Cricket: ODIs Aren’t Proper Cricket Edition

[Paxter]

I’m not sure the problem here was “knowing what is permitted”. There’s no grey area in bringing a foreign object onto the ground to amend the ball’s condition. But the breach detection and punishment regimes probably need an overhaul. Players should know that they will get caught and they will face severe repercussions.

Of course, the other argument is that we should just legalise ball tampering altogether....

[Jeor]

I think legalising ball tampering will open up a huge can of worms. We might actually see orbital sanders being brought onto the grounds...well, maybe not, but I think when you open up an avenue like that, you never know how inventive teams will get to push the boundaries of that new opening. They already push the boundaries enough as it is.

The foreign object stuff is obviously not on. Picking at the seam or scratching the ball with your boot spikes or fingernails is also not on. With all that being said, surely the answer is just to say that the only thing you are allowed to do to the ball is shine it using your saliva and clothes, and that doing anything else to change the condition of the ball is not allowed? The whole mint thing is one way around it but I don't see that being a huge issue.

The other side of the equation being that the umpires need to be empowered to use third umpire camera views, anything they need if they feel something odd has gone on and then they change the ball immediately.

The ICC also needs to allow ball tampering to be cited across all levels of the disciplinary system (Levels 1, 2, 3, 4). Currently it seems it's only a Level 2 offence but there should surely be gradations of ball tampering such that it could be higher or lower.

[Paxter]

1 hour ago, Jeor said:

With all that being said, surely the answer is just to say that the only thing you are allowed to do to the ball is shine it using your saliva and clothes, and that doing anything else to change the condition of the ball is not allowed?

These are the current rules as I understand them, in addition to the prohibition on any artificial additives to saliva. As I mentioned earlier, I think the possible regime changes will be more around crime detection and punishment, as opposed to the definition of the crime.

[The Marquis de Leech]

6 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

You think that is bad. We've had tests starting in Wellington in mid-April in the past. April in Wellington is a month where you can get daytime maximum temperatures of 12Deg C and biting southerlies blowing straight up from Antarctica. 

For sanity's sake, we've never had anything that late here. The latest-in-the-year test in Dunedin was one against Sri Lanka on 18-22 March, 1995 (and, yes, there was rain). The latest ODI was 30th March, 1974.

[Paxter]

Reports now saying that the Aussie cricketers want Warner ejected from their hotel to avoid any tensions between players. The “mastermind” isn’t the most popular right now...

[Jeor]

Good. I've always disliked Warner and there's a large amount of schadenfreude I have for him right now. Everything we hear says that he's one of the biggest sledgers in the game but he can't take it when someone bites back. Plus, his quote of a couple of years ago when he says that he would be very disappointed in any teammates who were driven to ball tampering. He's a hypocrite of the highest order and I rather nastily hope his career goes down the toilet.

Renshaw's been recalled so it's clear that at least one if not both openers (Bancroft/Warner) are not going to be in action for the 4th Test, at this point I'm betting both. The real question is how long Smith/Warner are banned for, and whether anyone else is going to get caught up in the net (looks like Lehmann will resign but I wonder about any other players in the team).

[Paxter]

So. Lehmann apparently staying on as coach (!), but Warner, Smith and Bancroft returning to Aus and all likely to face significant time out of the game. No other players involved. 

Paine is the new skipper and The Big Show, Renshaw and Burns are in the squad for the Wanderers. You’d think Handscomb would play ahead of one of those guys though?

More to follow no doubt!

[Paxter]

I’ll just add that I’m shocked Lehmann thinks his position is tenable (he is responsible for the culture of the side).

Also, it’s looking more and more likely that Warner will not play for Australia again. His age, his apparent instigation of the ball tampering and his ability to be a T20 mercernary are all factors I’d think.

[Hereward]

Do they really expect people to believe it was all Warner and Smith, and Bancroft just happened to overhear and volunteer? Lehmann and the walkie talkie? None of the bowlers had an input into what they wanted the ball to be like or noticed? Bullshit whitewash.

[Paxter]

Agreed. Michael Clarke is outraged - believes it’s unthinkable that this is the full story. Lehmann for me is the egregious non-scalp in all of this.

[Yukle]

55 minutes ago, Paxter said:

I’ll just add that I’m shocked Lehmann thinks his position is tenable (he is responsible for the culture of the side).

Also, it’s looking more and more likely that Warner will not play for Australia again. His age, his apparent instigation of the ball tampering and his ability to be a T20 mercernary are all factors I’d think.

 

34 minutes ago, Hereward said:

Do they really expect people to believe it was all Warner and Smith, and Bancroft just happened to overhear and volunteer? Lehmann and the walkie talkie? None of the bowlers had an input into what they wanted the ball to be like or noticed? Bullshit whitewash.

How stupid are the bowlers that they didn't notice how quickly the ball was being roughed up? Or the fact that the ball kept returning to the same player?

There are only 16 in the squad. The idea that they weren't all in on this is hard to swallow... and I agree that the idea Boof-head didn't know is utterly and completely ridiculous.

He never struck me as one for having any brains at all, especially after his ban for being a racist bumface.

[williamjm]

48 minutes ago, Hereward said:

Do they really expect people to believe it was all Warner and Smith, and Bancroft just happened to overhear and volunteer? Lehmann and the walkie talkie? None of the bowlers had an input into what they wanted the ball to be like or noticed? Bullshit whitewash.

It does seem inconsistent with Smith's initial mention of the 'leadership team' discussion, which is a weird way to describe talking with David Warner only. If they think they've managed to draw a line under the affair by sending the three players home then I think they're definitely mistaken.

[Jeor]

Yes, "leadership group" definitely implies more than two people plus Bancroft. I'm sure there will be more to the story than what's come out today.

Still, to send all three home while they (presumably) dig up more dirt is probably the only decisive thing they could do right now. Just before the Fourth Test, to send anybody else home they would have needed strong evidence they were involved and circumstantial stuff probably wouldn't have cut it. I expect more will come out with time, but in the limited period they had between Tests that's probably all they could do. Sutherland did seem pretty certain it was only those three, though - he could have left himself more wiggle room.

If it does stick to only the three of them, Smith and Warner are going to be in much more trouble. It's easier to give out long bans to two players who were directly culpable, than it is to spread punishment among half a dozen with varying levels of involvement.

It sounds like Warner has really burned some bridges with the team and people are saying he may not play for Australia again. Can you play for the IPL and all those T20 leagues if you're banned?

 

[Paxter]

Whether Lehmann knew or not is beside the point in my view. He has to take responsibility for a rotten team culture.

And yes I’m not sure why Smith would have been so keen to shield Warner with his now infamous “leadership group” remark.

One thing I will say: in retrospect I’m pleased for Smith and Bancroft that they at least faced the media and confessed. Warner is an absolute coward, as well as a dim-witted villain.

[lmanion]

Warner is everything wrong with the team really if he wasnt there I cant see that this would have happened. He constantly sledges everyone which I have no problem with but you have to be able to take it and as soon as someone gives it back to him he cries foul. Unfortunately Smiths career is down the toilet and will never be looked at in the same light as his record so far deserved. He really failed as a leader which is a little ironic as it was against SA that he probably had his best moment of leadership.

[Jeor]

Yes, the more it sounds like Warner is trying to save his own skin. He apparently gave the contradictory testimony to CA officials that the bowlers knew all about it and leaked that info to Channel Nine. Cricket Australia have clearly not accepted that information by saying it was confined to Smith/Warner/Bancroft.

If that's the case, then the vice-captain not fronting up to the press conference as well - which, now that I think about it, is probably the right thing for a VC to do to support his captain whether or not he's involved - and leaving the other two to do it is basically the definition of cowardice.

 

[Yukle]

3 hours ago, Paxter said:

One thing I will say: in retrospect I’m pleased for Smith and Bancroft that they at least faced the media and confessed. Warner is an absolute coward, as well as a dim-witted villain.

Did he though?

Watch Smith's press conference again. When asked a question, he turns to Bancroft so he can answer it. He doesn't take full responsibility for his team at all. He keeps making the young guy the fall guy. The one with the fewest tests, with the career least settled in and the position that's most tenuous who will do anything to stay in the squad.

[Paxter]

My point is that Smith was a lot braver than Warner. I agree that he tried to deflect some of the heat onto Bancroft in that presser, which was hardly edifying. Ideally it would have been Smith, Warner and Lehmann facing the media heat, with Bancroft present but not doing a lot of the talking.

Overall I must say I have little sympathy for Bancroft. Yes he’s a few years younger than Smith and less experienced at the international level, but he’s an experienced First Class cricketer and he knows right from wrong.

[Jeor]

Hindsight is always 20/20 but yes I agree the press conference should have been Smith, Warner and Lehmann. For anything of that magnitude, surely the real leadership team has to front up - the Captain, Vice-Captain and Coach of the team and then anyone directly involved (Bancroft).

I do think Bancroft should be banned as well, but probably not to the same severity as Smith and Warner. He needs to be punished because he carried out the act and could have chosen not to, but if it was Warner's brainchild, the imbalance of power and condoning by captain and vice-captain should count as somewhat mitigating circumstances. In the same way that Herschelle Gibbs and Mohammad Amir got off more lightly when being led astray by more influential and established senior players and captains.

 

[Paxter]

Yes, the similarities with the Butt and Cronje sagas are certainly coming through here. Some people are arguing that ball tampering is less of a hanging offence and far more widespread than match-fixing. That may well be true, but there is something about the circumstances here (the tape and its hiding, the premeditated nature, junior players acting under the direction of senior players) that differentiate it from other ball tampering episodes.