Captains and player discipline
The other day I commented on CMJ's piece worrying about a deterioration in player discipline. As I wrote on Cricket Burble a while ago, I don't feel it's fair to saddle the captain with all player discipline issues and I'd like to see umpires challenging individual players that say things out of earshot of the captain.
So interesting then to see that James Foster has been banned for 2 games for persistent discipline issues at Essex. He's guilty of a big breach of discipline himself - the CMJ piece says that he had a slanging match with the umpires in front of TV cameras. But this ban comes as a result of 5 Essex disciplinary issues in the last 12 months - not the specific Foster case.
"The regulations make it absolutely clear that the captains are responsible for discipline on the field and ensuring no repetition occurs."
That is what they say, yes. However, it's simply not possible for a captain to ensure that no repetition occurs - the only way that can be done is through non-selection of the likes of Stuart Broad. All the other counties will now presumably put in place procedures that demonstrate they've taken action whenever a player is reported by an umpire, so they can demonstrate that they've tried to do something to avoid a repeat. But that doesn't really address the issue that the captain could be the best captain in the history of the game, but they still can't totally stop individual ill-discipline.
I'd like to see individual fines and penalties increased, and if the captain is deemed to have encouraged ill-discipline they might receive an even greater fine than the individual in question. While Foster's individual actions have demonstrated that he has set a very poor example, I fear for the precedent penalising the captain for the ill-discpline of his/her players sets. What might it lead to? Use your most dispendable player as captain for the toss and admin potentially?
As a captain in club cricket, I support the umpires wherever possible and do what I can to prevent ill-discipline. But I also know that it's impossible to ensure no repetition occurs. So why have regulations that aren't humanly possible to achieve?
5 comments:
I happened to be discussing this very issue with my club chairman this week as we've had a few disciplinary incidents this season - for example:
1 one match where some of our players ended up calling opposition players cheats when they were umpiring when they wouldn't give their players out. The opposition batsman then threatened to wrap a bat around one of our player's heads. Several rounds of verbal abuse followed between several players on both teams. It was pretty ugly really (No official umpires present - a self-umpired game and I was at fine leg and not captaining the side at the time).
2 the above took place during the second innings; during the first innings of the same game, I had been umpiring and had given one of our good players out lbw and been verbally and loudly abused by him as he trudged off and then from the boundary later in the innings! I eventually shut him up by asking if he was a qualified umpire (I am).
3 another match where the opposition called one member of our team a cheat for not walking for a caught behind appeal (their slip fielder grabbed the bat off our player and pointed out where he thought the ball had hit the edge. Our player (ironically the same batsman from 2 above) responded by saying that there was an official umpire standing at the bowler's end and he hadn't given it out. The bowler (opposition captain) then responded by shouting "You're an ******g *****r and you know you are!" The umpire (who is actually the league's Umpires Secretary) said nothing the whole time!
4 An opposition player tripping over the legs of a junior player as he trudged off the pitch, then saying to the junior (a 15 yr old boy) "What the f**k do you think you're playing at, you f....etc I'll do you after the game." (He was reported to the league by our club's own umpire later and received a ban for a few games. Personally, I feel that this wouldn't have happened if our player had been 18 yrs or more.)
In truth, the official umpires rarely intervene to prevent ill discipline or abuse on the field of play in our leagues. And I don't see many captains telling their players to keep quiet or to calm down in situations like the ones I've given as examples.
I have mooted the idea of strengthening the internal disciplinary code at our club, but there would be no buy-in from others and it would only make team selection harder every week if we started banning players ourselves for loss of discipline, abusive behaviour, dissent towards officials, etc.
So what do you do? Oh, and yeah, I thought Stuart Broad was setting a pretty appalling example recently by showing dissent. But then, I was surprised they gave him the job in the first place - remember when he threw the ball in anger at the batsman?
Anyway, just my tuppence worth. Not sure what the answer is.
Wow, it sounds like you play some very eventful cricket Matt!
I think strengthening the club disciplinary code could be one approach. I also want to ask some players what their motivations are? If they want to win the game, is it beneficial to rile the umpire (no it never is) or the opposition (not often)? So why do it? If it's to vent frustration then you're selfishly letting your mates down as you're reducing their chances of winning the match.
Once again I fail to see what the problem is if the league has a disciplinary code in place and operates it when necessary. This happens in the Southern Premier League and any transgression is dealt with promptly and severely.
Before the season starts, the Spirit of Cricket is emphasised at a captains' meeting pointing out that the captain is responsible for behaviour and that the umpire will refer all issues to him. During a game an umpire will inform players when a disciplinary issue will be reported and both umpires comment on the appropriate form.
This results in very few problems and perhaps your league needs to adopt our stance.
I guess my point is that I think it's unfair to expect the captain to be responsible for all player behaviour. i.e. they're accurately applying the regulations, I just don't agree with them!
The captain should be responsible for reacting appropriately when players don't tow the line, but they shouldn't be held liable for the actions of idiot players. It's not possible to stop them.
Knowing you Grov, I assume you talk to the player in question before you refer the issue to the captain which is how it should be.
Are there other sports that ban the captain for the misconduct of other players? I can't think of one off the top of my head - certainly rugby and football don't.
The key in the Foster case is presumably the repeat nature of the offences. It might be unrealistic to expect a captain to predict when one of his players is going to transgress as a one off incident, and to be able to stop it, but surely it's realistic to expect him to clamp down on repeat offences. At that point, it's not just one off incidents, it's the culture of the team that's gone wrong, and that falls on the captain.
Post a Comment