A. The on-field behaviour listed in Regulation 5 mirrors the conduct provisions in the Laws of Cricket and additional conduct provisions have been included in Regulations 6-7 and 9-13. Relevant Cricket Organisations can stipulate that additional categories of on-field and/or offfield behaviour will constitute an On-Field Breach or an Off-Field Breach in accordance with the version of these Regulations that they adopt. If so, the Regulations and definition of On-Field Breach and Off-Field Breach should be amended accordingly. For the avoidance of doubt, Relevant Cricket Organisations cannot exclude any of the categories of on-field or off-field 

behaviour which fall within the definition of On-Field Breach or Off-Field Breach in the version of these Regulations published by the ECB from time to time. 

B. Relevant Cricket Organisations can stipulate that players under their jurisdiction are obliged to report additional categories of offence to them. If so, the definition of Relevant Criminal Offence should be amended accordingly. 

1.1. When a definition or regulation refers to someone (or something) being “under the jurisdiction” of another body or organisation (for example, the definition of “Participant”), this means that the relationship between that person and other body is such that the body or organisation has official power to make decisions or judgments in respect of that person. For example, when a cricketer signs up to join and play for a cricket club, they agree to be bound by the rules and regulations of that cricket club and are therefore officially under that cricket club’s jurisdiction. 

2.1. These Regulations do not apply to competitions organised by Professional County Clubs, including any academy fixtures, nor the Tier 3 Competitions. 

2.2. If a Recreational Cricket Board or National County arranges or participates in ad hoc or friendly matches that do not form part of a formal competition structure, these Regulations will not apply to those fixtures and the Recreational Conduct Regulations will apply instead. 

2.3. These Regulations also do not apply to competitions organised by University Centres of Cricketing Excellence or Colleges of Sport. 

2.4. The ECB GCR will apply to any competitions organised by the ECB, including County Age Group and Emerging Player Programme fixtures. 

3.1. The ECB’s Anti-Discrimination Regulations can be found on the following ECB webpage, 

along with guidance on the ECB’s Anti-Discrimination Regulations: 

https://www.ecb.co.uk/about/policies/regulations/recreational-cricket. 

3.2. Although every case will be considered on its facts, the starting position is that all OnField Offences which involve an alleged breach of the ECB’s Anti-Discrimination Regulations should be considered equivalent to a Level 3 breach and charged accordingly. The Disciplinary Officer and/or the Disciplinary Panel may consider that an alleged breach of the ECB’s Anti-Discrimination Regulations in a particular case is not equivalent to a 

Level 3 breach, based on the severity of the alleged conduct, and charge and/or sanction on that basis. 

4.1. Relevant Cricket Organisations are responsible for implementing the disciplinary processes contained in these Regulations in respect of those Participants that are under their jurisdiction. In the case of Recreational Cricket Boards, this will be those Participants that commit On-Field Breaches and Off-Field Breaches in any competitions organised by a Recreational Cricket Board, as well as Off-Field Breaches committed by Participants 

where there is no obvious connection with any other Relevant Cricket Organisation. An example of the latter might be where a cricketer at a Club which is affiliated to a Recreational Cricket Board posts something discriminatory on social media in the close season. Relevant Cricket Organisations may make other arrangements delegating responsibility for cases that fall within their jurisdiction, as described in paragraph 4.2 

below. 

4.2. Relevant Cricket Organisations may already have structures in place where there is an agreed division of responsibility between Clubs, Leagues and Recreational Cricket Boards about which categories of case will be determined by which entity. Whilst the ECB would prefer for there to be consistency in this across the game, we appreciate that in many cases these systems are operating effectively and therefore are not seeking to disrupt 

this approach at this stage. However, in order for these Regulations to be effective it is crucial that there is consistency of process, procedure and approach to sanctions. Accordingly, Relevant Cricket Organisations who wish to retain that existing structure will not be in breach of these Regulations provided that whichever Club, League and/or Recreational Cricket Board has jurisdiction over a particular category of cases complies with 

the requirements in relation to the disciplinary and/or appeals process as set out in these Regulations. 

4.3 Relevant Cricket Organisations should consider, and clearly stipulate to all Participants: 

5.1. Disciplinary Reports and Written Complaints must only be submitted in good faith, i.e. with honest intentions and containing correct information (to the best of the individual’s knowledge). The primary purpose of allowing Written Complaints to be submitted by individuals other than the umpire is to capture offences that an umpire did not see but which would constitute an offence if the umpire had seen it. 

5.2 Disciplinary Reports and Written Complaints should include a description of the alleged breach including: 

5.3 A Relevant Disciplinary Body may become aware of a potential or alleged breach of these Regulations by other means than a Disciplinary Report or Written Complaint, for example by identifying an inappropriate social media post which has not been independently referred to it. Notwithstanding the fact that the Relevant Disciplinary Body has not received a Disciplinary Report or Written Complaint, the Relevant Disciplinary Body may consider this conduct in accordance with the process set out in these Regulations. 

5.4. Relevant Cricket Organisations may wish to stipulate in the version of these Regulations that they adopt, that there should be a deadline for Disciplinary Reports to be made. 

5.5. Where an action (or inaction) is determined to be “prejudicial to the interests of cricket” and therefore a breach of the Regulations, this means it is an act (or omission) not covered by any of the breaches listed specifically in Regulations 5, 6(a)-(b), 7(a)-(d), 7(f), 11(a) (f), or 11(h)-(i) but is an act (or omission) that a reasonable person would consider detrimental to the ethos, reputation and/or environment of the game. Examples of this may include 'running a book’ on outcomes or having a sponsor that is banned through 

other advertising policies. 

C. Relevant Cricket Organisations can impose more rigorous conduct obligations for captains or Clubs if they wish. However, they cannot impose less rigorous conduct obligations for captains or Clubs than are set out in these Regulations. 

6.1. Posting, repeating, commenting, or supporting posts or comments by others that breach the Regulations may itself constitute a breach of the Regulations. For example, liking or otherwise promoting or supporting a comment that breaches the ECB’s Anti- Discrimination Regulations is likely to result in a breach of the Regulations not only for the person who posted the comment in the first place but also for any Participant who 

supports that post. 

6.2. If a Participant is alleged to have breached Regulations 11-13 as a result of having liked or supported a discriminatory comment but claims that someone else logged into their social media account to submit that “like” (or other supportive comment/gesture), this will not necessarily prevent regulatory action being taken but should be taken into account by the Adjudicator or Disciplinary Panel. 

7.1. Following receipt of a Referral, the Disciplinary Officer may conduct any further investigation as they deem necessary to limit the chances of vexatious complaints and ensure there is a full understanding of the circumstances in which the complaint arose. 

7.2. Once any additional investigation is carried out, if a Disciplinary Officer decides that there is sufficient information to charge the Participant for an alleged breach of the Regulations, and the Disciplinary Officer determines it is right to do so having considered the information and evidence provided, the Charge Letter issued may include a charge for a different breach to that detailed in the Referral. 

D. Relevant Cricket Organisations may decide that all cases should be determined at a Hearing and therefore disapply the Summary Procedure at Regulations 22-28. If this approach is chosen, all of Regulations 22-28 should be removed from the version of the Regulations that the Relevant Cricket Organisation adopts. 

8.1. Relevant Cricket Organisations may decide that it is not necessary for lower-level offences to be determined by a Disciplinary Panel at a Hearing. By way of example, it may be appropriate for on-field offences at Level 1 and Level 2, or off-field offences which would constitute a Level 1 or Level 2 offence if they had been carried out on the field (e.g. dissent), to be determined using the Summary Procedure rather than at a Hearing. However, on field offences at Level 3 and Level 4 and all other off-field offences should be determined by a Disciplinary Panel. Where the sanction potentially available is significant, for example a third Level 2 on-field breach within 24 months resulting in a 12-match ban, the case should be determined by a Disciplinary Panel rather than under the Summary Procedure. 

8.2. If a Relevant Cricket Organisation decides to adopt the Summary Procedure, it should adopt clear internal guidelines on the types of cases that should be determined at a Hearing and the types of cases that should be determined using the Summary Procedure. These guidelines should then be applied consistently to all cases the Relevant Cricket Organisation has to deal with. 

9.1. Reasonableness will depend on the circumstances of the case but, in most instances, it is reasonable to request a response to a Charge Letter within seven days. 

9.2. Any Hearing should be arranged in a timely manner. As the matters brought under the Regulations will likely involve volunteers in most instances, this will likely differ for each matter. However, arranging a Hearing in a timely manner means allowing sufficient time for all the parties concerned to prepare adequately, taking account of their availability and other commitments but not scheduling a Hearing so far in advance that it causes unreasonable delay. There must still be efficient handling of all matters and determination within a timeframe that allows everyone concerned to recall the matter adequately. Although a Hearing may be rescheduled if the Respondent is not able to attend at the original date or time, this is designed to ensure that the Respondent is given an opportunity to attend and will not be used by the Respondent as a way to 

unreasonably delay proceedings. If the Disciplinary Officer feels that the Respondent is seeking to unreasonably delay proceedings (for example, if they have requested multiple postponements of the Hearing without very good reason) they will take this into account when deciding whether to agree to the Respondent’s request to reschedule the Hearing. 

9.3. It may be appropriate for Relevant Disciplinary Bodies to seek to ensure that they arrange a Hearing within 28 days of the Charge Letter. However, this timeframe may not be appropriate in all cases and a shorter timeframe may be considered more expedient in the interests of the case. A longer timeframe may also be considered in extremely complex cases. 

9.4. The Disciplinary Panel Chair has the discretion to set a disciplinary timetable as they consider appropriate. This means they can administer the proceedings according to a timetable they deem fit for the matter at hand (albeit whilst ensuring compliance with the Regulations). The Disciplinary Panel Chair should notify the parties, within a reasonable timescale in advance of the Hearing, of their expectations on all parties and 

provide the parties with the opportunity to: 

9.5. Although it is a matter for the Disciplinary Panel Chair to determine how to run the Hearing, most Hearings relating to a breach of the Regulations should be inquisitorial (taking on a fact-finding approach to get to the bottom of the situation as it is alleged) rather than adversarial and oppositional (which is the approach taken in criminal or civil proceedings). The Disciplinary Panel Chair should make clear that the parties will have 

the opportunity to raise any matters they consider relevant to determining whether the charge(s) can be made out and allow for an appropriate length of Hearing to provide sufficient time for this. 

9.6. All parties should be given information explaining that they will have the opportunity to put forward any observations, question the other party or parties, and/or make any submissions on the matter (including in relation to the other side’s evidence). 

9.7. The Disciplinary Panel Chair and Disciplinary Panel should: 

9.8. Disciplinary Panels should seek to ensure that decisions are produced within 7 days of the respective Hearing. 

E. The only permitted amendment Relevant Cricket Organisations can make to Regulation 32 is that they may stipulate a fixed deadline for a Respondent to respond to the Charge Letter by. In all cases however the Disciplinary Panel Chair must have the power to grant the Respondent additional time to respond to the Charge Letter in appropriate circumstances. 

F. Relevant Cricket Organisations may amend Regulation 34 to stipulate how a Hearing will typically proceed, provided that in all cases the Disciplinary Panel Chair must have the power to alter these directions in appropriate circumstances. 

10.1. Adjudicators, Disciplinary Panels and Appeals Panels will determine matters on the “balance of probabilities”. This means that when the Adjudicator or relevant panel is considering whether the alleged breach has been committed or not, they must be satisfied that it is “more likely than not” that the alleged breach took place, taking account of the evidence submitted and heard. Therefore, the Adjudicator or relevant panel do not have to be absolutely sure that it took place but satisfied that it is more likely that it did. 

11.1. As noted in Appendix 3, it is important for decisions to be clear about the scope of any ban, including when a specific time period starts and ends. In the interests of clarity, it is therefore suggested that Disciplinary Panels and Appeal Panels adopt the following template wording, amended as appropriate for the circumstances: 

“The [Disciplinary Panel/Appeal Panel] imposes a [X match ban]. This ban will apply to all cricket, be effective immediately and remain on [the Respondent’s] record for 24 calendar months from the date of the breach. The ban will therefore be served in the next [Match/X Matches] [Respondent] is due to participate in, regardless of whether [that match/those Matches] [is/are] in an ECB Competition.” 

“The [Disciplinary Panel/Appeal Panel] imposes a ban of [X days], which will commence on [Y] and end on [Z] (the “Period”). This ban will apply to all cricket, be effective immediately and remain on [the Respondent’s] record for 24 calendar months from the date of the breach. The ban will therefore apply to any matches [the Respondent] is due to participate in during the Period, regardless of whether [that match/those matches] [is/are] in an ECB Competition.” 

11.2. Where a Disciplinary Panel or Appeal Panel is considering imposing a playing suspension on a Participant under the age of 18, it is recommended that any such suspension should be expressed by reference to the number of matches – rather than weeks – the Participant must miss. This is because a suspension expressed in weeks can have a disproportionately punitive effect on a junior cricketer, who may be playing in multiple cricket environments throughout a given week. 

11.3. Where a sanctioned individual has multiple roles in cricket, for example they are both a player and a coach/umpire, any suspension imposed should clearly identify whether it relates to just playing in a match, or whether it also covers other activities such as coaching and umpiring. For example a one match ban imposed on a player that also umpires should be expressed in terms that enable that individual to know whether they are just banned from playing in a match or whether they are also prohibited from umpiring in that match. 

12.1. For first instance decisions, the Disciplinary Panel may choose to make a costs order against the Relevant Disciplinary Body in instances where the alleged breach is found not to have been committed and/or the allegation is found to have been spurious or vexatious. In such instances, the Respondent against whom the Referral has been made may be reimbursed for reasonable costs as the Disciplinary Panel deems appropriate. 

12.2. For appeals, the Appeal Panel may also choose to make a costs order in instances where the appeal is successful or if it feels that one party has acted unreasonably by bringing the appeal or in any way during the appeal process. 

12.3. All parties are encouraged to keep costs to a minimum and the Appeal Panel Chair will take any unreasonable incurring of costs by either party into account when determining whether to require one party to pay more of the additional costs. 

13.1. Relevant Cricket Organisations may wish to publish the outcome of disciplinary casesconcluded under these Regulations on their websites. However, before doing so, Relevant Cricket Organisations should consider the data protection implications of publishing information about Respondents on a public forum. 

14.1. If the Notice of Appeal or required administrative fee is not submitted within 7 days, the appeal will not proceed unless there are reasons justifying otherwise, which will be decided by the Appeal Panel Chair in their sole discretion. The appeal fee is requested to cover the administrative costs associated with holding a hearing and/or otherwise determining the matter. For example, there may be costs associated with the travel of the panel members or hiring a room for the day. If no administrative costs are incurred, the Appeal Body may choose to refund all or part of the fee in accordance with Regulation 57. 

14.2. All procedural rules and principles that apply to Hearings at first instance also apply to appeals. The process and timing requirements for Disciplinary Panel Hearings (detailed in the Regulations and above at paragraph 9 of this guidance) will also apply to Appeal Hearings. 

G. An Appeal Body may stipulate an appropriate fee in respect of appeals. The maximum fee that would be considered appropriate is £150, but the Appeal Body may stipulate a lower figure. An Appeal Body may also stipulate a different timeframe for a Notice of Appeal to be filed. 

H. The only permitted amendment an Appeal Body can make to Regulation 51 is to stipulate a fixed deadline for the Relevant Disciplinary Body to respond to the Notice of Appeal by. In all cases however the Appeal Panel Chair must have the power to grant the Relevant Disciplinary Body additional time to respond to the Notice of Appeal in appropriate circumstances 

I. It may be appropriate for the Disciplinary Panel Chair to suspend a Respondent from participating in cricket until the Hearing has concluded, or the Appeal Panel Chair to impose a sanction imposed by a Disciplinary Panel until an appeal has concluded, where the allegations which have been made are serious, the sanctions imposed (or likely to be imposed) are severe and it would potentially bring the sport into disrepute for the Respondent to participate in cricket whilst the disciplinary process is ongoing. 

J. An Appeal Body may amend Regulation 53 to stipulate how an Appeal Hearing will typically proceed, provided that in all cases the Appeal Panel Chair must have the power to alter these directions in appropriate circumstances. 

K. An Appeal Body may amend Regulation 57 to stipulate a different limit for any award of costs. 

15.1. In instances where a Participant discloses a Relevant Criminal Offence, in accordance with 

15. Regulation 11, the Relevant Cricket Organisation receiving that disclosed information must abide by its duty of confidentiality and all applicable data protection laws. 

15.2. Any Relevant Criminal Offence should be disclosed to the Club Safeguarding Officer in the first instance and, if that Club Safeguarding Officer has any concerns in relation to the handling of the matters disclosed, they should escalate it only to the County Safeguarding Officer. Such matters should only be disclosed beyond those two people and discussed at committee level in complex cases and only following discussion and agreement with the County Safeguarding Officer. The ECB’s Safe Hands Training Course provides further 

information on this. 

15.3. Full information about the relevant ECB contacts for referring any safeguarding concerns can be found here: https://www.ecb.co.uk/about/policies/safeguarding. 

16.1. The UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018 are the primary data protection legislation in the United Kingdom. It is a legal requirement for all Relevant Cricket Organisations (including Disciplinary Panels and Appeal Panels) to comply with data protection law when processing personal data. If Relevant Cricket Organisations do not comply with their obligations under data protection law, the Information Commissioner can impose various sanctions on the Relevant Cricket Organisation including preventing the use of the 

personal data and/or imposing a significant financial penalty on the Relevant Cricket Organisation. Relevant Cricket Organisations may wish to obtain independent legal advice to ensure they meet their obligations. 

16.2. The UK GDPR provides that, where personal data is obtained, the person or organisation receiving the personal data must provide transparency information (usually referred to as a ‘privacy notice’) to each individual whose personal data is received. If the data is not received directly from the individual (as may be the case following receipt of a Disciplinary Report or Written Complaint), the person or organisation receiving the personal data must provide the privacy notice within a reasonable period following receipt of the data and, in any event, within one month. What amounts to “reasonable” will depend on the circumstances, but as a general principle, the Relevant Disciplinary Body should take all steps to communicate with the data subject (about whom personal data is received in a Disciplinary Report or Written Complaint) as soon as is reasonably practicable, providing the privacy notice with the communication, to ensure compliance. 

16.3. All Relevant Cricket Organisations will need to include appropriate references to the Regulations and its provisions in their respective privacy notices to ensure that they comply with transparency obligations in data protection law when collecting, processing and/or sharing personal data as a result of handling disciplinary matters. The UK GDPR provides a list of what information must be included in a privacy notice, but in the context of these Regulations it will be important to explain the collection, processing, disclosure and use of information relating to the particular individual and their activities. In particular, this should address the conduct of any applicable disciplinary procedures and any associated issuing and recognition of penalties. Independent legal advice should be sought on this point where necessary. 

16.4. A template privacy notice, which can be adopted and amended as appropriate for use by Relevant Cricket Organisations, appears in Appendix 5. The privacy notice should be provided to each person whose personal data is obtained, either at the point that their data is obtained or, if the personal data is not obtained directly from the individual, within a reasonable period (e.g. when the relevant Participant is notified of any allegation made against them). 

17.1. When handling proceedings involving an under-18 or an adult at risk who is a witness, alleged victim or alleged offender, the processes that are followed must pay due consideration to safeguarding and welfare issues and associated data protection laws. Full guidance from the ECB on disciplinary proceedings that involve under-18s or adults at risk can be found on the ECB’s website: https://www.ecb.co.uk/about/policies/safeguarding/kit-bag-resources. 

17.2. Reasonable adjustments should be made for anyone with a disability. Whilst the reasonable adjustments that may be required will differ depending on the nature of the disability, we have set out below some examples of the ways in which a person’s disability may affect the application of these Regulations and practical steps that can be taken to assist when such issues arise: