Dear Sir,

Please allow space in your editorial pages for me to share my views on Cup Match 2025. Cup Match is far more than a cricket game — it is one of Bermuda’s most cherished traditions.

The first day of Cup Match is Emancipation Day, a solemn commemoration of the abolition of slavery throughout the British Empire in 1834 and of the brave ancestors who helped to secure our freedom. The second day is Mary Prince Day, named for the Bermudian-born activist whose autobiography sparked the abolition movement across the empire. Together, these days anchor Cup Match in memory, history and identity while thousands gather in the stands and tens of thousands more watch on television.

Every year, the cricketers of Somerset and St George’s sacrifice their time, energy and passion so that we might experience two days of spirited competition and cultural celebration. They are our sporting heroes, serving both as entertainers and as living symbols of our unity and pride.

Yet, year after year, Somerset have held dominance — while St George’s face the formidable challenge of bowling Somerset out twice in two days. Psychologists call this win-loss fatigue: the accumulated emotional and mental stress of repeated disappointment.

It isn’t just theory; it manifests in human behaviours. We have witnessed tension spill into aggression, frustration erupting into misconduct. These are symptoms of pressure, but let us be unequivocal: we must never excuse poor conduct. Misbehaviour must be addressed swiftly and fairly — not as the centre of our narrative, but as a boundary we will not cross.

At the same time, it is essential to emphasise that discipline should not overshadow the broader message: we honour every player for their dedication, not just their ability to claim victory. These men show up, year in and year out, to carry our legacy on to the field. Their value lies not only in runs scored or wickets taken, but in their commitment, resilience and sportsmanship under immense pressure.

We owe it to them, and to ourselves, to nurture a system that respects that commitment. Here are practical explanations of some ideas we might adopt to support them:

1, Continue to recognise contributions beyond statistics

It is my understanding that players are acknowledged before and after the match, emphasising character, leadership, perseverance and community service rather than just runs or wickets. Perhaps we can introduce more awards for sportsmanship or bravery under pressure — honours that lift the player’s spirit even if the match ends in defeat.

2, Support players’ emotional and mental care

Offer facilitated team conversations or peer-led debriefs where players can express frustration, anxiety or fatigue. These sessions can be led by respected coaches or retired players and do not require formal counselling. The goal is to normalise honest expression and emotional support so that pressure is managed, not internalised.

3, Improve accuracy of officiating

To that end, I strongly suggest the introduction of a decision review system, even in a simplified form. This would provide teams the opportunity to challenge questionable decisions and help to reduce controversy. While we may not have the same technological infrastructure as international cricket, a scaled-down version — using replay cameras and an off-field review official — could be an achievable goal for Cup Match.

Perhaps someone may offer to sponsor DRS to the fullest.

DRS allows teams to challenge certain on-field umpire decisions — such as leg-before wicket or caught behind — by using technology to review them. It is not continuously monitoring every decision, but only when requested by players or umpires. On-field mistakes can be overturned after review using tools like:

• Hawk-Eye (ball tracking) — predicts whether a ball would hit the stumps in lbw appeals

• UltraEdge (or Real-Time Snicko) — detects faint edges off the bat or pad via sound

• Hot Spot — infrared imaging to show ball contact on pad or bat (less common owing to cost)

TV replays — used for run-outs, catches, stumpings, boundary decisions, etc.

How It works

• Each team have a limited number of unsuccessful reviews (three in Test matches, two in ODI/T20)

• After an umpiring decision, a player signals by making a “T” with their hands within 15 seconds if they wish to challenge it. Batters can challenge an “out” ruling; captains can challenge a “not out”.

• The third umpire listens to the appeal, uses available technology (Hawk-Eye, UltraEdge, etc.) and reviews all angles to confirm or overturn the call

• If the available evidence is inconclusive — especially in borderline cases — the original on-field decision stands under the principle of “umpire’s call”. The review does not count as unsuccessful in that case

4, Introduce modest structural tweaks to rebalance opportunity

• Alternating first batting team annually: if at least once in the match they bat first, St George’s can avoid always chasing under time pressure

• Overs cap in first innings — for example, a maximum of 90 overs — so that defensive batting cannot consume all available time, forcing more active play and strategic urgency

These ideas are not about undermining tradition. In fact, cricket legend Sir Garfield Sobers once proposed similar changes, recognising that they encourage real competition instead of passive score retention. While some have resisted such suggestions in the past, others in cricket leadership have acknowledged their merit.

Cup Match was conceived not just as a sporting contest, but as a tribute to our emancipation, unity and identity. As noted by David Burt, the Premier, the holiday roots lie in our ancestors’ resistance and resilience, and we honour those when we attend with purpose, celebration and respect.

Let us always value the players, regardless of the scoreboard. Let discipline be fair, but not the narrative. Let appreciation outweigh admonishment. Let us preserve Cup Match by uplifting its character and reminding ourselves that the greatest victory is found in dignity and honour, so long as the game is played in mutual respect — for community, tradition and the men who sustain it.

Thank you for considering this perspective.

GLADSTONE THOMPSON

St George’s