Should cricket introduce red and yellow cards?

Mate, interesting question.Introducing a red card for a player who is not disciplined is fine,but who will you bring in his place..?? 12th man..??
The laws of cricket state: "If there is any breach of the Spirit of the Game by a player failing to comply with the instructions of an umpire, or criticising his decisions by word or action, or showing dissent, or generally behaving in a manner which might bring the game into disrepute, then the umpire concerned shall immediately report the matter to the other umpire. The umpires together shall: (i) inform the player’s captain of the occurrence, instructing the latter to take action. (ii) warn him of the gravity of the offence, and tell him that it will be reported to higher authority (iii) report the occurrence as soon as possible to the Executive of the player’s team and any Governing Body responsible for the match, who shall take such action as is considered appropriate against the captain and player or players, and, if appropriate, the team concerned."

That would be quite an interesting addition to cricket, and though we won't see much of a physical confrontation, there are the occasional verbal assaults. If the use of a red card translates to a player leaving the field, then it might change the way subs are used in the game. Probably they may choose a different penalty for each card, maybe it could directly imply percentage of match fees, and subsequent cards depleting it. Looks like the ICC wants to keep it clean.

Stuff the "red," "yellow", "periwinkle"  or any other cards!  Cricket umps should have the same power as baseball umps: if a
player's verbal abuse goes over the line the umps should be able to give him the heave-ho right on the sport.  Replace him with
12th man, even a 13th or 14th if any more of these "gentlemen players" have to be chucked.    >

Why does cricket have to emulate other sports? Yes there are a few altercations and heated  moments in the game but nothing compared to some of the violence that we see in other sports. Cricket for the most part has been played with exceptional spirit so I dont really think a few bad incidences should cause a fundamental change in our sport.

Maybe so, but there's been plenty of ugly incidences in the game--Holding kicking down stumps,  Lillee kicking Javed (think that's who it was) and
disgruntled players barging into umps who could do absolutely nothing.  Umps should at least have, as a last resort, the option to chuck out these  [pseudo] "gentlemen."  >

No.

Umpires need to control matches more effectively and players need to understand where to stop if not bans..... fines mean nothing.

Reminded me of:

Also not really. There's a purpose to cards in football - the other player's act does influence the game directly. Not sure if you can say the same about cricket. Don't know what the big deal is - let them get on with the game, then fine or ban or whatever accordingly by ICC. 

Sure, let pseudo-gentleman  kick down the stumps and  Jeeves the [lackey] umpire remake them as if nothing's the matter.  Have I got 'em straight? Wanna boot 'em again? >

That is a significant point.

The only issue with teh ICC is that they apply the rules inconsistently and it was interesting hearing Ian Cappell talk on this subject which supports the West indian perspective.