Batsman damaging pitch

[jerryspaniel]

On Saturday one of the opening batsmen chose to bat way out of his crease. The problem was that he was very tall (probably 6ft 8-10in). He also had a very wide stance and this took his front leg into the protected are of the pitch without even going on to the front foot. He was also wearing spikes.
In your opinion, should the umpire (which one?) ask him to bat further back so that a) his front foot isnt in the protected area and b) so that, if he were to go on the front foot, his left foot wouldnt be on the protected area?
If so, can this be done prior to any damage, on the basis the fact that he is bound to damage the pitch by the nature of where he is standing (and what he is wearing)?
Is it the same if any batsman 'dances down the pitch'?
Is it all covered by 42.14?

[tippexii]

The "protected area" isn't relevant for the batsmen, only the bowler. The batsmen (and other fielders) are under obligation not to damage any part of the pitch unnecessarily - they can't start digging up the pitch outwith the protected area.

I wouldn't ask the batsman to move back unless his guard position is manifestly unreasonable - if he's batting a yard or 4 feet out of his ground, I think that's his choice. He's entitled to take guard, and start his run from that position, but he has to get off the pitch (the entire 10 feet width, not just the protected area), as soon as possible.

[gooders]

Whilst I would agree that the protected area is not relevant per se to the batting side, I would make sure that the batsman was well aware that I was not happy about his tactics, by insisting that he was not getting off the pitch quickly enough in my opinion. If he were then to ask what he could do about it, I could easily suggest to him that he may wish to retake his guard a little nearer to the popping crease.
You also have to bear in mind that if the bowler is alert, he might try to throw down his wicket (which he is of course entitled to do) prior to entering his delivery stride, to try to run him out.
Oh isn't life fun as an umpire?

[johnfgolding]

This has also been covered in this link:
nompere.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=basiclaw&action=display&thread=169

I posed the question to a mentor of mine who quoted
"Can speak with the authority of none other than Steve Bucknor on this one
Was due to do a game last year but got asked to stand down to let SB have a game between Tests - went to watch anyway and exactly this happened.
He immediately told the batsman he could not do this and made him move back - I guess his authority was not going to be questioned but the principle still applies.
(Batsman actually asked for his autograph on his bat after the game!)"

[jerryspaniel]

I very much appreciate the replies and the link to previous threads on the subject.
I suppose my problem with this action by the batsman was that it HAD to damage the pitch and it was clearly avoidable (he didnt have to bat there). The batsman would have been about 18st given his height. He was wearing spikes and he wasnt gloing to run sideways in his first movement as no one does. The pitch was dry and liable to break up under the weight and spikes.
I also didnt like the way a batsman of the team batting first could rough up the pitch in the protected area whereas a bowler (whose team were going to bat on it second), couldnt.
I was the square leg umpire, so I suppose I should have brought it to the attention of my colleague and together we could ask the batsman to move back. However if he says 'the protected area is no relevance to batsman' how far back should he be asked to move his guard? Commonsense would suggest to a point where his actions cant damage the pitch - which might affect batting - so behind the protected area!!
Fortunately he was out before it became a serious issue. Next time I will ask him to move back.