WC 2003 - ICC commissioner rejects Lanka~~s plea on interpretation
Published: Sunday, February 16, 2003, 23:53 [IST]
Justice Ahmed Ebrahim, 2 March 2003
Justice Ebrahim reached his decision based on written submissions from the ICC technical committee and the BCCSL. The judgment has now been formally passed to ICC legal counsel, and forwarded to the Sri Lanka team, the event technical committee and ICC chief executive Malcolm Speed, the release said. The decision of the appeals commissioner is final and binding, the release added.
SA coach hopes a hero emerges in crucial tie vs Lanka
Bangalore: International Cricket Council (ICC) appeals commissioner justice Ahmed Ebrahim on Sunday upheld the decision of the ICC event technical committee, in its interpretation of clause 21.9.1 of the playing conditions of the World Cup, according to an official press release from the ICC."In doing so Justice Ahmed declined the appeal lodged by the Board of Control for Cricket in Sri Lanka (BCCSL), which disputed the event technical committee's interpretation of the criteria used to decide which teams progress to the Super Six stage of the tournament," the release said.The summary of Justice Ebrahim's decision:"Clause 21.9.1 outlines in the clearest of terms the criteria for qualification for the Super Six stage in the event of more than two teams finishing the Group stage on equal points. Various stages have been laid down on how a determination is to be made. The words are clear and unambiguous. "Nowhere does the approach suggested by the Sri Lankans appear in that Clause. I have no difficulty in interpreting what appears to me to be the clear and unequivocal meaning of the wording of the Clause, which in my view accords with the interpretation of the events technical committee (ETC)."The point was also made by Sri Lanka that New Zealand should have been penalised as far as its net run rate is concerned for forfeiting the match against Kenya. There is no provision within the regulations to penalise a team, which has forfeited a match in the way that New Zealand did. Therefore the ETC had no right to do anything more than recognising that the match be awarded to Kenya.In the result the appeal must fail."