David's match should be replayed, fearing "it could cause anarchy in decision-making by umpires''.

On Tuesday night, St. David's confirmed their intention to appeal the decision by the board, and yesterday, in a prepared statement, the umpires questioned how the Bermuda Cricket Board of Control reached its decision to replay the match.

"The Bermuda Cricket Umpires Association were shocked to read about the rescheduled league match between Devonshire Recreation Club and St. David's Cricket Club on Tuesday, September 21, 1993,'' the statement, which came from president Randy Butler, began.

"The umpires are still wondering under what laws of cricket the decision was made. At no time did the losing captain protest to the umpires. The decision stands.'' The statement then quoted laws 21 and 22, which pertain to the acceptance of a result and a bowler being incapacitated or suspended during an over: "After the umpires have agreed the scores and the captains of both sides have accepted them, the result of a match cannot be changed at any later stage or date. Cases are on record where attempts have been made to change results, but it is emphasised that the result of a match cannot be altered by any committee or arbitrating body at any later date.'' "In the event of a bowler breaking down and being unable to complete an over the remaining balls will be bowled by another bowler. Such part of an over will count as a full over, only as so far as each bowler's limit is concerned.'' Continued the BCUA in its statement: "We further understand that a bowler bowled 11 overs. This is incorrect as no bowler bowled more than their quota.

Dale Fox, who was unable to complete an over, had his captain, with the umpire's permission, complete the over and the captain (James Pace) was credited for the final over, even though he only bowled a few balls.

"At no time was the Bermuda Cricket Umpires Association informed of any irregulation concerning the match, which was won fairly by St. David's Cricket Club.''