Sense and sensibility

It finally appears that I can now pen an article where I mention common sense and cricket in the same breath. The game has been plagued by incidents over the last few years that have escalated to gargantuan proportions because those two words have not been grouped together.

If you look back at some of the recent damaging scandals, such as the Hair affair and the latest debacle during the second test between Australia and India, those fiascos could have been avoided if common sense was applied.

It appears as though sanity has now been restored Down Under through responsible, common sense actions by the players. Sensibly, Ponting has admitted some errors in attitude by his players and has subsequently addressed that internally.

It remains to be seen if that falls on deaf ears or if Australia's moral obligation to the game is improved.

India have come to the party and thoughtfully and thankfully decided to drop their alleged racial abuse charge against Hogg, thereby diffusing simmering tensions on the eve of the third test in Perth.

As I see it now, Australia will need to do the same with their charge regarding an alleged racist remark by Harhajan Singh against Andrew Symonds to balance the scales.

However, the issue does not end there. The ICC, as governing body, also need to be proactive and clean up their act. They have continued to disappoint. Many are left with the feeling that the magnitude of the game has surpassed them. Their handling of the latest cricketing headliner was extraordinary.

To succumb to power pressure from India and replace Bucknor set an extremely dangerous precedent. They can paper over the cracks and engineer any manner of reasons for the substitution, but the bottom line was that the decision was based on placating the most powerful cricketing nation that holds all the purse strings.

In addition, the ICC must restructure their hearing process regarding serious player offences such as the recent volatile incidents in Sydney. Mike Procter was a sensational cricketer and is a fine human being.

He has zero legal background and should never have been placed in a compromising position to act as judge and jury following such a damning accusation, one that could tarnish a player for life. Professional legal representation must be solicited immediately by the ICC in the future, when warranted, to ensure a fair and impartial hearing.

During the Sydney test the standard of umpiring caused a furore. Umpires do make mistakes; it is as simple as that. Again the ICC must heed the situation and finally decide that they will no longer expose the men in white. When a mistake is made in the middle, all but the umpires realise the error.

In today's modern media world with sporting technology as it is, it is foolhardy to ignore its introduction.

Quite simply, if it is standardised and used correctly it will enhance the game.

That is where the discussion should end. There are enough outstanding cricketing brains still involved in the game with intricate television production knowledge, to ensure the correct structures are agreed upon and implemented. I would go for the tennis chair umpire theory and empower the third umpire with overruling capabilities. If need be, he can consult the match referee.

This also introduces the possibility of imposing stringent penalties on players should they try and 'cheat the system' by standing when guilty. Importantly, if the visual and audio aids prove inconclusive then the doubt goes to the batsman.

In summary, the players have stepped up to the plate and decided to take a good look at themselves.

The ICC need to match that gesture and move the game forward.