CricInfo Home
News Home

NEWS FOCUS
Rsa in Pak
NZ in India
Zim in Aus

Domestic
Other Series

Several factors, ranging from a perception of injustice, a lack of respect for the umpires and a response to the ill-will between teams sparked the bottle-throwing during the seventh One-Day International (ODI) between the West Indies and Australia last Sunday.

Sociologist Richard Carter, former West Indies batsman Sir Conrad Hunte, Australian journalist Richard Craddock and numerous callers all gave their reasons on Radio 900's Best and Mason last Tuesday.

``The reason behind it, I think, lies more in the feeling of injustice. Persons generally felt that an injustice had been done,'' said Carter.

``I don't think that the bottle-throwing was particularly directed to any individual. It was more a reaction to what happened.''

Carter noted that a similar incident happened 20 years ago.

Host Carlisle Best said that it was also a response to the build-up of ill-will because of the unsportsmanlike behaviour of the Australians.

He recalled the incidents of Glen McGrath's spitting near Adrian Griffith and one of the Waugh brothers snatching his hat from the umpire, and said there was dissent in the prolonged appeals.

But Craddock said the Australians played the game in a very tough manner and made no apologies for doing so.

He said Sherwin Campbell should also take some of the blame for the incident.

Sir Conrad said that he did not immediately see the incident between Campbell and Brendon Julian as obstruction, but it should not have drawn the response that it did from the crowd.

``I think we can never condone that. In this case, maybe he was right to call him back but you should never overrule the umpire's decision like that because of a mob reaction and legally it is not right,'' Sir Conrad said.

Both Best and co-host Andrew Mason agreed that the crowd clearly seemed to be making the decision, and the Australians were more concerned about their safety, than whether the obstruction was deliberate.

Carter also said that a different type of fan was going to cricket, one who did not really appreciate the shots and basics of the game.

But Craddock said this was not peculiar to the Caribbean because he has noticed it worldwide, moreso at ODIs.

``Modern sports are not played with the same kind of gentlemanly approach that sport might have been played two or three decades ago,'' Carter said.

``Sometimes it verges on hostility and it is going to be manifested in the response of the persons who go to support their respective teams.''

With this in mind, Sir conrad called for a renewal of the gentlemanly spirit in the game where there would be more interaction off the field among the players.

``If the respect for the rules and the respect for authority was in place, there would have been no need for him (Campbell) to come back, because the respect for the decision of the umpire would have been there,'' Carter added.

``They recalled Campbell to basically quell the crowd. To recall a person to satisfy the crowd is going down a wrong road.

``What happens tomorrow if the crowd becomes dissatisfied with something, and they will?'' he asked.

The issue of the role of the third umpire and whether the obstruction should come into his domain was then raised.

Former Test umpire Lloyd Barker was strongly against this, saying that it should rest with those in the middle.

``The third umpire never, ever, ever, ever tells the umpires who are standing out there if he thinks they are right or wrong.

``It destroys one another's confidence and you just don't do that,'' he said.

Carter said that the ``fall back'' of the third umpire would erode confidence and lead to more people questioning their ability.

Craddock said that the Australians were very happy to see the tour end and it was sad to say that because it was wonderful cricket.

``It is unfortunate that there is a small sourness towards the end of the tour and the Australians are, quite unfortunately, very happy to be leaving for the World Cup.''

He said there should be a blanket rule where the home team should be made to lose the match when things like this occur.

Sir Conrad said that it would be an over-reaction not to have matches at Kensington Oval because of the incident, but with the right security every thing would be all right.