ICC to discuss relaxing on field swearing rules as Ben Stokes' punishment is criticised

[MenInG]

The International Cricket Council is to discuss relaxing its rules around on field swearing in the wake of Ben Stokes being punished for shouting an obscenity at himself during the second Investec Test against West Indies.

The ICC has been criticised by a string of former players for awarding Stokes one demerit point after he swore in frustration during the second day’s play when West Indies batsman Shai Hope edged a ball between the slips.

Stokes was not swearing at the batsman or the umpire but because his profanity was picked up by the stump microphone and broadcast live on Sky Sports the match referee took action. It followed Kagiso Rabada being punished for a similar offence during the Lord’s Test which led to him being suspended for the next match at Trent Bridge.

But players who swear on the field and are not caught by the stump microphones are much less likely to be punished unless they are directing the foul language at an opponent or official.

Ben Stokes

Stokes is now one point away from a suspension. The ICC has cracked down on player behaviour over the last two years and introduced a new demerit point system last year.

But Telegraph Sport understands that at the ICC’s next full board meeting in New Zealand in November the demerit system will be discussed with agreement that players should not be punished for swearing in frustration at themselves.

Michael Vaughan, writing in Telegraph Sport, accused the ICC of having its priorities wrong. “Test cricket needs players like Stokes and Rabada on the field. The ICC has opened up such a grey area. Player behaviour is not an issue, in fact I would say it is better than in previous years. There are much bigger issues in the game than the odd swear word or two that the ICC is not addressing such as context for Test cricket and over rates. They do nothing about over-rates but ban players for swearing. It has its priorities the wrong way round.”

Reaching four demerit points triggers a suspension of one Test match or 2 ODIs or 2 T20Is. The points stay on a player’s record for 24 months. If a player then reaches 8-11 demerit points a suspension of two Tests, or 1 Test and 2 ODIs/T20Is or 4 ODIs or 4 T20Is kicks in.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/...g-field-swearing-rules-ben-stokes-punishment/

 

[MenInG]

So Ben Stokes gets punished and suddenly calls to allow swearing....

 

[MenInG]

So is swearing in local languages ok?

 

[Chief Destroyer]

Clearly, race is not involved. Didn't see this discussion come up when Rabada was banned.

 

[Sherlock]

Looks like Nasser had a word then...

 

[HitWicket]

Clearly, race is not involved. Didn't see this discussion come up when Rabada was banned.

Rabada got done for verbal abuse targeting a specific opposition player. Stokes got done for saying a swear word in frustration directed at absolutely no one. Pretty big difference.

 

[MenInG]

Rabada got done for verbal abuse targeting a specific opposition player. Stokes got done for saying a swear word in frustration directed at absolutely no one. Pretty big difference.

I am not sure if you would like your younger ones to hear someone swear like that. Brings the game in disrepute imo

 

[HitWicket]

I am not sure if you would like your younger ones to hear someone swear like that. Brings the game in disrepute imo

I completely agree, but comparing directed verbal abuse and an undirected expletive doesn't make much sense.

 

[shaz619]

I completely agree, but comparing directed verbal abuse and an undirected expletive doesn't make much sense.

Your hypocricy and racial bias has been exposed, if you were consistent I would have said fair play

 

[HitWicket]

Your hypocricy and racial bias has been exposed, if you were consistent I would have said fair play

Out of interest do you think if a player ran up to and tried to kick an opposition player they should receive the same punishment Reece Topley got for kicking out the stumps in frustration after losing a LOI?One is directed abuse at an opposition player, one is simply an act done in frustration that sets a bad example.

 

[mak36]

I completely agree, but comparing directed verbal abuse and an undirected expletive doesn't make much sense.

Was he ever punished for this?

 

[HitWicket]

Was he ever punished for this?

Not as far as I'm aware, but one of the inconsistencies mentioned in the article and by most pundits is that players will only be punished for what's picked up on stump mic.

 

[shaz619]

Obviously the two are different levels of offences but not like Stokes has never directed abuse at an opposition player, if he has a point for something else so what; why can't we factor in all the times he has been a right douche? wouldn't you call this sweet justice and welcome his punishment in general. But since he's on the receiving end all of a sudden they want to relax the rules, that too for something in itself which was has been deemed a minor offence. #WhiteyStrikes

 

[mak36]

Obviously the two are different levels of offences but not like Stokes has never directed abuse at an opposition player, if he has a point for something else so what; why can't we factor in all the times he has been a right douche? wouldn't you call this sweet justice and welcome his punishment in general. But since he's on the receiving end all of a sudden they want to relax the rules, that too for something in itself which was has been deemed a minor offence. #WhiteyStrikes

See the video I just posted.

 

[HitWicket]

Obviously the two are different levels of offences but not like Stokes has never directed abuse at an opposition player, if he has a point for something else so what; why can't we factor in all the times he has been a right douche? wouldn't you call this sweet justice and welcome his punishment in general. But since he's on the receiving end all of a sudden they want to relax the rules, that too for something in itself which was has been deemed a minor offence. #WhiteyStrikes

Remind me of the last player to be sanctioned for swearing. Just straight up swearing, no verbal abuse and not directed at anyone or a decision.

Let's be honest, if this was a player that wasn't white we'd have pages full of people crying discrimination and racism as we did when Rabada got done for his verbal abuse. My favourite are the people who claimed "if player X did this then they wouldn't get any punishment" (many of them using Stokes's name funnily enough) and are now nowhere to be seen now that Stokes has received the same punishment as Rabada for a less severe offence.

 

[j_kazmi]

We always talk about the ICC favouring players from the big 3 but this is too blatant. When rababda got banned a lot of fans and pundits were complaining about his ban but the icc did nothing.

 

[shaz619]

Remind me of the last player to be sanctioned for swearing. Just straight up swearing, no verbal abuse and not directed at anyone or a decision.

Let's be honest, if this was a player that wasn't white we'd have pages full of people crying discrimination and racism as we did when Rabada got done for his verbal abuse. My favourite are the people who claimed "if player X did this then they wouldn't get any punishment" (many of them using Stokes's name funnily enough) and are now nowhere to be seen now that Stokes has received the same punishment as Rabada for a less severe offence.

I don't think it's anything to do with that but there's clear hypocrisy when all of a sudden they want the rules relaxed now, maybe it's because Stokes is white, maybe it's due to England being a more high profile team then SA etc who knows but there needs to be consistency across the board regardless of the level of offence.

 

[mak36]

Remind me of the last player to be banned for swearing. Just straight up swearing, no verbal abuse and not directed at anyone or a decision.

Let's be honest, if this was a player that wasn't white we'd have pages full of people crying discrimination and racism as we did when Rabada got done for his verbal abuse. My favourite are the people who claim "if player X did this then they wouldn't get any punishment" (many of them using Stokes's name funnily enough) and are now nowhere to be seen now that Stokes has received the same punishment as Rabada for a less severe offence.

I don't think it is an issue of race.However, I do think it is a case of (i) double standards from the media/fans and it does show the huge disparity in the influence of the boards/administrators.

You are a case in point. Here's what you wrote at the time of the Rabada incident:

Because I'm sure it's be great to walk down and watch a game of kids cricket in your local park to hear then aggressively shouting expletives at each other because 'the professional cricketers do it in tv'.
If he doesn't want to get banned he should take the hint and not repeatedly break the rules.

Can learn it wherever they want, shouldn't unnecessarily be learning it from their idols whilst watching a cricket match.

If removing directed aggressive verbal abuse destroys the sport for you then maybe you should be looking elsewhere for your entertainment?

Audibly wearing [sic] in full view of the world has never been part of the game. You may be missing the fact that it's accumulating 4 points that has got him suspended, for this incident he only got 1 of those points. He's a repeat offender who's not learnt his lesson and although it'll be sad to miss his skills from the next game, evidently something more drastic needs to be done to get the message in his head that he can't keep breaking the rules.

Damned by your own words i'm afraid. It's worth adding he hasn't actually been banned and yet there has been this huge uproar. Nothing to do with the fact there is an Ashes series around the corner by any chance...

 

[HitWicket]

I don't think it's anything to do with that but there's clear hypocrisy when all of a sudden they want the rules relaxed now, maybe it's because Stokes is white, maybe it's due to England being a more high profile team then SA etc who knows but there needs to be consistency across the board regardless of the level of offence.

I agree with being consistent across the board. But complaining that there's not consistency because the first time (as far as I'm aware) a player gets sanctioned for an offence in the sport (in this case a player swearing undirected out of frustration, something we've seen players from many nations do previously) it gets suggested by some that players in general shouldn't be getting sanctioned for that seems ridiculous to me, no?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Rabada and Jadeja got punished.It was fine.Stokes gets punished and ICC starts to have a relook.

 

[shaz619]

I agree with being consistent across the board. But complaining that there's not consistency because the first time (as far as I'm aware) a player gets sanctioned for an offence in the sport (in this case a player swearing undirected out of frustration, something we've seen players from many nations do previously) it gets suggested by some that players in general shouldn't be getting sanctioned for that seems ridiculous to me, no?

I think Stokes is a douche in itself so people care not to pay attention to his level of offence as it stands given his history however, do you not see any bias on ICC discussing the relaxation of rules now after the English throw a hissy fit ? or do you deem it acceptable. Anyhow I don't agree with the points system regardless of who it is

 

[HitWicket]

I don't think it is an issue of race.However, I do think it is a case of (i) double standards from the media/fans and it does show the huge disparity in the influence of the boards/administrators.

You are a case in point. Here's what you wrote at the time of the Rabada incident:









Damned by your own words i'm afraid. It's worth adding he hasn't actually been banned and yet there has been this huge uproar. Nothing to do with the fact there is an Ashes series around the corner by any chance...

How on Earth have I been damned by my own words. I'm not suggesting either is acceptable. I'm suggesting that comparing directed verbal abuse and shouting out a swear word in frustration as comparable incidents like some are starting to do in this forum makes no sense.

Uproar? I'd not describe it as anywhere near an uproar, infact it's all been pretty tame. Uproar was what we had on this forum when Rabada received the same punishment as Stokes for a more severe offence. One of Stokes's demerit points will have expired by the time the ashes come around I believe.

 

[HitWicket]

I think Stokes is a douche in itself so people care not to pay attention to his level of offence as it stands given his history however, do you not see any bias on ICC discussing the relaxation of rules now after the English throw a hissy fit ? or do you deem it acceptable. Anyhow I don't agree with the points system regardless of who it is

I don't see any bias in it all. No one in the history of the sport has ever been banned for straight up swearing as far as I'm aware and Stokes has just become the first in 100+ years of international cricket. Naturally questions will be asked.

 

[shaz619]

I don't see any bias in it all. No one in the history of the sport has ever been banned for straight up swearing as far as I'm aware and Stokes has just become the first in 100+ years of international cricket. Naturally questions will be asked.

Well, we can agree to disagree on that one This nonsensical system has been questioned many times but the ICC have not been so swift to discuss relaxing various rules regardless and that goes beyond the level of offence for me

 

[mak36]

How on Earth have I been damned by my own words. I'm not suggesting either is acceptable. I'm suggesting that comparing directed verbal abuse and shouting out a swear word in frustration as comparable incidents like some are starting to do in this forum makes no sense.

Uproar? I'd not describe it as anywhere near an uproar, infact it's all been pretty tame. Uproar was what we had on this forum when Rabada received the same punishment as Stokes for a more severe offence. One of Stokes's demerit points will have expired by the time the ashes come around I believe.

Actually that's exactly what you seem to be doing. You say the comparison doesn't make sense, and yet in the Rabada thread this is what you wrote:

Can learn it [ie swearing] wherever they want, shouldn't unnecessarily be learning it from their idols whilst watching a cricket match.

Audibly wearing [sic] in full view of the world has never been part of the game [...] He's a repeat offender who's not learnt his lesson [...] evidently something more drastic needs to be done to get the message in his head that he can't keep breaking the rules.

Those criticisms have nothing to do with whether the abuse was directed at anyone- in other words they apply just as much to Stokes as they do to Rabada, and yet you are now unwilling to say so.

 

[mak36]

I don't see any bias in it all. No one in the history of the sport has ever been banned for straight up swearing as far as I'm aware and Stokes has just become the first in 100+ years of international cricket. Naturally questions will be asked.

He hasn't been banned. He only got one demerit point for this (ie a slap on the wrist). The fact he is close to a ban is for the same reason Rabada was banned. As you wrote "He's a repeat offender who's not learnt his lesson [...] evidently something more drastic needs to be done to get the message in his head that he can't keep breaking the rules."

 

[HitWicket]

Actually that's exactly what you seem to be doing. You say the comparison doesn't make sense, and yet in the Rabada thread this is what you wrote:





Those criticisms have nothing to do with whether the abuse was directed at anyone- in other words they apply just as much to Stokes as they do to Rabada, and yet you are now unwilling to say so.

Then let me clear it up for you :

- Neither 'offence' is acceptable, kids shouldn't be learning expletives and offence language from their idols on TV.

- Despite the larger uproar around Rabada being punished his offence was actually more severe than Stokes's. Naturally abusing someone else is more severe than shouting a swear word out loud.


I do not see how suggesting one offence is more severe/worse than another has to mean the other is acceptable. Murder is worse than theft, doesn't mean I condone theft.

 

[HitWicket]

He hasn't been banned. He only got one demerit point for this (ie a slap on the wrist). The fact he is close to a ban is for the same reason Rabada was banned. As you wrote "He's a repeat offender who's not learnt his lesson [...] evidently something more drastic needs to be done to get the message in his head that he can't keep breaking the rules."

Slight error on my part, I meant to state 'punished' instead of 'banned' as I have referenced through the rest of the thread.

 

[Suleiman]

After reprimanding him for this next make sure cricket is played with a stuffed toy ball so no one gets hurt.

Keep making it a sissy's game.

 

[kingusama92]

To be honest, South Asian cricketers get away with a lot in this regard because they swear in their language.

 

[mak36]

Then let me clear it up for you :

- Neither 'offence' is acceptable, kids shouldn't be learning expletives and offence language from their idols on TV.

- Despite the larger uproar around Rabada being punished his offence was actually more severe than Stokes's. Naturally abusing someone else is more severe than shouting a swear word out loud.

I do not see how suggesting one offence is more severe/worse than another has to mean the other is acceptable. Murder is worse than theft, doesn't mean I condone theft.

Your analogy doesn't work because I didn't discuss which one was more serious. The point I was making is that their situation and behaviour is more similar than you were trying to make out. That is to say, Rabada wasn't banned for verbal abuse. He was banned for an accumulation of demerit points, which in part came about because he used expletives. Stokes could also face a ban due to an accumulation of demerit points, which in part came about because he used expletives. You seem to have now accepted this point.

Also, more uproar? Stokes faces a potential ban if he chooses to misbehave again and the ICC decides to have a discussion about changing the rules. Rabada is banned and no-one bats an eyelid.

 

[HitWicket]

Your analogy doesn't work because I didn't discuss which one was more serious. The point I was making is that their situation and behaviour is more similar than you were trying to make out. That is to say, Rabada wasn't banned for verbal abuse. He was banned for an accumulation of demerit points, which in part came about because he used expletives. Stokes could also face a ban due to an accumulation of demerit points, which in part came about because he used expletives. You seem to have now accepted this point.

Also, more uproar? Stokes faces a potential ban if he chooses to misbehave again and the ICC decides to have a discussion about changing the rules. Rabada is banned and no-one bats an eyelid.

I understand the demerit system perfectly fine. Stokes and Rabada still received the same punishment for each of their offences in isolation however.

There will be more discussion by the ICC because Stokes has been punished for something no one else ever has been in an international cricket match.

Compare that to the amount of media uproar, the numerous threads spanning multiple pages on here that existed because Rabada was sanctioned for something that many people in the history of the sport had already been punished for previously.

 

[Shutdown Corner]

So Ben Stokes gets punished and suddenly calls to allow swearing....

Surprising how no bowler from India, England, or Australia has ever been tested for chucking, isnt it?

Steve Bucknor makes a few mistakes and never umpires again. I think any wins by the Big 3 need to have 50% weightage since they have so many benefits and any wins vs them ought to count double. Like Pak beating India in the CT ought to count as beating them twice.

 

[HitWicket]

Surprising how no bowler from India, England, or Australia has ever been tested for chucking, isnt it?

Harbhajan Singh and Ojha are 2 off the top of my head. Are there any others that you would suggest are highly suspicious?

Don't know much about the Aussie system but an English bowler won't get to the national team whilst chucking because it'll be rooted out below that. Hence the likes of Leach, Jack Taylor etc. being pulled up on chucking at levels below international.

 

[mak36]

I understand the demerit system perfectly fine. Stokes and Rabada still received the same punishment for each of their offences in isolation however.

There will be more discussion by the ICC because Stokes has been punished for something no one else ever has been in an international cricket match.

Compare that to the amount of media uproar, the numerous threads spanning multiple pages on here that existed because Rabada was sanctioned for something that many people in the history of the sport had already been punished for previously.

Actually, it seems you don't understand it as you are wrong on both counts.

Firstly, they were punished for breaching two different rules:

Rabada was punished for breaching Article 2.1.7.
Stokes was punished for breaching Article 2.1.4.

Secondly, he is not the first to be punished under 2.1.4 and to be honest even if he was it would be irrelevant. He was punished for an offence that is clearly stated in the Code of Conduct, and that is why he accepted the offence.

In sum, you have nothing to complain about. Just as you said about Rabada, all he needs to do is learn to keep his mouth shut. If he does that, his place for the Ashes is safe. I hope he does as he would be a big loss.

 

[Sachin136]

Whatever the motive behind this is, the rule should be more relaxed.

 

[Shutdown Corner]

Harbhajan Singh and Ojha are 2 off the top of my head. Are there any others that you would suggest are highly suspicious?

Don't know much about the Aussie system but an English bowler won't get to the national team whilst chucking because it'll be rooted out below that. Hence the likes of Leach, Jack Taylor etc. being pulled up on chucking at levels below international.

Gareth Batty was bending his arm like crazy in Bangladesh last year. I've heard people say Jadeja chucks at times and quite a lot of people think Ashwin does too. Maybe not tho.