time in Dhoni's 24-Test captaincy stint that he had inserted the opposition in after winning the toss (he's won 8 tosses, by the way).

The first time he did it was in March 2009 against New Zealand at Hamilton... and India went on to win that match by 10 wickets. That win was possible only because the Indian pace bowlers were able to dismiss the Kiwis for 279 on Day 1 itself. This time tough, things are a lot different.

Kallis is rock solid at the end of day's play with Ashwell Prince for company. Boucher is still waiting in the wings, and even though he isn't in the best form, he can still be dangerous if this partnership can add a few more and take South Africa to a position of strength. Then all that Boucher will need to do is get a few quick runs... and usually, these sort of situations are exactly what an out-of-form batsman wants in Test cricket.

Back in Hamilton, India could dismiss New Zealand cheaply mainly due to the fact that Ishant Sharma bagged 4 wickets on that day. He's bagged only 1 so far today and though the other bowlers' figures are not far ahead than his, I must say that I was extremely disappointed with Ishant Sharma's bowling today.

Here is the comparison of the pitch maps of the three Indian pacers today...

Zaheer Khan's pitch map on Day 1

S Sreesanth's pitch map on Day 1

Ishant Sharma's pitch map on Day 1

As you can see, Zaheer was extremely full... as you should be when conditions are favouring you. I know Ishant Sharma's stock delivery is when he runs in, hits the deck hard at back-of-good-length area and allows the seam movement to do its bit. But this was not a pitch and these were not the conditions for his style of bowling.

He needed to pitch the ball further up today and make the batsman play. His pitch map clearly shows that he was short of the required length and also quite some way outside off... which helped the batsman in leaving the balls. Both he and Sreesanth bowled a lot of balls that could be left alone harmlessly by the batsmen... particularly early in the day when the conditions were favourable for the bowlers. It was a waste!

Ishant got Alviro Peterson out driving to a delivery that was amongst the fullest he'd bowled all day. The fact that Ishant did not bowl full consistently after getting such a reward was very disappointing.

Sreesanth was still okay... even though he could have been a bit more fuller. I say a bit more fuller particularly because more often than not, he was getting a very good shape taking the ball away from the right hander. But when he was pitch it on good length, the batsmen were able to leave the ball trusting the shape to take it away from them (except for one occasion when De Villiers has a fatal poke at it). Had he been a little fuller, the batsmen would have been forced to play a lot more and given how close he gets to the stumps while delivering, it could have been a lot more than just 2 wickets for him today.

Zaheer operated well, from both over- and around-the-wicket... but apart from his first spell, he could not get significant movement on the ball. With the new ball available just 6 overs into the day tomorrow, he could make things very difficult for the left-handed Ashwell Prince.

Having won the toss and inserted the opposition in, Dhoni would have hoped for a lot more from his pacers. Though the day wasn't BAD for India, it wasn't satisfactory either. Tomorrow, the sun is expected to be shining brightly over Newlands, Cape Town and Dhoni will be hoping that South Africa collapse with the second new ball so that his batsmen get a chance to wield their willow in helpful conditions under the sun. They haven't had too many such chances on this tour thus far!

A BRUTE!

A snorter from Sreesanth dismissed the key man for South Africa... Jacques Kallis!

THE DECIDING DAY AT DURBAN

The Durban Test is all set for a thrilling finish... South Africa can win the series with 192 more runs... India can level it with 7 more wickets.

Durban has seen rain overnight... and though the sun is out again, I hope the early morning start will see a bit of help for the Indian pacers, particularly Zaheer Khan. If Sreesanth keeps his head about him, he may also prove to be crucial to the task.

For South Africa, the overnight batsmen are the key. Before they commenced the chase, I had figured out that four batsmen in their top-5 are the biggest threats in my opinion - Graeme Smith, Hashim Amla, Jacques Kallis and AB De Villiers. Two of them are out and two of them are in. If the Indian pacers can use some help that they might gain from the conditions and dismiss these two early, the game might well be in the bag.

Yes, Ashwell Prince and Mark Boucher are good batsmen... and the South African lower order can hang around (Morkel and Harris) or even spank the ball a bit (Steyn). But the situation in this Test is so tight that it will be hard to hold the nerves.

Most people are saying that Harbhajan will be the key man considering the bounce he might be able to generate on the pitch. But I would still peg Zaheer as the key man for India. Bhajji might prove useful if the match gets too tight as he is a lot more experienced than the South African lower order batsmen (except Boucher).

There may not be a lot of clouds in the Kingsmead sky, but there should be a bit of moisture due to the rains last night. I hope India can use this to their advantage and manage a victory here. It is too tight to call at the moment. The match should begin in less than 10 minutes now... and I am off now to watch it.

THIS TIME IT WAS RECKLESS

I am, for a change, disappointed with Virender Sehwag. Usually, I always leap up to defend Viru even when he throws away his wicket. But today, I am going to be the prosecutor, not the defendant.

The shot that Sehwag was trying to play when he got out might well have connected and the ball would have screamed towards the deep cover boundary. But it would still have been a reckless shot.

That delivery was the first time Sehwag's bat made contact with the ball during this tour of South Africa in a match situation. And given the kind of shot he was attempting, it's no wonder it landed in the hands of that bearded fielder at third man.

A few Indian players reached South Africa early to get acclimatised with the conditions. Gary Kirsten did thousands of throw downs in the nets and at his academy to get his batsmen ready. But none of that can get you into match rhythm, especially in difficult and alien conditions as India encountered. So in such a situation, for Sehwag to go for that wild swing of his bat without having felt the ball even once during the match, it was reckless and irresponsible.

Most observers would agree that Sehwag, of late, has become a more dangerous proposition than he originally was because he has now become a little more selective in his shot-making and more aware of the match conditions and the team's dependence on the starts provided by him.

But there was nothing selective or responsible about that shot today... and I am utterly disappointed with him. I know Strauss went for a third ball duck at the Gabba and yet England are not too far away from retaining the Ashes now. But expecting something similar here will be stretching imagination beyond reasonable boundaries.

I just hope now that our weakened pace attack of Sreesanth, Ishant Sharma and the debutant Jaidev Unadkat show a bit of fight tomorrow and manage to strike a few telling blows early. Lets see if the contest becomes more of a contest tomorrow...