Essex President Labels ECB ‘Absolutely Stupid’ Over 12-Point Penalty For Too-Wide Bat

Back in April, Essex had beaten Nottinghamshire by 254 runs at Trent Bridge. During the Essex second innings, however, umpires Tom Lungley and Steve O’Shaughnessy found the bat of Feroze Khushi, their opening batter, had got “stuck in their measurement gauge”. Khushi, on 21 at that point, added another 11, but the incident went on to impact Essex’s prospects for the season.

The ECB docked Essex 12 points for the violation. They were on 149 points when they began their ongoing match (their 12th of the season), also against Nottinghamshire – but that was before the deduction. Since table toppers Surrey were on 193, Essex are virtually out of the race for this summer’s Championship title.

According to a report in The Times, Keith Fletcher, former England captain and now Essex president, said: “Gray-Nicolls [Khushi’s bat manufacturer] have backed us all the way. There are several different bat gauges and they say they followed the rules.

“I assume the ECB thought this was cheating and the appeal panel is trying to flex its muscles a bit. Feroze does not believe he did anything wrong and the whole side has been penalised, not just the one player. As a batsman I know that a few millimetres either way is not going to have any effect on performance. Umpires test bats at random and I think the ECB have been absolutely stupid.

“We realise we are not going to catch Surrey now and there is money at stake for the players and prestige for a non-Test-match club such as ourselves involved in where we finish. We are always up against it with the Test-match clubs, which already have the money to attract the best players.”

What do the Laws say?

Law 5.7.2 states: “The blade of the bat shall not exceed the following dimensions: Width: 4.25in / 10.8 cm. Depth: 2.64in / 6.7 cm. Edges: 1.56in / 4.0cm. Furthermore, it should also be able to pass through a bat gauge.”

However, there was a problem, as Essex chair Anu Mohindru observed: “It was evident that the two gauges being used were of different sizes. As a result we asked that the sizes of the gauges be checked in case one was faulty. The MCC handbook clearly stipulates the size a gauge must be. There is no mention of any allowed tolerance within the size of the aperture.

“The four gauges initially used to test the bat, both at the ground and after it was taken away by the regulator, failed to meet the MCC standard. We accept that finally, one month after confiscating the bat, it did not go through a fifth gauge that was the correct size. However, at that point other questions then raise their heads. Firstly, where had the bat been stored? Also, what right did the regulator have to take the bat away if the initial tests were conducted on gauges that did not conform to the MCC guidelines?”

Essex had appealed against the judgement, but in vain. “Since then, no other bat has been tested,” noted Mohindru. “My issue is with the apparatus for testing not being standard. I’m not suggesting we did not fail the final test and I don’t have any criticism of the umpires and match referee but it is not a level playing field if we are all using different gauges. I would like to think we are not being singled out in this matter.”

Follow Wisden for all cricket updates, including live scores, match stats, quizzes and more. Stay up to date with the latest cricket news, player updates, team standings, match highlights, video analysis and live match odds.

Click here to read article