Friday, 20 June 2008

Rules about laws about regulations

Yesterday a group of wise old fellows from the ICC got together and after about 3.142 seconds of discussion agreed to change the rules relating to the length of ODI intervals. Great so that's one rule patched up, and next time it's horribly rain delayed then it won't be as much of an issue (assuming the rule is commited permanently not just the duration of the ODI series) then the umpire will not be powerless to muck around and use duh duh duhhhhh Common Sense.

But that's just one rule. I've not looked at these rules because, whilst I did spend some time this morning printing of some scoresheets, I'm not actually that boring. But *IF* I were to I'd be betting a lot of English pounds that there are countless more rules which are just waiting to screw up another match and create more headlines involving the word "farce". So why not look to just allow umpire (umpirical?) discretion above everything else? If BOTH teams and ALL officials agree to a change, why should anything at all stand in it's way? On Wednesday the ODI should have been subjected to reduced innings, that action be formally relayed to Dubai on the back of unicorns being carried by diamond encrusted condors, (Picture please Ceci & Mel) and then in their own time let the ICC change the rules for definite.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Oh Spiggypoo - cannot fulfil that particular dream sequence but hate to disappoint - we have diamonds here though no condor(just possibly a rather horrid trousersnake)