He had wanted the news withheld until his innings was over.There was the suspicion that the punishment had weighed too heavily on him and had, perhaps, had a bearing on his second-innings performance. There could have been a veritable shoal of dissenting players: including his captain Alec Stewart."We are disappointed for Mark," intoned Stewart, picking his way through a verbal minefield since ICC regulations prohibit anyone from making any kind of comment about disciplinary decisions. "But he has been dealt with by the match referee." Ramprakash was told of his punishment before went out to bat in the second innings, when he went for a four-ball duck. about pounds 850.The punishment is not unique in world cricket.
The International Cricket Council has acted similarly in more than half a dozen cases over the last four years. But if Ramprakash was guilty - he stood his ground for quite a while before heading for the dressing-room and clearly on the way back must have said something as well - he should not have been alone. The Middlesex captain's punishment has been suspended for six months after match referee Javed Burki ruled that his "dissent was both physical and verbal". It happened in England's first innings, after Ramprakash was given out, caught behind, by umpire Darrell Hair. Television replays later showed that the ball from Allan Donald had clipped the batsman's elbow rather than the inside edge of his bat. Mr Hair's report was considered by referee Burki and, at a hearing at the close of the third day's play, Ramprakash was additionally fined 25 per cent of his match fee of around pounds 3,400, i.e. MARK RAMPRAKASH yesterday became the first English cricketer to be handed a one-match ban for dissent after being found guilty of dissent in the second Cornhill Test at Lord's.
It is also a damaging reflection on those who orchestrate the side from the dressing-room.If match referees do not become a good deal tougher over their reaction to dissent it will soon descend to open warfare in the middle.At the end of this match Mr Burki has said that he wants to meet with the captains and the managers before the third Test next week at Old Trafford I very much hope he will not mince his words Some of the behaviour at Lord's has been disgraceful.. The replay showed what a good decision it was and yet Donald spun round with disbelief and covered his face with his hands.It is a dreadful reflection on contemporary cricketers that they refused to accept the umpire's word or, in their dissenting agreement, try and make the umpire look foolish. The ball hit the pad first and then the bat as it came through. It looked a good decision from Mr Hair but Hussain waited longer than he should have done.Allan Donald was just as guilty as the Englishmen when George Sharp refused to give Hussain out, caught off bat and pad at short leg in his last over before lunch. Mark Ramprakash's dissent was clear for all the world to see when he was given out caught behind in the first innings. He may not have been out and the ball may have hit his shirt and not the inside edge That is not the point The umpire's decision is, and always has been, final And, one hopes, will remain so. We saw Ramprakash mouth words at the Australian umpire Darrell Hair, who reported him to Javed Burki, the match referee and he was fined pounds 850 and given a suspended suspension of one Test match. Unfortunately, this episode did nothing to dissuade some of the others from similar protests on the fourth and final day.
The most culpable was the captain, Alec Stewart who, as the years go by, has found it harder and harder to leave the crease without a silent protest.Stewart drove at an outswinger from Jacques Kallis and was caught behind. He stood his ground in disbelief, shook his head and then, when he eventually began the walk back to the pavilion, he repeatedly looked over his shoulder at the big screen hoping for the replay which might have justified his go-slow.Three overs later Nasser Hussain played half forward to Lance Klusener with his bat behind his pad. It was also an unhappy and discreditable game from the point of view of the way in which cricket is developing with players from both sides increasingly making a habit of being unable to accept the umpire's word. THIS WAS not just an unhappy match for England because they lost, yet again, at Lords, to South Africa by a huge margin.