Red Cards in Cricket?

[J.Coney]

maybe you could be sent off the field for a number of overs , so you leave your feilding team with only 10 players for like 10 overs or something, and if you a batting in the 4th innings and you break a law or something you only can bat for the next 10 overs or until you get out.

just idea off the top of my head.

 

[Jdz]

maybe you could be sent off the field for a number of overs , so you leave your feilding team with only 10 players for like 10 overs or something, and if you a batting in the 4th innings and you break a law or something you only can bat for the next 10 overs or until you get out.

just idea off the top of my head.

Sin bin?

Don't exactly know how it works but I guess do it however the Rugby would do it except make it an amount of overs. Then if it was an amount of over, I could see the team using two spinners to quickly get through the overs?

And don't really like your batting idea though.

Maybe it could all be implemented in 20/20, keep ODI's and Tests as they are, it's already a slow game, why make it slower by implementing things we don't need.

 

[SJS]

maybe you could be sent off the field for a number of overs , so you leave your feilding team with only 10 players for like 10 overs or something, and if you a batting in the 4th innings and you break a law or something you only can bat for the next 10 overs or until you get out.

just idea off the top of my head.

Sure. Depends on the gravity of the violation - colour of the card

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I think if someone gets red carded or whatever they should be able to be replaced by someone else. Not having 11 batsmen could be the difference between winning and losing a game. With football you can manage with only 10 players, but you can't really in cricket as all have to bat.

And having extra rough to deal with when you're batting last trying to stay alive in a series could be a big difference between results too. Not just any player will be carded in this situation. It would take a serious offence, and what Afridi did is extremely serious and quite disgusting.

 

[chaminda_00]

Red Cards and SuperSups, is it really cricket anymore? Its one thing to try and improve the game, its another thing to change it completely. I don't think things like Red Cards belong in cricket, what Afridi did was wrong, but how often do these things actually happen? Will it actually improve the game at all, is sportsmen and fair play so bad in cricket that we need to take these steps?

 

[Hazza]

I think some sort of ban in the particular match should be issued, but having said that I don't think it should be in a card like structure (2 yellows= red). Possibly just a ban from bowling and batting, but allow the player in question to field, and thus I do not believe there should be red cards.

 

[honestbharani]

I am not sure if we will need a red card as such, but the concept of the punishment of a player taking effect "during" the match has a lot of pluses. I mean, bowlers bowling two beamers or running on the pitch three times, cannot bowl again in the innings, similar stuff should be there for fielders transgressing the laws voluntarily and blatantly.

 

[pakster]

In the current Pakistan v England Test at Faisalabad, most people will know that Shahid Afridi was caught scuffing up the pitch and was subsequently suspended for one Test and two ODIs. These laws have been around for a long time, and, have been applied almost as severely as possible. But in this circumstance, Pakistan have gained an advantage that applies to the current test, and no matter how long Afridi is banned for, the damage in the current game may affect the outcome of the entire series. If Pakistan were to win this test, due to Kaneria and Afridi getting exaggerated turn out of the damaged pitch, then will Pakistan mind if Afridi cannot play in the final Test, since the series may be already decided?

I dont think Afridi's pirroute and subsequent Michael Jackson impression has caused any real damage to the pitch, not enough to give Pakistan any significant advantage...nice rant though

Pakistan must be punished in the current test, so I propose 'sendings off', as seen in virtually all other team sports.

As must England...Red card for Bell, yellow for Harmison - game on!

As for your yellow/red card idea - it stinks, no offence. I just couldnt see it working, people are already endlessly complaining about umpiring standards and mistakes, giving them extra powers will only fuel the "umpires are inherently biased" rants that people make so often.

 

[open365]

it would never work.

incidents like the Afridi one are very rare.

and as you can appeal,imagine if afridi got banned,pakistan lose,then afridi wins his appeal.

imagine the controversy.

 

[archie mac]

Better still, lets make him bat and bowl with the opposite hand for the rest of the Test, or force him to swing the bat at everything

 

[SJS]

I am not sure if we will need a red card as such, but the concept of the punishment of a player taking effect "during" the match has a lot of pluses. I mean, bowlers bowling two beamers or running on the pitch three times, cannot bowl again in the innings, similar stuff should be there for fielders transgressing the laws voluntarily and blatantly.

The big problem will be a non- bowler, damaging the pitch, at the beginning of the fourth innings of the match for example.

 

[deeps]

Theyd still only have 10 fielders, which has a big bearing on the game

Its just hyped up by the media and the match referee made a mistake imo giving him such a large suspension. One test, OR two one dayers. Shouldn't have been both imo.

Let's see what a few ppl have to say about it:

"Shahid Afridi did nothing worse last week than 99% of professional cricketers have been guilty of doing at some stage of their careers. His mistake was to get caught. Every cricket team I played in discussed, at some stage, how to scuff up a pitch on a spinner's length."
Mike Atherton puts pitch-scuffing in context

And

http://sport.guardian.co.uk/columnists/story/0,10260,1649139,00.html?gusrc=rss



As i said, it's nothing, and it's just made out to be huge

 

[Scaly piscine]

Theyd still only have 10 fielders, which has a big bearing on the game

Its just hyped up by the media and the match referee made a mistake imo giving him such a large suspension. One test, OR two one dayers. Shouldn't have been both imo.

Let's see what a few ppl have to say about it:

"Shahid Afridi did nothing worse last week than 99% of professional cricketers have been guilty of doing at some stage of their careers. His mistake was to get caught. Every cricket team I played in discussed, at some stage, how to scuff up a pitch on a spinner's length."
Mike Atherton puts pitch-scuffing in context

And

http://sport.guardian.co.uk/columnists/story/0,10260,1649139,00.html?gusrc=rss



As i said, it's nothing, and it's just made out to be huge

Such a large suspension? What planet are you on? The guy blatantly cheated in front of millions - one of the worst acts of cheating in the last decade and after handing his team a significant advantage for that Test all that happens is Pakistan are slightly inconvienced for the next Test and he misses 2 meaningless ODIs. He and Pakistan got off very lightly.

As for Atherton he's the biggest tit going.

 

[deeps]

Such a large suspension? What planet are you on? The guy blatantly cheated in front of millions - one of the worst acts of cheating in the last decade and after handing his team a significant advantage for that Test all that happens is Pakistan are slightly inconvienced for the next Test and he misses 2 meaningless ODIs. He and Pakistan got off very lightly.

As for Atherton he's the biggest tit going.

That is a very shallow point of view to take. As Mike Atherton pointed out, it is something that happens ALL the time. Read the article, about what Sunil Gavaskar did. It is not an isolated incident at all. The only thing unique, is that Afridi did not try to 'hide' it. He blatantly went out and did it, as opposed to the players that hide it.

 

[deeps]

one of the worst acts of cheating in the last decade

That's just stupid. Match fixing, drugs, ball tampering are just a few things that have happened, and you make this seem like the worst?

 

[Scaly piscine]

That's just stupid. Match fixing, drugs, ball tampering are just a few things that have happened, and you make this seem like the worst?

How does "one of the worst" make it seem like the worst?

 

[open365]

Better still, lets make him bat and bowl with the opposite hand for the rest of the Test, or force him to swing the bat at everything

Why is everyone making such a big deal out of it?

I agree with Bob Willis(now there's something i never thought i'd say)

Afridi's actions didn't change the course of the match at all,what he did was no more likely to ruff the pitch up than normal bowling. How many times has this happened in the last 4 years? Is all this fuss over Afridi really neccesary?

The cricketing bodies are too harsh on minute things, they manage to ignore Zimbabwe yet punish anyone for the slightest mis-deamina,i'm not saying Afridi shouldn't be banned but Butt should never have been warned for running on the wicket,just as Kaneria shouldn't.The same with ball-tampering.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Why is everyone making such a big deal out of it?

I agree with Bob Willis(now there's something i never thought i'd say)

Afridi's actions didn't change the course of the match at all,what he did was no more likely to ruff the pitch up than normal bowling. How many times has this happened in the last 4 years? Is all this fuss over Afridi really neccesary?

The cricketing bodies are too harsh on minute things, they manage to ignore Zimbabwe yet punish anyone for the slightest mis-deamina,i'm not saying Afridi shouldn't be banned but Butt should never have been warned for running on the wicket,just as Kaneria shouldn't.The same with ball-tampering.

Of course it has no effect on the pitch, they thought they'd just cheat for the hell of it. This ridiculous 'oh it's only a bit of inconsequential cheating' attitude is sickening. Can you imagine that sort of attitude in exams?

 

[deeps]

Of course it has no effect on the pitch, they thought they'd just cheat for the hell of it. This ridiculous 'oh it's only a bit of inconsequential cheating' attitude is sickening. Can you imagine that sort of attitude in exams?

What he did, is something that happens ALL THE TIME. Bowlers do it intentionally, batsman do it intentionally. Most cover it up, and make it look unintentional. Do you really think, that when batsman are told not to run on the pitch during their second innings, that they are running on it accidentally?

What about bowlers? Do you think they accidentally forget not to follow through on the pitch? Come on, they've been playing on turf pitches for most of their career, they don't simply "forget". It's intentional, the sooner you realise that, the better.

 

[marc71178]

What he did, is something that happens ALL THE TIME.

No, it does not.