ABU DHABI, United Arab Emirates (CMC) — The chief executive of the International Cricket Council (ICC), Dave Richardson, is suggesting that young West Indies bowler Keemo Paul should have warned Zimbabwe batsman Richard Ngarava before removing his bails in an incident that sparked controversy during the recent ICC Under-19 World Cup in Bangladesh.
The incident occurred during a crucial final group game between the two teams, with the Caribbean side needing just three runs to win with a wicket remaining.
Paul clinched victory for West Indies by running Ngarava out at the bowler’s end, while running in to bowl the first delivery of the final over with replays suggesting Ngarava had strayed only marginally from the crease.

read more at Antigua Observer

In reply to CaribbeanCricket.com

Totally disagree. The law of the game was strictly followed and enforced. If the “spirit” of the rule should be taken into consideration, then codify it so that the umpire can take that into consideration. When a batsman knows he is out and does not walk, isn’t the spirit of the game also violated. I hear no issue then, what we hear is, “that is why we have umpires. I am GLAD the young WI gave no quarters and accept none

If this person from the ICC is suggesting that the bowler should have warned the batsman, all they need to do is to reword the law making is compulsory for the bowler to issue a warning before the act.........there are lots of things that happen in cricket that do not fit the spirit of the game everyone seem to on these days.........they made it lawful, change it to make the warning mandatory, do not have it there and then when it is followed talk about the spirit of the game........wuh foolishness is that.

In reply to cherri

Precisely - whatever - we won within the rules of the game

In reply to cherri

Exactly.
And why he wait til we win?

Ahemmmm!!! So there is some support for Newdread, Raggs and De Courtery from way up de ICC hierarchy...De CEO at that.

De Courtesy says: "one person with a conscience will always make de majority".

In reply to Courtesy

Fish rots from the head

In reply to cherri


Six my sister!!!!!!!


well said.

Precedent has been set with with so many worse dismissals in cricket not the least of which west indians being the reciepients.

Absolute rubbish.

In reply to cherri

Exactly.

In reply to cherri

Bingo!
Well said.

How many mm/cm/m must a person be out of the crease before you can determine that they are trying to take advantage?

“My personal view is that where the batsmen aren’t specifically trying to steal runs, the option is with the fielding side to at least warn the batsmen,” Richardson said at a press conference on Monday.

end of story!

In reply to osrlive


And how are you going to determine whether he is going to steal a run or not?........look, they say if yuh out of yuh crease and the bowler breaks the stumps.....yuh out..........how is the bowler going to know, is he going to ask the batsman......boss, you tiefing a run or wuh?..........they have to revamp that rule or forget about it.........in a game like the one with the WI/Zim the bowler thinking how to out the batsman and do it within the law, and yuh know what, mankad right there smiling.........

An opinion, no matter whose, cannot be enforced by the umpires. Only the rules can.

This particular opinion is pandering to those who seek to conveniently invoke the spirit of the game.

Loser talk dat. Steuuuuuuuuuups

If Players from Australia or England or India had done what Paul did , there would never be any query , but it is because it was one of our Players why
Some people are Upset .

As I ave stated several times in this
Forum :

MORE CRICKET IS PLAYED OFF THE FIELD

THAN ON THE FIELD . THERE AINT NO

DISPUTE ABOUT THAT FACT .

BTW , there exists concrete evidence
to support what I have stated . I guess that when England went to England in the 1932 - 1933 Series and
indulged in Bodyline Bowling against the Australians , that was in the Spirit of the Game .

In reply to Trinidave Lmao.


If the laws aren't enforced, there will be disorder!

In reply to dwinston They (wi) were immovable!

If a bowler oversteps by only two inches he should get half of a wicket and the other team two leg byes....

In reply to BeatDball

I agree with you completely that if the law is not enforced there will be disorder. This also applies when a batsman takes up the ball he plays at his feet and throws it to the fielding side, there should be no condemnation if he is given out on appeal by the fielding side. If the law is irrelevant, it should be removed from the books. if it serves a useful purpose, it should be enforced. Why should anyone be allowed if break a law deliberately? The spirit of the game demands that all play within the rules of the game and no one needs to impose on anyone conditions that are not within the rules. The spirit of the game demands that we treat everyone decently.

So I can stand up in the middle of the wicket patting the turf and I can't be run out because I wasn't trying to steal a run? What bull I hearing this hour of the evening?

Allyuh must learn to respect other people's opinions especially when they have espoused that it is based on their values.

Even in a court of law judges and magistrates have discretionary power.

First offence...

Dave Richardson is out of line to comment on that incident, what Paul did was legal, end of story. Richardson should be supporting Paul, that will be like endorsing his ICC rules, the organization he leads.

In reply to dayne

Well said !

In reply to dayne

im going to tweet this, could not have put it any better

I was trying to remember this runout.

Link Text

When will you guys understand that this is not a right or wrong issue.

Some of us feel strongly that a warning should have preceded the run out.

It is our view which should be respected in much the same way that your view should be respected on this matter.

There is no right or wrong here just differing opinions.

Players have exercised discretion in the matter in the past. No big ting.

Spirit of the game?

In reply to Courtesy
Opinions are opinions and are subjective no matter how respected.The running out the non-striker once he is out of his ground is lawful.If the non striker says "but I didn't mean to take a run", who knows but opinions don't matter in the end, the Law is quite clear.

In reply to jacksparrow

Haven't other bowlers exercised discretion on this matter in the past and even during the ICC Youth World Cup? Why did they do it?

In reply to Courtesy

When:

1. Batsmen walk when they know they're out.

2. Batsmen at the bowler's end stop taking head starts deliberately and continuously (I never did that at any time in my cricketing life; don't know how it became a normal thing to do).

3. Batsmen stop running in the middle of the wicket to avoid being runout.

4. Fielders stop McCulluming batsmen (see link above re Murali).

5. Captains stop appealing for obstructing the field when there is obvious doubt about the batsman's intentions.

Generally, when cricketers do things they know are against the rules and spirit of the game, then I will listen to the argument about Paul.

In reply to dcbreds

Sadly, you're not following my opinion and Raggs and Newdread and Richardson.

For the above mentioned posters it is our opinion and it hinges on moral turpitude nothing more nothing less.

In reply to Courtesy

Again just a matter of opinion and later in the World Cup,perhaps influenced by media.
Just like any other law you might break, for example, maybe you get a warning from a police officer, maybe you don't.

In reply to jacksparrow

In reply to CaribbeanCricket.com

Where the hell is the icc weighing in on this? This seems something dave richardson saying in his personal capacity.