- July 18, 2025
Cricket fans are fans of the on-field drama. But they love the off-field drama even more because it can go off the charts. The latest Test — England vs India at Lord’s — had all the usual elements of drama, an element of sledging, plenty of fiery send-offs and, now, added post-match drama. Former England captain Michael Vaughan has stirred the pot in the debate surrounding the ICC’s ridiculous decision to act only on England’s slow over-rate, with no penalty imposed on India. Has cricket diplomacy gone wrong in this case, or is this simply blatant selective enforcement? Let’s break it down a bit.
Vaughan’s Outburst: A Legit Grievance or Just Frustration?
Michael Vaughan is not shy of expressing his opinion, especially on X (formerly Twitter), and this time he has gone in hard at the ICC. His argument? England and India had the same slow-over rate at Lord’s, but only Ben Stokes and his team were penalized with match fee reductions and very important WTC points taken away.
It’s perplexing. If both teams were guilty of delay, why did they punish only one team? It usually results in a penalty offense. Vaughan said ‘beyond me’, and to be fair, many fans agree with him. The explanation given by the ICC was that England did not take a hearing, so does that excuse India? We need to know how these decisions are made, especially when you have WTC points, which ultimately lets you play in the final, riding on the big decisions.
India’s Spicy Counter: Was Crawley Time-Wasting?
Now, we will not disregard the other mini-drama that played out on Day 3. Shubman Gill was furious that Zak Crawley took his time to face the last delivery of the day, claiming that he was hit on the hand. Cue expletives, a nice bit of subcontinental heat, and a group of vigorous fielders.
From India’s angle, wasn’t Crawley killing time? If slow play is punishable, shouldn’t such acts be scrutinized too? These elements make things more complicated because it was not only the bowling side killing time. Batters also have their bag of tricks to kill time, yet those never seem to receive the same level of punishment.
On day 4, we had Mohammed Siraj giving Ben Duckett a volatile send-off, just showing how heated the series has become. In a Test that has already been filled with emotion, the ICC has only set off more flames with the biased punishment.
Is ICC’s Inconsistency Damaging the Spirit of the Game?
This whole situation is more than just points and penalties. If one team faces punishment, but the other team, which has behaved similarly, receives no punishment, then people will begin to ask, “What is it I am watching?” Is this bias, and is this transparent?
Every point counts in the WTC age. The penalty has brought England’s points percentage down from 66.67% to 61.11%. Some serious consequences may arise for England, especially given the tight situations that may arise for spots to qualify. When you have a competing team let off for the same infraction, it risks damaging the competitive integrity of the tournament.
If ICC is serious about being a professional body, they have to enforce the laws of the game in a uniform and correct way. If they don’t, then these sanctions seem arbitrary and unfair rather than real reasons to protect the respect and standards of the game.
For more, visit JeetBuzz News to read our quality Cricket Blog updates. Explore if you want to reminisce and enjoy all of your favourite cricket players and nostalgic match moments. To ensure that you never miss out, keep updated and join in the fun!
