The Rules
RULE
1. - FIELDING A TEAM
RULE 2.
- THE GAME
RULE 3.
- UNIFORMS
RULE 4.
- THE TOSS
RULE 5. - PLAYING EQUIPMENT
RULE 6. -
THE UMPIRE
RULE 7. -
ARRIVAL/LATE PLAYER(S)
RULE
8. - PLAYER SHORT / SUBSTITUTES / INJURED PLAYERS
RULE 9. -
FIELD PLACEMENT.
RULE
10. - PLAY BALL/LIVE BALL/DEAD BALL.
RULE 11. -
SCORING.
RULE 12. - NO
BALL.
RULE
13. - WIDE AND LEG SIDE WIDE BALLS.
RULE 14. -
BOWLER CHANGING DIRECTION/STYLE.
RULE 15. - BALL
LEAVING THE PLAYING AREA.
RULE 16.
- APPEALS FOR DISMISSALS.
RULE 17.
- DISMISSALS.
RULE
18. - INTERFERENCE.
RULE 19. -
MISCONDUCT.
RULE 20. - ORDER OFF.
RULE 21. - ILLEGAL
COURT ENTRY/EXIT.
RULE 22. -
RUNNERS.
RULE 23. - END OF GAME.
RULE 24. - MIXED GAMES.
SECTION 2 - AICF STANDARDS
1.
COURT LAYOUT
AND DIMENSIONS.
2. EQUIPMENT.
SECTION 3 - MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES
1.
GAME FEES.
2. LATE STARTS.
3. PREMIERSHIP AND BONUS POINTS.
4. LADDER POSITION.
5. FINALS QUALIFICATIONS.
6. DRAWN FINAL.
SECTION 4 - VARIATIONS.
SECTION 5 - UMPIRE SIGNALS.
Umm . . out?
Indoor Cricket's RED CARD equivalent
Yes, there is a Send Off rule, and yes, it is used . . . carefully
An analysis and explanation (where possible) of the Rules of Indoor Cricket
RULE 20. ORDER OFF
Acccording to the AICF rules, umpires MUST order off:
a) Any player whose conduct is extreme (eg. striking or threatening behaviour). I'd add becoming (and staying) vocally abusive toward the umpire, other players, spectators-anyone in fact. Except for Channel 9 (Australia) television cricket commentators--they deserve all the abuse any one mortal could hurl their way.
b) Any player who has been the cause of 2 separate penalties for misconduct being awarded against their team. These obviously would have been instances of misconduct that the umpire decided did not warrant sending off the first time . . . "
c) Now, it gets a tad confusing here: Rule 19 actually states that a player can incur a run-penalty for misconduct (and amongst the examples given is striking another player), but rule 20 states that a player must be ordered off for striking another player. Generally I'd agree with rule 20's version over rule 19's for a player striking someone.
The AICF rules go on to state that:
d) The umpire is the sole judge of what constitutes extreme misconduct. Indeed!
e) A player ordered off the court will take no further part in the game.
Now, I have no real problem with this rule . . . but I think there should be room in our sport for certain infringements to attract both a run-penalty plus removal of the offender for a certain number of overs. The offending player is shown the behaviour is not tolerated on the court, but has the opportunity to cool down and return to the game. . . only for minor-ish breaches of the misconduct rule mind you . . . like equipment abuse, or too much back-chat to the umpire after being warned to stop. I think a lot of ego-driven wannabees would quickly come back down to planet Earth if this was adopted. However, whenever "discretion" is allowed (as in the imposition of a less-than-the-whole-game "sin bin",, there is a high risk of bringing out the perception of inconsistency, of favouring or disfavouring certain teams and/or players. Perhaps a stipulated, lesser "sin bin" for defined infractions: "Throwing bat: 2 overs; repeatedly audible swearing: 1 over etc etc" or similar. Either way, a delicate judgement would be required, definitely not for the faint-hearted . . .
f) A player ordered off will not be replaced. Teams are to revert to the Player Short Rule [Rule 8] for the batting and bowling. Unless my "sin-bin" suggestion above gains currency of course . . .