Sourav Ganguly out on no-ball

[gamerkid22]

Suspension rule did not have ICC board sanction


Sourav Ganguly is undergoing a career-threatening six-match ban for failing to keep up the over rates during the series against Pakistan. But investigations reveal that the clause under which the India captain has been suspended is neither tenable nor applicable in this specific case. Sources close to ICC confirmed that the wrong rule was invoked while imposing the ban on Ganguly. For those who might start thinking that this is another conspiracy against the Indians, here's some news: South Africa's captain Graeme Smith too was suspended for four matches last week under the same provisions.

In fact, Ganguly escaped his two-Test suspension after the India-Pakistan jubilee match in Kolkata only because ICC appeals commissioner Tim Castle discovered that the code of conduct did not give ICC the right to suspend a skipper for slow over rates. Interestingly, ICC attempted to incorporate code CC 5.1 in C1 shortly after the jubilee match to overcome this hurdle, even without the mandatory consent of its executive board. When the matter came up for hearing at ICC's New Delhi meeting on March 17, the board rejected it.

It's reliably learnt, however, that even if CC 5.1 clause is added to C1, a player cannot be suspended for slow over rates. So it's curious that ICC has gone ahead and suspended two skippers under the same C1 clause even after it was rejected.

The clause that deals with slow over rates is J-5 (C-III). It, however, states that if there is time wastage, the captain will be penalised under C1. Further, the C1 (CC 5.1) clause can only ban cricketers on showing serious dissent at an umpire's decision, or using any language or gesture that offends, insults or attacks a person's race.

That is perhaps why when ICC president Eshan Mani said that Ganguly got a middle-level ban (level 3 of C1, conduct contrary to the spirit of the game on the basis of time wasting), BCCI president Ranbir Singh Mahendra responded by saying: "There is no rule that says Ganguly is guilty. This kind of comment is unacceptable from the ICC president." Now that ICC is caught on the wrong foot, it is its legal cell and Ganguly's hearing commissioner Michael Beloff who can explain the situation and stop ICC from taking advantage of its power.

Article from THE TIMES OF INDIA http://cricket.indiatimes.com/quickies/1112418.cms

 

[barmyarmy]

Please remember to quote correctly and cite the source of any article not written by you.

 

[sohum]

Ooooh..... this could get hot. Where did you get this from?

 

[gamerkid22]

i got it from today's newspaper "THE TIMES OF INDIA" in the sports section.

the link for "THE TIMES OF INDIA" is http://cricket.indiatimes.com/quickies/1112418.cms

 

[gamerkid22]

Please remember to quote correctly and cite the source of any article not written by you.

done :readit

 

[T20]

ICC has rejected the claims made in this article.

 

[gamerkid22]

BCCI seeks legal opinion on Ganguly's ban

BCCI seeks legal opinion on Saurav Ganguly's ban


NEW DELHI, May 17 : The Indian cricket board is seeking legal opinion on the six match ban imposed on Sourav Ganguly by the International Cricket Council (ICC) for India's slow over rate during the just-concluded limited overs series against Pakistan.

"We are getting the issue legally examined. We will do as our counsels advise," Ranbir Singh Mahendra, president-elect of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), said.

Reports on Tuesday said Ganguly was penalised under a wrong ICC clause, implying that the ban was not tenable and applicable.

The 240-page "ICC Playing Handbook", however, is quite clear that captains are wholly responsible for all on-field action in Tests and ODIs.

Under Rules of Conduct-Offences and Penalties in the chapter on 'ICC Code of Conduct for Players and Team Officials', rule C 1 states: "Players and/or team officials shall at all times conduct play within the spirit of the game as well as within the Laws of Cricket and the captains are responsible at all times for ensuring that this is adhered to (Rule CC 5.1 deals with the application of and penalties for breach of this Rule)."

Elsewhere in the chapter, rule 2.11 of Level 2 under Offences and Penalties (Supplemental) states: "The captain of any team guilty of such conduct shall be held responsible."

And rule 5.7 of Level 4 further stresses the captain's responsibility on the field. It says: "Nothing in this Code of Conduct alters the onus on the captain to ensure that the Spirit of the Game is adhered to, as stated and defined in the preamble to the Laws of Cricket."

Ganguly was penalised 70 per cent of his match fee for breach of C1 Level 2 of the ICC Code of Conduct (CC), which relates to unfair play due to slow over rate during the third ODI against Pakistan at Jamshedpur April 9.

Three days later, the same match referee, Chris Broad of England, slapped a six-ODI ban on Ganguly for a second breach of the ICC code on April 12 in the fourth ODI at Ahmedabad. Since this came within 12 months of the previous incident, the penalty was automatically upgraded from Level 2 to a Level 3 breach.

Ganguly, supported by the BCCI, appealed to the ICC to waive off the penalty, but the international body's Appeals Commissioner Michael Beloff rejected the request.

Ganguly has already sat out two ODIs following the Ahmedabad match. If there is no alteration in the penalty, he will miss the initial phase of the triangular tournament in Sri Lanka in August, if not the entire competition. West Indies is the third competing team.

While admitting that the BCCI was seeking legal opinion on Ganguly's ban, well-known advocate Radha Rangaswamy said the board was likely to give clear cut instructions by this month end.

"They have to tell us (about exploring legal redressal) after their meeting, possibly, by the end of this month," Rangaswamy said.

When asked if there was indeed a case in favour of Ganguly, especially as the ICC rules clearly hold the team captain responsible for all on-field action, she said: "We do read the book, but we have our reasons (for taking legal recourse)."

Ganguly has a history of breaching the ICC code, as he has been either penalised or reprimanded before.

Vice-captain Rahul Dravid is set to lead India in the triangular series in Sri Lanka in August if the ban on Ganguly remains.

ARTICLE FROM THE TIMES OF INDIA http://cricket.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1113134.cms

 

[shahid6995]

This is not the first time Ganguly has been on the wrong side of the ICC. How about cleaning up his act instead of trying to hire lawyers and finding minuscule loopholes in the rule-books so that he can get away with it again?

 

[fardin]

He cant get away with this again,ICC is just doing Their job nothing more then that,Suspended for 6 games,Will you have to get on with other wise you will get your self more troubled but ICC officials,ICC will be The last thing I would mess with.

 

[sohum]

I must say the ICC rulebook is quite complicated. How many traversals you have to make just to find the punishment for an offense. The game has become too complex. Ganguly should probably give up this quarrel and instead concentrate on his batting. That would help India more.

Anyone remember that time that Ganguly went public saying that the change of the over-rate law from docking overs to fining was stupid after India lost a close game? He further went on to say that he did not even know when the rule change was made. Things got messy when it was revealed that he had even signed a document including the new rule change.

 

[SaiSrini]

This is not the first time Ganguly has been on the wrong side of the ICC. How about cleaning up his act instead of trying to hire lawyers and finding minuscule loopholes in the rule-books so that he can get away with it again?

You're absolutely right. He has to serve the ban and then if he has it in him to comeback strongly, he should do it immediately. Instead of wasting money on lawyers and fighting battles with the ICC, he should concentrate on resurrecting his game!