Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

West Indies will be without their captain, Jason Holder, for the third Test of the series against England after the ICC suspended him.

Holder was held responsible for his team's slow over rate during the win in Antigua. West Indies wrapped up the three-match series with a second successive win - this time by 10 wickets - within three days in Antigua. They won the first Test in Barbados by 381 runs within four days.

The man likely to step in for Holder is vice-captain, Kraigg Brathwaite, who led West Indies in two Tests on their tour of Bangladesh last year, which Holder missed due to injury.

http://www.espn.com/cricket/story/_/id/ ... lucia-test

Holder out and most likely Jospeh wont play either...changes for WI, introduction of a spinner maybe?

Holder is a huge blow.

series already won cushions it a bit though

Thank God it's a dead rubber, because this is such a ridiculous ICC rule!

Now, both du Plessis and Holder will be forced to miss dead rubber Tests, because of slow over rates...in matches they both won by a day or two to spare!

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/cricket/1 ... t-pakistan

"South Africa captain Faf du Plessis has been banned from the final cricket test against Pakistan because of a slow over rate by his team in the second match in Cape Town."

Both teams used a four-prong pace attack with four genuine pace bowlers, and they're being punished for it. There were two good comments on caribbeancricket.com on the issue....

"A side with 4 pacers should never have the same required rate as a side with two pacers and two spinners."

"slow over rates should only apply to drawn games"


Agreed on both counts...it's a stupid ICC rule.

I think slow over rates are as bad for test cricket as playing county cricket in the spring and autumn

The ICC have no choice but to act. I just wish they were more strict and acted more

Over rates in test cricket are pathetic and represent poor value for the poor sod who has to pay through the nose to watch a day's test cricket. What's more, captains couldn't care less and when they allow this to happen, then they treat the spectators with disdain at best and contempt at worse

I've lost track of how many years I've been banging on about this and nothing ever improves

Yep i dont think Holder can have any complaints, they know the rules, and I am very happy to see some punishment given to players. The Australian team must be close now getting their captained banned......again

mikesiva wrote:Thank God it's a dead rubber, because this is such a ridiculous ICC rule!

Now, both du Plessis and Holder will be forced to miss dead rubber Tests, because of slow over rates...in matches they both won by a day or two to spare!

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/cricket/1 ... t-pakistan

"South Africa captain Faf du Plessis has been banned from the final cricket test against Pakistan because of a slow over rate by his team in the second match in Cape Town."

Both teams used a four-prong pace attack with four genuine pace bowlers, and they're being punished for it. There were two good comments on caribbeancricket.com on the issue....

"A side with 4 pacers should never have the same required rate as a side with two pacers and two spinners."

"slow over rates should only apply to drawn games"


Agreed on both counts...it's a stupid ICC rule.

But if for example(as I did do the summer) paid for 90 overs cricket on day 1 and 2 and you didn't get that, that is the game cheating you out of your money.

At Lords, you can pay up to 150 quid for a ticket.

Maybe the punishment should be different. But 90 overs in a day is achievable for any side.

The match finished with two days to spare. Watching the highlights the spectators were riveted by the action. I didn't see anybody looking like they felt cheated.

It's a pointless law that should only be applied when it's used to deliberately eke out a draw when the fielding team is in a losing position.

I hope the West indies and South Africa stick to their four fast bowlers despite this stupid rule. Local fans would much rather watch Joseph tearing in to bowl instead of Chase lobbing up lollipops to placate that nonsensical ICC ruling.

ddb wrote:
But if for example(as I did do the summer) paid for 90 overs cricket on day 1 and 2 and you didn't get that, that is the game cheating you out of your money.

At Lords, you can pay up to 150 quid for a ticket.

Maybe the punishment should be different. But 90 overs in a day is achievable for any side.

I don't understand this feeling short changed if you don't see 90 overs in a day's play. I watched the great West indies pacers bowling at Sabina Park in the 1980s and they never bowled 90 overs in a day's play.

But we came away thoroughly entertained not bothered by how many overs were bowled.

I guess West Indians see things differently. I can see I'm not alone in calling for Holder and the West indies management not to change their four prong pace attack despite this stupid rule.

mikesiva wrote:The match finished with two days to spare. Watching the highlights the spectators were riveted by the action. I didn't see anybody looking like they felt cheated.

It's a pointless law that should only be applied when it's used to deliberately eke out a draw when the fielding team is in a losing position.

I hope the West indies and South Africa stick to their four fast bowlers despite this stupid rule. Local fans would much rather watch Joseph tearing in to bowl instead of Chase lobbing up lollipops to placate that nonsensical ICC ruling.

Sorry Mike but I can't agree with that. Sure it is entertaining watching good fast bowling : and if the fielding team is able to take their time so that said fast bowlers can get through their workloads it is great for them , isn't it ? But like every tactic it must have risk as well as reward : if you are too slow with your overs (and in truth the umpires make quite a few allowances for stoppages of various kinds anyway) you must have consequences.

Is banning the skipper too harsh ? I actually don't love that penalty ; think I'd rather see a run penalty in the actual match though I'm unsure how you'd arrange that - it would need to be substantial to carry any weight .

As it is , they all know the rules. I regret that Holder has to miss a game ; but I don't think anyone can cry foul...

It's a tricky one. Sure , you don't want the bowling side taking the piss and killing the momentum of the game. However, does it make for a great spectacle for the fans if in the middle of a tense session, of quality fast bowling the West Indies suddenly are forced to bring on Chace and Campbell for over rate reasons?

mikesiva wrote:

ddb wrote:
But if for example(as I did do the summer) paid for 90 overs cricket on day 1 and 2 and you didn't get that, that is the game cheating you out of your money.

At Lords, you can pay up to 150 quid for a ticket.

Maybe the punishment should be different. But 90 overs in a day is achievable for any side.

I don't understand this feeling short changed if you don't see 90 overs in a day's play. I watched the great West indies pacers bowling at Sabina Park in the 1980s and they never bowled 90 overs in a day's play.

But we came away thoroughly entertained not bothered by how many overs were bowled.

I guess West Indians see things differently. I can see I'm not alone in calling for Holder and the West indies management not to change their four prong pace attack despite this stupid rule.

look when I see test matches in the uk generally England are taking the piss, although haven't seen a live test match for 2-3 yrs now so it could be different under root captainacy but cook was awful.

agree with you mike when their are wicket or action going on but when team are strolling along with not much happening that is when the spectators are getting cheated at.

Anyway Mike you should check the overrates during the ashes and see if england captain get banned if they miss any overs.
no action was taken when england was 6-8 overs short once barring Hales paying some money to a fan on twitter.

suspect different rules for different nations.

plus mike money makes a huge difference as well, if you paying peanuts for the match tickets which it is in WI you really don't give a crap if a team doesn't bowl 90 overs any cricket is a bonus same with the game in SA.
but with the insane ticket prices in england now you pretty much get the feeling the spectators are demanding 90 overs and very good cricket which probably explains why prebooked tickets are in decline at the moment for the test matches, generally tickets being sold weeks or couples of days before the game.
I generally book my tickets on the day or couple of days out of a test match if I do go since if I am paying a lot of money I want to see a good days play and not a crap one.

personally think out of all the teams England is probably the one that needs to fix the overrate issue since england fans and media are generally the only ones that actually care about it, they fans are the only ones really complaining and a lot of that is due to the insane ticket prices.
outside england not sure many even care about it, because either not that many people watch the game in the stadium and even if they do they paid so little for the action that they don't really care if they saw 12-30 ball less and are more interested in the runs or wickets.

pretty insane really because in england people actually watch or follow how many overs left in the days play or if they bowled 30 overs in a session.