Ponting Scathing at England's use of substitutes.

[Paoli]

Ponting was in no mood for diplomacy. "I think it is an absolute disgrace the spirit of the game is being treated like that," he said. "[Duncan] Fletcher has known right the way through the summer this is something we haven't been happy with, but it's continued. He knows it's something that has got under our skins and I've had enough of it, and I let him know that, and most of his players too.

"Being here in England they've obviously got the resources to just draft in the best fieldsmen that they possibly can at the time. The way they've been doing it is just before their bowlers are about to bowl they'll send them off for a short amount of time to have a bit of a loosen-up and a massage and that sort of stuff, and come back on and bowl. As soon as they've finished their spell they'll do exactly the same thing. It's within the rules of the game but it's just not within the spirit of the game, which is what we're all trying to uphold."

Full story

It's a hard question to answer. What England have done sure is wrong; I understand a few players can't even get into the county teams, but still, it is within the rules so therefore considered ok. But; how do the ICC tighten up on this? When the squad is named, I expect Tremlett goes back to play for Hants (Does he?) and then if a player goes off you are left with no option. Perhaps only players who play for the team that the city of the test match is in?

Discuss.

[Sean Beynon]

Why should the ICC tighten up on who a home side picks as their substitute fielders? This has been happening for a long time. It's not as if England have two or three specialist twelth men who follow them round for the whole series. They simply pick the best fieldsmen from the Counties who are not in action on a particular week. It's logical. Why should Tremlett be forced to hang around the dressing room and do a bit of fielding when he could be playing proper cricket somewhere. It's a logical, legitimate use of resources.

[Cliff-UK]

what England have dfone is NOT wrong.
Honestly, what a bit of sour grapes. I remember when Lillee was nearing the end of his run he woudl be off the field after every bowling stint. It was the 81 series i think. It's been going on for ages. England have just refined the process by not using the local trundler. It is within the rules and it is disappointing that Ponting is taking this stance. I hope there are no other excuses. No-one said the Aussie penchant for sledging which even many Australian commentators despised, was killing the opposition. Though that was REALLy against the spirit of cricket. They saw it as something to be overcome. Well, I did anyway. All is fair if it's in trhe rules, surely. It;s called professionalism.

[flanflinger]

I think England have taken the P*** slightly. Maybe the rules need to be clearer. But if a bolwer nips off for one over how much rest is that going to give him..

He only has an over to re-appear, and has to go up to the Dressing room and back in that time. How much is he going to get done? How much rest will he get?

Secondly, to my knowledge England have used a local subsitute for years. Normally after the first day.

When Clarke was injured - was Hodge the offical twelth man - I doubt it..

Surely if a touring side can have a squad of 14 - then England can name their twelth man plus two other local players?

As it is the run-out occured not when a player was on for a bowler "nipping to the Loo" but when the guy was having an X-Ray... think it's time Ponting stopped complaining and started thinking about how he is going to win at the Oval...

[djdannybrown]

Just remembering though.Was it Pratt who replaced Simon Jones.What does Ponting want,injured people still fielding.Also good experience for young brilliant county cricketers who benifit England for the future by getting a feel of full test match crowds and intensity.Im all for it.It's the batsmen risk of taking a close run and is his fault alone, not just because we put a young cricketer on the field.

[greg]

Pehaps Ponting wants to become an Englishman and is practising his whinging now

[Paoli]

There was a Durham lad out there; isn't Trent Bridge in Notts?

Now, it could seem like complaining to your neighbour when your house is burning down behind you, but I can't think of any other team that has done this whilst at home.

In saying that though; if Prattt hadn't of hit the stumps; not a word would've been said.

[Notts Exile]

Originally Posted by Paoli69

There was a Durham lad out there; isn't Trent Bridge in Notts?

Now, it could seem like complaining to your neighbour when your house is burning down behind you, but I can't think of any other team that has done this whilst at home.

You're right that Trent Bridge is in Nottingham and not Durham. However, England isn't such a large country and the distances travelled aren't that large as they would be in Oz.

How would you know if the Sri Lankans were doing it? How do you know that they weren't using players from outside the district as substitutes? Did you care because you were winning?

[Cliff-UK]

i'd just like to say that just cos the aussies are upset it doesn't mean they have a case. it was fair. and it is really a very peripheral matter. what is wrong with getting a good fielder to be your twelfth man? the aussies get their twelfth man from their tour squad and one factor which helps a player get in the tour squad is they are a good fielder. are we supposed to make do with anyone who happens to be available?

this is a red herring. and nothing more. a deflection from the fact that ponting is in a pickle. i really am disappointed in him.

[Goatman]

If the bowlers - as they claim - just need to go to the loo a lot, then its plain daft to criticise it. Do you really want to see SP Jones whip his nob out and take a slash against the sightscreen? I don't!

If they are nipping off to have a 5-minute massage (they have 8 minutes after crossing the rope before they have to re-cross it) - as the Aussies claim (and I have to say, a 5-minute massage? I wouldn't bother!) - then it is not against the laws, but it is against the spirit. Thats a fair cop, and steps should be taken. I can't believe that the "where the subs come from" thing has come up now though! ENG have been doing it for years and years! I am sure that this policy was in place 4 years ago, and I diddn't hear a peep out of the Aussies then. To be perfectly honest, this aspect of the complaint is bollocks and is only coming out now because AUS are losing and are grasping at straws to prove that they are hard-done by. If they are so ossified that they can't bring themselves to adapt to the game as it becomes increasingly proffessional, then thats thier own doing. They will go the way of the dinosaurs and whats more they will deserve to.

Verbal abuse and intimidatory behaviour towards opposition players is also against the spirit. Much of the motivation for tightening up the "spirit of the game" regulations in recent years was explicitly to cut down on this tactic, which has not exactly been underused by Australians. At present excessive appealing, over the top celebrations (cf. SP Jones) and dissent to umpires are what is being punished, but in the longer term the ICC have been quite clear that they intend to improve cricketers on-field behaviour in all contexts using "spirit" legislation - and so they should. Proper use of sledging is funny, and is part of the use of mindgames which are important to cricket. Waughs "You just dropped the world cup" - probably the best piece of sledging of all time - and Flintoffs "Mind the windows Tino" are classic examples. Use of torrents of abuse to simply intimidate opponents is disfiguring to the game however, and I despise it. Slow over rates and overuse of bouncers was also against the spirit, and was legislated out of the game as a result of Clive Lloyds exploitation of this loop hole. And quite right too.

The common thing about good teams is that they are innovative. One thing common about innovators is that they look for every advantage they can legally get thier hands on, as WI did with the slow over rates, AUS did with "mental disintegration" and ENG are doing with substitues. The game changes, the ICC polices those changes and the game moves on. Those who would prevent it from doing so would see our vibrant, living, breathing game fossilise. And I am not one of them.