By IANS,
New Delhi : It would not be all that easy to take away Kanpur’s status as an international venue following an adverse report on its “poor” pitch provided for the third Test against South Africa, a top Uttar Pradesh cricket official said Thursday.
The five-day Test ended within three days, largely due to undue assistance to spinners from the pitch, with India winning by eight wickets to draw the series 1-1. Incidentally, the second Test in Ahmedabad had also ended inside three days, with South Africa winning by an innings and 90 runs.
“What about the Ahmedabad pitch? There too the match ended in three days,” Rajeev Shukla, secretary of the Uttar Pradesh Cricket Association (UPCA), noted.
Earlier Thursday, the International Cricket Council (ICC) disclosed that its match referee Roshan Mahanama, who officiated in the series, had termed the pitch “poor” in his report and the ICC gave the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) 14 days to comment on it.
Shukla, however, seemed confident that Kanpur, which has staged 20 Test matches since 1952 and 11 One-Day Internationals, would retain its status.
“It won’t be that easy to take away Kanpur’s status,” Shukla told IANS.
While speedsters from both sides dominated the Ahmedabad Test with assistance from the pitch, taking 21 of the 27 wickets to fall, spinners grabbed 18 of the 32 wickets to fall in Kanpur.
“Once that response is received by the ICC, then it is considered – along with the match video – by the ICC’s general manager-cricket (David Richardson) and the Elite Panel ICC chief match referee Ranjan Madugalle,” it said in a statement.
“They have the power to impose a sanction that can range from, at one end of the scale, a warning to the home board (along with corrective action required), through a fine imposed on that board, up to a withdrawal of international status for a period of time for the venue in the case of repeated offences.
The home board has the right of appeal against any sanction imposed and a member of the ICC’s code of conduct commission would hear that appeal. The decision of that appeal would be final and binding on both sides.