Siraj Fined by ICC for Shoulder Charge Against Duckett

Mohammed Siraj Fined: India’s fast bowler Mohammed Siraj has been fined by the ICC for a shoulder bump on Ben Duckett after dismissing him on the fourth day of the Lord’s Test.

Mohammed Siraj Fined: Indian fast bowler Mohammed Siraj has been fined for a clash with Ben Duckett after dismissing him on Day 4 at Lord’s. He was found guilty of breaching the ICC Code of Conduct and has been penalised with a fine and demerit points. The incident occurred during England’s second innings of the India vs England third Test match when Siraj dismissed the England opener. Siraj celebrated in front of Duckett, leading to a collision between the two players.

Siraj Sanctioned for Shoulder Collision

An ICC statement said that Mohammed Siraj was found guilty of breaching Article 2.5 of the ICC Code of Conduct and has been fined 15% of his match fee. He has also been awarded one demerit point, his second in a 24-month period. Article 2.5 relates to using offensive language, behaviour or gestures after a batsman is dismissed in an international match, or provoking an aggressive response from the batsman.

What Happened Between Siraj and Duckett?

The incident happened on the last ball of the sixth over of England’s second innings. Duckett was caught by Bumrah at mid-on off Siraj’s bowling. While celebrating the wicket enthusiastically, Siraj made shoulder contact with Duckett. However, replays showed that Duckett had moved towards Siraj, resulting in the contact.

India’s ace pacer has been penalised for breaching the ICC Code of Conduct on Day 4 at Lord’s.#WTC27 | #ENGvINDhttps://t.co/5GLw5Q6HHf

— ICC (@ICC) July 14, 2025

Heated Argument with Duckett and Crawley on Day 3

Mohammed Siraj provided India with two early breakthroughs in England’s second innings on Day 4. He dismissed Ben Duckett and celebrated vigorously. This exuberant celebration was partly fuelled by an earlier incident at the end of play on Day 3, when Siraj, along with other teammates, engaged in a heated argument with Duckett and Crawley.