The Club Debate: How will the new laws affect grassroots cricket?

In October last year, the MCC, the custodians of the Laws of Cricket since the club’s formation in 1787, issued a new code for the first time since 2000 following a global consultation with players, umpires and administrators at all levels. While some of the laws tried to address issues relating to safety and participation, in many ways the new code was prompted by fear: anxiety over law suits, the dispirit of cricket and the rising tide of gamesmanship.

According to the MCC’s laws sub-committee, the guiding objectives were making the laws more interpretable, more inclusive to all, and minimising the type of misconduct that has caused players and particularly umpires to leave the game.

Anything that helps boost participation is welcome, but what ramifications will the law changes have on the recreational game?

BEAMERS

At my league’s AGM in February one new law in particular prompted murmurings of discontent and was labelled ‘unfair’ in the minutes. A bowler who delivers more than one beamer, which passes above waist height of the batsman, irrespective of speed, must now be taken out of the attack.

Previously, slow balls – a rather ambiguous term – could be delivered up to shoulder height. Meanwhile, repeatedly bowling above head-height bouncers could also trigger a warning, while deliberately – how can an umpire tell? – bowling front foot no balls could lead to immediate suspension.

Kristian Martin, first XI captain at Ealing CC, is not concerned by the new beamer law’s implementation in his league but worries for those further down the food chain. “It’s a fine line between trying to work in the interests of health and safety and discouraging people from bowling. It will affect junior cricket – the ECB are pretty wishy-washy on their guidelines.”

***

While the ECB and local associations have the flexibility to amend and influence certain rules changes, the laws of cricket adopt largely a one-size-fits-all approach. But is that workable?

Some laws – such as bowlers being penalised only for a no ball and not any subsequent byes scored off the delivery – seem very logical. Others, such as the beamer ruling, feel too open to interpretation and potentially damaging to the confidence of young cricketers. Safety and participation were at the core of the lawmaker’s objectives, but in this instance health and safety appears to be directly competing against participation and inclusion. If a young spinner bowls a couple of slow beamers and is then removed from the attack, how will that keep them in the game?

Increased likelihood of suspensions – of players and of play itself – also do little to support the ECB’s ‘Get The Game On’ campaign. Empowering umpires to penalise, suspend and dismiss players is a brave call. Much will depend on the capability, personality and partiality of the individual. Keep a close eye on how this power is executed below panel umpire-level in which teams have a regular official with a strong allegiance to the club. If these powers are not executed tastefully, the law introduced to tackle poor behaviour could in fact inflame it.

Useful resources: 

ECB: https://www.ecb.co.uk/be-involved/officials/resources
MCC: https://www.lords.org/mcc/laws-of-cricket

Last month’s debate: 

https://www.wisden.com/stories/your-game/club-cricket/the-club-debate-where-have-all-the-families-gone

https://www.wisden.com/stories/your-game/club-cricket/club-debate-letters-where-have-all-the-families-gone-readers-views