# England’s Lord’s Over Rate Controversy: Why ICC Penalized England and Not India in England vs India 3rd Test

URL: https://technosports.co.in/why-icc-fined-england-england-vs-india-3rd-test/  
Published: 2025-07-16  
Updated: 2025-07-16  
Author: Ankush Mallick

In the high-stakes **England vs India 3rd Test** at Lord’s, the on-field drama wasn’t limited to bat and ball. Following the match, the ICC slapped **England with a two-point penalty** in the World Test Championship standings for a **slow over rate**, stirring controversy and sparking debates about fairness, regulations, and consistency. Critics, including former England captain Michael Vaughan, questioned why **only England faced sanctions**, especially when India, too, had their share of stoppages and on-field delays. So, what do the **[ICC’s](https://www.icc-cricket.com/)official regulations** say? And was England really at fault?

## England Penalized, India Spared: What Happened at Lord’s?

On July 16, the International Cricket Council (ICC) confirmed that England had been **docked two WTC points** for being **two overs short** of the required rate during the second Test at Lord’s against India. Additionally, they were **fined 40% of their match fee**.

![ICC](https://technosports.co.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Shoaib-Bashir-4-1024x809.webp)
*LONDON, ENGLAND – JULY 14: Shoaib Bashir of England appeals unsuccessfully during Day Five of the 3rd Rothesay Test Match between England and India at Lord’s Cricket Ground on July 14, 2025 in London, England. (Photo by Alex Davidson/Getty Images)*

The decision immediately drew backlash online. Fans and pundits pointed out that **India’s batters**, especially Rishabh Pant, who **required multiple on-field treatments** after injuring his finger, were partly responsible for the time loss. On top of that, **India captain Shubman Gill** received a lengthy massage from the team physio while fielding, further eating into the clock.

*“**If both teams were wasting time, why penalize only one?**“* asked many, echoing Vaughan’s sentiment.

## ICC Over Rate Rules: What Do the Regulations Say?

Per **Article 12.9.3 of the ICC’s WTC 2025–27 playing conditions**, several allowances are made before deciding on over rate penalties:

| Clause | Description |
| --- | --- |
| 12.9.3.1 | Time lost for on-field medical treatment **is not counted** against fielding side |
| 12.9.3.4 | Time-wasting **by the batting side** is **excluded** from over rate calculations |
| 12.9.3.5 | Delays beyond fielding team’s control (e.g. injury, crowd, equipment) are **not penalized** |
| 12.9.3.6 | **2 minutes per wicket** taken is deducted |
| 12.9.3.7 | **4 minutes per drinks break** is allowed |

This essentially means **England could not claim allowances** for delays caused by **India’s injured players** receiving medical aid or being slow between overs. Nor would the time taken for **Shubman Gill’s massage** or **Pant’s injury breaks** be counted against India’s over rate while they were bowling.

Interestingly, **both teams bowled each other out in under 80 overs** in the second innings, meaning those phases didn’t factor into the over-rate calculation at all, per **Article 12.9.4**.

## The Spin Factor: India’s Strategic Advantage

While both teams faced similar stoppages, the **style of bowling** played a critical role in the over rate differences. India employed **spin bowlers for 42.1 overs**, allowing quicker over turnover, compared to England’s 31.5 overs of spin. England’s pacers bowled **162.2 overs**, which naturally takes more time, while India’s pacers bowled only **132.3 overs**.

![Washington sundar](https://images.technosports.co.in/2025/07/Washington-Sundar-3-1024x706.webp)
*Washington Sundar*

Though the difference between the teams was just **two overs**, it proved costly for England under strict ICC enforcement.

The **ICC doesn’t make detailed over-rate calculations public**, but time lost due to uncontrollable events is reportedly recorded in their internal system, forming the basis for such sanctions.

## Vaughan Questions ICC’s Consistency

Former England captain **Michael Vaughan** didn’t mince words on social media, openly questioning why the **ICC’s over-rate policy** led to **only England being penalized** despite a match full of interruptions from both sides.

While the laws appear clear, Vaughan’s concern echoes a larger sentiment among fans and analysts: the **lack of transparency** in how exact deductions are calculated.

![Ben stokes](https://technosports.co.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Ben-Stokes-2-1024x658.webp)
*Ben Stokes*

The England vs India Test at Lord’s was yet another reminder of how **fine margins and interpretations of ICC laws** can tilt the balance. While the **rules were followed to the letter**, the situation reignited discussions about **whether the ICC should make over rate data public**, especially in an era where WTC points are so crucial.

Read More: [England Penalized WTC Points for Slow Over Rate After Thrilling Lord’s Win in England vs India 3rd Test](https://technosports.co.in/england-points-docked-england-vs-india-3rd-test/)

## FAQs

### Why was England penalized for slow over rate in the England vs India Test?

Because they were found two overs short after ICC calculated their rate excluding injury delays and other uncontrollable time losses.

### Why wasn’t India also fined for slow over rate?

India completed their overs within the allowed time, benefited from spin-heavy bowling, and delays caused by fielding injuries aren’t counted.

### What are the ICC rules on over rate calculations?

Article 12.9.3 outlines several exemptions for time lost due to injuries, reviews, drinks breaks, and time-wasting by the batting team.

### Do medical delays count against the fielding team?

No. Per ICC rules, medical attention time is exempted from over rate penalties.

### Will the ICC release detailed over rate data to the public?

Currently, no. The ICC keeps precise over rate data internal, though critics are calling for more transparency.