Association of Cricket Officials Issue 30 | Page 8
How the Laws
Are Made
As you will all be aware, 2017 marks a
significant moment for cricket with a
new Code of Laws produced by the
MCC. Former Laws of Cricket Advisor
Mark Williams explains the processes
required to change the Laws.
MCC is the guardian of the Laws of
Cricket, and the Laws Sub-Committee is
charged with considering any changes
to the Laws and the drafting of new
Law. Chaired by Russell Cake, and made
up of a diverse set of personalities, the
best known of whom is Simon Taufel
(former Australian Test umpire), its
members bring a variety of skills to the
table to attempt to ensure that the
process of changing Law is performed
with sufficient attention to detail, rigour
and with the best interests of the game
at heart. Meetings can be heated as the
finer points of Law are forged in the
cauldron of intense debate, but in my
experience what finally emerges is a
new Law which is robust and articulate.
When a new idea emerges, the
Sub-Committee will discuss it, and if
approved, direct the Laws Drafting
Group, made up of five Sub-Committee
members, to produce a first draft.
Subsequent refinements are made as
the draft goes back and forth between
these two groups, and can be a lengthy
process (as when the current Law 19
[Boundaries] and Law 32 [Caught]
were completely rewritten). Once the
Sub-Committee is satisfied that the new
drafted Law is sufficiently robust, the
8
MCC Cricket Committee pass a fresh
set of eyes over it, and assess whether
the new Law is in the best interests of
the game. Meantime, the ICC Cricket
Committee and the MCC World Cricket
Committee will also have their input.
The draft may return to the Laws
Sub-Committee several times for
further editing as a result of this
consultation, until the Cricket
Committee is finally satisfied and
feels able to recommend it to the
MCC Committee. Only once the latter
has given the final draft its stamp of
approval will it finally become Law.
(MCC members no longer have any
direct influence in determining Law,
although their views will always be
considered by the Sub-Committee.)
For the new Code of Laws, which
came into force this October,
consultation began with an
international questionnaire for
international, domestic and recreational
umpires who were asked to respond to
roughly 40 ideas for new Laws, as well
as to suggest any of their own ideas
for change. I will use two examples of
the latter, one successful and one
unsuccessful, to illustrate the process.
The first came from recreational
umpires all round the world who
pointed out declining standards of
player behaviour, especially in
competitive cricket. Northern Districts
in New Zealand had even acted
unilaterally in imposing a ‘red and
email us at [email protected] contact us on 0121 446 2710
yellow card system’ in their leagues,
which was spectacularly successful in
eradicating improper conduct and
changing the culture of their cricket.
The idea that such a system might
become enshrined in Law initially met
with strong resistance from the majority
on the Sub-Committee and Cricket
Committee; it was argued that stronger
umpiring backed up with tougher
sentences from disciplinary Committees
should be used to combat the trend.
Gradually the worm turned: verbal
evidence and videos from around the
world, the ECB’s national survey, which
showed that umpiring numbers and
recruitment were declining because of
behavioural issues, and successful trials
of a code of conduct and associated
disciplinary system involving sanctions
imposed by the umpires in MCCU
matches and three Premier Leagues
persuaded key members of the
Sub-Committee