http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/engvw...ry/298776.html

Maybe next time to show his frustration he should practice bowling on the pitch during the lunch break or constantly make over the top appeals to intimidate the umpire.

Now now, there's a difference between a technical infringement (Harmison) / over appealing (Panesar) and swearing loud enough for spectators to hear. Imagine how many children watching at the ground or at home could have been influenced by Edwards, thinking "If he does it, it must be okay".

By the way; I do actually think Monty deserved a stern word at the very least regarding the overappealing.

__________________
"Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose."
- Ayrton Senna

I'm not making any excuses about what Edwards did.

No, Monty should have been fined. I've seen plenty of people moaning about similar overappealing from players like Danish Kaneria; who has been fined before. Monty's display at Old Trafford in particular deserved more than just 'stern words'.

If I recall, not only did Kaneria get fined, Inzamam was docked 30% of his match fee and got a ONE match ban, right?

Umpires and match referees need to be consistent about these things. (over-appealing) What's good for the goose...So, yes. Monty should have been fined. And Vaughan.

Monty should have been fined and England should have been made to open their bowling with players who weren't using the square,if it meant having to open with Collingwood and Bell tough.

Edwards deserves his punishment but i wish the punishments were fair for all sides.

Monty probably deserved a fine, but then again Warne used to get away with murder. If he got fined every time he over appealed or showed dissent he could have paid off the third world debt.

__________________
Mark.

Yes. And he should have got fined.

Its not surprising that other teams complain on this particular issue when Warne and Monty get away with what players from the sub-continent (and in this case the West Indies) cannot get away with.