Kathmandu, November 1
The events before Saturday night’s Nepal Premier League (NPL) match between Sudurpaschim Royals and Biratnagar Kings have raised serious questions about how tournament rules are being enforced.
With persistent rain forcing the cancellation of the first match of the day, the chances of the second game going ahead also appeared slim. However, after grounds staff worked tirelessly to prepare the pitch and outfield, the weather cleared in the evening. Following repeated inspections of the playing conditions, match officials decided to stage a five-over contest.
The toss was scheduled for 7.25 pm, with the match due to begin at 7.41 pm. Both teams’ captains had agreed to the arrangement. However, the toss did not take place at the scheduled time. Biratnagar captain Sandeep Lamichhane arrived on the field, but Sudurpaschim captain Dipendra Singh Airee did not.
Confusion began after reports emerged that Sudurpaschim’s overseas players were unwilling to play. The team’s manager Sunil Thapa, coach Misbah-ul-Haq and captain Airee held lengthy discussions with Cricket Association of Nepal (CAN) secretary and NPL Governing Council coordinator Paras Khadka, as well as match referee Wendell Labrooy. Aireehad also earlier been seen speaking with Khadka near the boundary.
Despite the delay, discussions continued. Sudurpaschim players and coaching staff briefly left the field and returned to the dressing room.
After more than an hour of uncertainty, Sudurpaschim informed officials at 8.54 pm that its players were ready to play. The toss was then rescheduled for 9 pm, with the match set to begin at 9.15 pm.
Neither Sudurpaschim nor CAN has publicly provided a detailed official explanation for the delay. However, the damp outfield and the reluctance of some overseas players to take the field appeared to be central to the discussions.
Decision to start the match after the cutoff time
The most significant aspect of the incident was the time at which the match eventually began.
The five-over match was initially scheduled to start at 7.41 pm. But after that deadline passed, officials decided to begin at 9.15 pm — more than an hour after the scheduled start time.
Under the rules, a match cannot be played once the cutoff time has passed. However, amid the confusion, the toss took place nearly an hour and a half after the originally scheduled time. Officials reportedly had to delay the match because of the unusual circumstances.
Speaking after the game, CAN secretary Paras Khadka said the match should proceed once the match referee and umpires had deemed the ground fit for play. According to him, the delay occurred because Sudurpaschim’s overseas players were unwilling to participate and the team had to be persuaded.
“Once the match referee and umpires decide that the conditions are suitable for play, the match must go ahead. Technically, the game had to be played,” Khadka said. “When the overseas players were not ready to play, we urged them to take the field. That is why it took time.”
Khadka said the team could have forfeited the match if it refused to play under the rules. However, CAN tried to persuade Sudurpaschim to participate rather than allow the situation to escalate into a controversy.
“We could have directly declared a forfeit. But we tried our best to persuade them to play without creating a dispute,” he said.
He also stressed that cricket’s rules apply equally to everyone, not to any particular team or individual. Once the match referee and umpires had declared the ground fit, the match had to proceed, he said.
Another controversy before the first ball
Even after the long delay, the controversy did not end when the match was finally set to begin. The umpires had to intervene over Sudurpaschim’s fielding arrangement before the first delivery.
Sudurpaschim had initially not sent West Indies player Sherfane Rutherford onto the field. Tek Rawat was fielding in his place. After the umpire instructed Rutherford to come onto the field, he joined the team.
During the first three overs, Rutherford was seen fielding with his hands in his pockets.
Coming after the disagreement over overseas players’ participation before the match, the delay in Rutherford taking the field raised further questions about Sudurpaschim’s preparations.
Biratnagar was ready to play, says Lamichhane
Biratnagar captain Sandeep Lamichhane said his team had been fully prepared to play.
After the match, he said both the Nepali and overseas players in his squad were ready to take the field and that his team was prepared to follow the officials’ decision.
“Our players, including the overseas players, were fully ready to play. We wanted to play. But our position was that we would abide by whatever decision the officials made,” Lamichhane said.
He also said the efforts of spectators who had waited at the stadium throughout the day and grounds staff who worked to make the field playable deserved recognition.
“For me, the most important thing is cricket. We should appreciate the spectators who stayed at the stadium from the time it rained in the afternoon until 11 or 12 at night, and the grounds staff who worked continuously to make the field fit for play,” he said.
“Perhaps the opposition team’s overseas players were not ready. The officials would be in a better position to clarify that,” Sandeep added.
CAN’s responsibility to enforce the rules
Saturday’s incident has raised questions about how tournament organisers balance playing conditions, player safety and the enforcement of competition rules.
The match referee and umpires are responsible for deciding whether the ground is fit for play. Khadka maintained that teams are required to follow their decision once they have declared the conditions suitable.
However, CAN needs to clarify how the decision was made to start the match after the scheduled cutoff time had passed. If overseas players had raised concerns about their safety or the condition of the ground, the official basis for those concerns also needs to be made public.
Given Khadka’s own assertion that the rules apply equally to all teams, CAN now needs to explain Saturday’s events clearly and determine whether any further action is required under the tournament regulations.
