You are Suspended.

They are falling like nine pins. Players are getting banned, suspended and fined. They're blaming each other for using delaying tactics (in a 20 over game). Sachin Tendulkar meanwhile is still injured (and is being spared all this nonsense).

It emerged in the midst of SlapGate, that even though the IPL had all the trimmings - on field umpires, third umpires, fourth umpires and match referees, they didn't actually have a code for the referees to enforce. The garrulous Farrokh Engineer eventually used the ICC Code of Conduct in his ruling on SlapGate. It now appears that the IPL has appropriated the ICC's Code of Conduct for Players and Officials and further extended it beyond the ICC's wildest dreams. What we have, is the first ever instance of a referee suspending an umpire in a game of cricket! Farrokh Engineer has suspended the on-field umpire Pratap Kumar for heeding Sourav Ganguly's request to refer a disputed catch to the third umpire.

It began with this incident involving Shane Warne and Sourav Ganguly. Warne's side claimed a catch against Ganguly. Ganguly wasn't sure if it was clean, and didn't leave the wicket. The fielding side was convinced that it was clean, as was the square leg umpire (Rudi Koertzen, no less!). It all rested with the umpire at the bowler's end who needed to be convinced that the watch was clean. Now, if the umpire at the bowlers end was convinced that it was clean, he should have given the batsman Out. Usually, if the umpire at the bowler's end has been unsighted, he will take the word of the umpire at square leg. In any event, Ganguly requested that a referral be made (which he ought not to have done), and a referral was made.

So far so good. Farrokh Engineer has effectively ruled that Pratap Kumar went against his own better judgement and was influenced by Sourav Ganguly's request in making the referral. Is it really possible to prove that sort of thing? Also, if it is infact proved, is a suspension enough? Shouldn't Pratap Kumar get kicked out?

In any event, the most breathtaking thing here is that the Umpire has been dragged by the match referee into the fray, along with the players. This is unprecedented ground - where a referee sits in judgement of an umpire. Given Engineer's decision, why should he not suspend an umpire if a couple of LBW's are given wrongly, especially if in both cases, you have the batsman showing his bat to the umpire as the appeal was in progress (indicating an inside edge)? The whole premise of the Umpire, is that they are above the fray. They are not in competition with the players, and hence cannot be judged alongside the players. Referee Engineer has done just that.

Shane Warne's suggestion that Ganguly asked the Indian umpire to make the referral (as reported by Cricinfo), is dragging the whole matter down further into a charge of favoritism. Since the catch was taken by Graeme Smith, and the square leg umpire was Rudi Koertzen, why would a similar charge of favoritism not apply when considering the case of the square leg umpire immediately ruling that the catch was clean? This is especially interesting given that the third umpire, Asad Rauf eventually ruled in favor of the batsman, against Rudi Koertzen. With Farrokh Engineer enforcing his adopted British voice in the matter, what we seem to have is a perfect commonwealth brouhaha.

Of course, all these charges of parochialism are absurd, but that is what this seems to have descended into. The whole thing seems to closely resemble World Wrestling Entertainment, which resides deep in the bowels of Cable TV, with its make believe umpires and contests. The convenient application of the ICC's Code of Conduct to grant an element of seriousness to proceedings, coupled with the complete moral and logical relativism which marks Farrokh Engineer's treatment of the umpire, is just one more signal that the IPL is not serious about Cricket.