Middlesex County Cricket League to ban people saying bad things on the internet
Poor old Tom Redfern from Get a Hundred was banned for two games by the MCCL for showing dissent to an umpire.
Based on the video proof it seems like a shit decision by a bunch of people with another agenda, that agenda seems to be blogging.
This is from his post:
“Next on agenda; comments in your blog”.
“You’ve no authority”, I said.
”Yes we do”, said chairman, who cited section 2 para b (ii) disputing an umpire’s decision or reacting in an obviously provocative or disapproving manner towards the umpire at any time. “At any time” covered the internet they claimed.
Cos I’m the hero of my own story, surf my own arc, I pointed their eyes to the paragraph governing the sub paragraph they cited: each player shall conduct himself with the spirit of the game on the field at all times………. the field shall include any part of the cricket ground and not merely the field of play. That’s your remit; the field of play, not the net. Anyone can comment, rant interminably there unless you change your laws to cover it. Good luck on that one. MCCL bans opinion on world wide web.
I’ve been reading through the rules of the MCCL, because if Tom has gotten in trouble, next season I might be in the same boat.
Some players from other teams have already started reading my site, and they aren’t always happy with what I have written.
Of course they are free to write their own blogs about the game, they just can’t do some sports betting on them.
Everyone is.
The MCCL cannot stop any players from blogging about their games of cricket, and if they do i will refuse to play in their league.
I don’t need some uptight assholes telling me what I can do or not do on my blog. I don’t listen to the ICC, I sure as shit ain’t going to listen to the MCCL.
Personally I believe the umpires word is final, but the level that most players in the MCCL play in umpires are not provided. Instead other players take over the role. Occasionally, officials from the clubs or friends.
It is not an independent person who is the arbitrator, but someone with a personal stake in the game. How could these people be independent.
The disciplinary code does not cater for this.
“i. verbal or physical abuse or hostility towards
any other player or any member of the public;ii. disputing an umpire’s decision or reacting in an
obviously provocative or disapproving manner towards an
umpire at any time;iii. using crude and/or abusive language or hand
signals or engaging in similar conduct. “
I don’t disagree with these rules, but where is the one that says a umpire provided by one of the teams must be fair, and, in the case of Tom’s LBW, know the rules of cricket.
Too many times this year I was on the end of poor decisions that were caused by boredom, lack of knowledge of the rules, poor umpiring technique and on occasion what seemed like blatant cheating.
Why are captains not held accountable for picking people who don’t know the rules or where to stand (twice I had stumpings not given out when the square leg was over 40 metres from the crease).
How are people, who are made of flesh and blood (not the ethereal fibre of the Spirit of cricket), supposed to react when week after week they see poor home town decisions by biased umpires?
Tom’s reaction was one that was quite common when you have got a howler, i have seen worse, and this year I have done worse.
The MCCL uses a archaic spirit of cricket paragraph in its laws, it is ridiculous. London cricket is as multi cultural as any cricket I have played in at senior level. The spirit of cricket generally depends on where you come from, Pakistanis, Australians, South Africans, Indians, New Zealanders and the English all have different ways of interpreting this make believe cricketing construct, and even then people from the same countries don’t agree.
The rules for club cricket are outdated, and frankly ludicrous.
“According to the Laws, the umpires are the sole judges of fair and unfair play.”
How can a kid you have gotten out earlier in the innings be the sole judge of fair and unfair play?
MCCL, perhaps you should be more worried about writings rules and regulations about cricket that make sense in the context that it is played, rather than trying to stop people talking about their experiences.
I agree with your comments, and also think that Tom was harshly dealt with – and if you head to a tribunal with the hint of guilt about you, you are going down. These guys live for handing down penalties.
But a counter point – if Tom’s teammate was umpiring his game instead of a real umpire, then he wouldn’t be given out.
I play a lot of cricket where umpires aren’t provided, some games where they are. I actually prefer to have an umpire from the opposition. Ultimately everyone knows where they stand – hopefully no one gets a shocking decision – and it has to be pretty bloody out to be given out. With real umpires you just never know what they are going to do – ie Tom’s lbw.
As a left-arm bowler I get LOTS of lbws. But only when they’re plumb, nothing borderline. That’s fine by me. And I’ve found that most opposition umpires are perfectly fair – there are some exceptions naturally – but generally it’s pretty good.
Hewy,
Tom here, the umpire was the injured vice captain of the opposition. Something they failed to tell us. We never have a player standing at the other end. There’s always one ‘neutral’ and he does both ends. Players stand at square leg. At 2nd team div 1 cricket we sometimes have panel umpires; if not clubs use someone who’s a qualified umpire even if he is a member of your club. The oppo that day have a reputation of firing people out; they were relegated as well!
You shouldn’t dissent but if you do just make sure you do it properly.
Hewy, I understand that opposition umpires are naturally hesitant on LBWs, but I am talking about stumpings where the batsmen doesn’t even try to get back into the crease. I don’t even appeal for LBWs with opposition umpires that often, this year I had an opposition player who was umpiring who said, “that LB was probably out, but i couldn’t give it, so i didn’t call that wide after it”.
I just don’t see how you can treat an opposition member the same as a real umpire. Especially when it comes to dissent.
Hi Tom,
Thanks for clearing that up. So it’s a slightly different situation and you got the worst of both worlds – an opposition umpire when you’re batting and bowling!
And with the dissent – they obviously had some issues with your blog, so a minor dissent charge allows them to throw the full force of the kangaroo court against you.
p.s. good luck with that ton.
Jrod,
mate, that’s just cheating. They might as well fiddle the score book as well. I’ve rarely seen anything as blatant as you seem to be facing.
Look, my experience is that the pool of umpires has decreased dramatically in recent years and so we’ve had to start umpiring ourselves. I reckon the standard of our own umpiring has increased rapidly and is generally very fair. You’ll always get some exceptions, but they tend to get known and teams and people get reputations. Over the long term they get found out.
I’ve never seen a dissent charge applied when self-umpiring. However, we have, as of this season, moved to a zero tolerance policy on dissent in our association. Interesting to see how that pans out, but I do think it’s the right move. (and I’m no angel in this regard – time for me to knuckle down and keep my mouth shut).
I don’t think anyone has a problem with leagues taking action against players who abuse an umpire who show decent on the field of play, but outside of the professional game it should stp there!