England v India: Should cricket introduce red and yellow cards?

The fracas between England's James Anderson and India's Ravindra Jadeja during the first Test at Trent Bridge has raised the question: is cricket too soft on bad behaviour?

Unlike in most other team sports, cricket umpires have no power to eject

 players from the field of play, with any penalties imposed by officials -

 such as the International Cricket Council's match referees - after the match.

Introducing football-style red and yellow cards would enable umpires to deal 

with misdemeanours as and when they occurred, but would be a fundamental 

change to a sport proud of its gentlemanly traditions.

The concept has been frequently considered by the MCC and was 

discussed by the ICC earlier this year.

Here are the cases for and against, plus your chance to have your say.

Behaviour on a cricket field is getting worse and will continue to get 

unless the umpires are given more power to intervene.

We need a system that operates throughout the formative years of a cricketer's career and acts as a deterrent against bad behaviour. Players need to understand that if they behave in a certain way they will be punished, and if they repeat their offence then the punishment will escalate.

Wakankar has been

That is where the idea of red and yellow cards comes in. It may sound radical but they said the same about bringing in coloured clothing 20 or so years back.

The exact working of the system would need more thought and discussion, but I would suggest a yellow card should be shown to a bowler for persistently abusing a batsman. I am not talking about sledging, but personal abuse and foul language that has no place in the game.

The card would result in them having to leave the field at the end of the over for a fixed period of time. If that bowler was in the middle of a great spell, or if the captain has a strategy based around him, it could be really harmful to the team. That evening, in the team meeting, the player could be singled out for having cost his side the game.

If a batsman is repeatedly wasting time, then the umpire could show him a yellow card, meaning he is is retired for an hour or until the next wicket falls. If a fielder misbehaves, he is demoted down the batting order, and so on.

And if something really serious happens - I'm thinking of the infamous dust-up between Javed Miandad and Dennis Lillee or something equally inexcusable - then the umpires would show a red card and you'd be out of the match.

This can all be refined, but the fundamental aim is to handle misdemeanours on the field and let the umpires be the boss on the cricket pitch.

Dennis Lillee of Austra

Let's keep the lawyers out of this. No-one is killing anybody, after all.

 Let the umpire take charge in the same way that the referee does in football, rugby or hockey. Why should cricket be different?

Waiting until after the game and then issuing a fine achieves nothing.

 Unless the punishment causes hurt where it hurts, it has no effect.

Look what happened to South Africa fast bowler Vernon Philander in Sri Lanka.

 He was accused of ball-tampering, and it was established that he tampered 

with the ball and yet what did he get? A fine of 75% of his match fee.

I don't know whether he writes the cheque or whether his board pays it for him,

 but either way it's no deterrent to anyone thinking of tampering with the ball.

Introducing cards would add another level of theatre to the game, but that is merely incidental. The important thing is to make sure the game is played the way it is supposed to be played.

If you introduced red and yellow cards from the grassroots of the game, players would learn to respect their opponents and avoid the kind of behaviour that might see them have to leave the field.

Make the umpire the boss and it will remove all the animosity that is blighting our game.