ICC take action on comfort

I've been harsh when they've been stupid, so it is only fair that praise is given when praise is due and that the ICC earns plaudits for its decision in Dubai.

No, not Zimbabwe, although well done on that. I'm talking about the new 'tough on comfort breaks' policy. A little-remarked decision made yesterday was to amend a clause in the playing conditions for matches saying that substitute fielders can only be allowed for injury, illness or "other wholly acceptable reasons". The clause goes on to say that this "should not include what is commonly referred to as a comfort break".

Quite right. They only have to field for two hours at a time and if the players are suddenly caught short then they can always slip off for an over - which is more than umpires can do - but why should their side not be penalised? Naturally the main target of this is not players heading for the loo but players, especially fast bowlers, slipping off for a rub down and a rest after bowling a spell. England seem to be bigger culprits at this than most nations. I'm glad the ICC has seen sense.

Comments

[Mr A Nel]

I'm concerned.

My medication causes my bladder to fill at 4.65 times the rate of people who do not have my suite of 'special circumstances'.

I either relieve myself in the privacy of the dressing room, or entertain the members at Lord's with an impromptu display of traditional irrigation technique in the outfield.

Alternatively, I could ignore psychiatric advice and eschew my prescriptions on game days. Although I see no problem with this course of action, apparently the cricket world -as a whole- would prefer that as many of my personalities as possible are sedated.

So, we are all in a conundrum of the ICC's making.

Whilst I am in total agreement that Freddies' bowels could not possibly need emptying after every spell, and that Bing's urethra is unlikely to burst at the seams at the end of four overs; there are some of us who really do have to go 'when we have to go'.

Don't say I didn't warn you Kidd. Maybe your mate Murgs can talk some sense into someone about this?

[Trevor Dee]

I agree with Peter McGuinness but the Cons do it as well, so crack down on the lot of them - make comfort breaks a thing of the past. If an older umpire can stand out there without need so can they.

[Peter McGuinness]

Hooray.

Cracking down on Poms taking phantom dumps.

I take everything back. These blokes really are tackling the big moral and ethical issues front on.

[Terry]

Hi Patrick. I think Simon Barnes brilliant article in the times sums it up. First class stuff.

[David Barry]

I'm surprised to hear you say "well done" to the ICC on the Zimbabwe issue. Their decision reflects very poorly on both the ECB and the BCCI. England are happy because they don't lose the ten million pounds or whatever that losing the World T20 would have entailed. India are happy because they get to keep Zimbabwe's vote on the ICC Board.

There's not a shred of principle, either cricket-based or moral-based, anywhere.

[Som]

I can foresee many joining Steve Waugh and writing their own version of "Out Of My Comfort Zone".