Crowe has nothing to crow about

Jeff Crowe was the blundering match referee at the heart of the farcical World Cup final . He once captained NZ.

Jeff has put up his hand admitting responsibility for the embarrassing cock-up in the final minutes of the game when the Aussies began jumping about like kangaroos thinking they had won the match and the umpires told them “its too early mates to celebrate”; which made Ricky Ponting tell umpire Aleem Dar “'Look mate, we've played the 20 overs, we've finished the game.'"

Crowe said: “In hindsight, I should have known the rules and said the game had been called off." All the same, he tried to shift the blame on the third umpire Rudi Koertzen as the one who “may have initiated the process leading to chaotic scenes at the climax of the game.”

How could Jeff have got it wrong, especially when he had elder brother Martin to turn to on matters relating to? Martin is the one who delivered the 2006 Colin Cowdrey lecture. In his lecture brother Martin spoke his mind against the use of technology to assist umpiring, except to determine such matters as line calls for run outs. He also slipped in some comments about his zero tolerance to chucking.

He said:
“I don’t care about talk of 15 degrees here or 10 degrees there… if with the naked eye a bowler is clearly chucking – even by 1 degree – he should be chucked out. Having it tested in a laboratory and not in match conditions is plain ignorance. To straighten your arm from any bent position is a massive advantage over other bowlers who bowl properly.”

Having been pinned in the head by ‘chuckers’ over 15 years, having been dubiously bowled first ball in a test by a certain Sri Lankan bowler, having tried to bowl a decent ball myself with a straight arm, I’ve had more than enough of this aspect of the game.”

It is time to show the same zero tolerance to referees who are ignorant of the rules. Jeff Crowe’s knowledge of the rules – or lack it- has been tested in match conditions and he has been found wanting. He must be chucked out.

World Cup Farce

The World Cup final was a farce. The various reports of the match would make you believe that the match turned into a farce because of the umpires’ decision to delay the Aussie celebration by insisting that the last three overs be completed.

It was a farce because of the fact that the Sri Lankans were made to bat “in pitch black conditions” (see the Independent); and it was a farce because the game was allowed to be played at all on Saturday. There was rain before the match began and nearly three hours of play was lost as a result. There were further interruptions that spoilt the game.

The pitch dark conditions did not descend upon the Oval at the end of the 33rd over; it was considerably dark even before that. The Guardian’s ball by ball description of the game confirms that by the 17th over it started raining. By the 24th over it was “honking down” and the light was poor. Nobody has asked the question as to why play was allowed to continue in those conditions. One is left to wonder as what might have happened if the Aussies had to bat second.

Both teams should have been allowed a fair shot at the Cup but this did not happen. The wicket was so flat and virtually tailor made for the Aussies; Michael Taylor confirmed this before the match began and when the Aussies won the toss the game was as good as over.

It is no way to end the tournament. The nabobs at the ICC were evidently keen to finish the match on Saturday come what may.

Good for the goose ...

... but not good for the gander

NZ went into their game against Australia yesterday minus two of their key players Shane Bond and Jacob Oram. On Thursday NZ coach John Bracewell confirmed that Oram would be fit for next Tuesday's game against Sri Lanka saying: "Yes. That's one of the reasons why he's not playing. It's a precautionary thing.”

"He had it (the injury) for a period of time during the home series. The diagnosis is that the initial impact is the worse case scenario, but he's been able to nurse it through. All of a sudden it's got a little bit more serious, so we've just got to take it easy.” However, Bond did not play despite Bracewell confirming he was not planning to rest Shane Bond for today’s match. No explanation was given as to why Bond did not play.

That was on Thursday, but come Friday and Shane Bond did not show up; nor did the critics who took umbrage at Sri Lanka resting Murali and Vaas in their line-up against Australia.

There was no reaction from either the Australians or the critics who earlier this week lambasted Sri Lanka for playing Australia without Vaas and Murali. Ricky Ponting, not one known for shedding tears, felt sorry that Oram missing out on Friday was a big loss for NZ but he showed no such sympathy for Sri Lanka last week.

The reaction – rather the lack of it - demonstrated the double standards adopted by those critics who virtually accused Sri Lanka of devaluing the game and opening up the game for corruption. We have not heard Ian Chappell calling for Condom to go into the NZ dressing room to ask what was happening. Not one of them has said this time that the fans were getting cheated.

Earlier this week Holding informed cricket fans that he had personal knowledge of how the gambling market worked as he had an account with Betfair. Proceeding to pronounce judgement he had this to say: "I think what it does is allow people who know what is happening to get a head start if they are gambling". We have not heard from Mr Holding up to now. Perhaps he would let us know how the market reacted to the omission of Bond and Oram.

Mr Holding’s interest in betting and the fact that he has an account with Betfair raises all sorts of questions, such as whether it is advisable, if not proper, for a commentator to indulge in betting on the outcome of games on which he comments. After all, Mr Holding is likely to have access to sensitive information by virtue of his privileged position.