The Cricket Thread.

[m100]

It's hardly any different to match fixing so a one year ban isn't enough. The australians have acted quickly in the hope that the ICC doesn't take further action which would likely be longer bans. Personally I think it should be lifetime but I reckon if they get away with less than three years they are very lucky.

[rupertramjet]

Originally Posted by marrow

Darren Lehmann has just announced that he will be stepping down as coach after the 4th Test. He stated "The feeling is that Australian cricket needs to move forward and this is the right thing to do." I heartily agree.

Quite right too, but he should have been sacked on the spot.

Playing for you country is the greatest honour you can have as a sportsman, I was doubly honoured to play for my adopted country, every anthem was fired out with pride, passion and a pure lack of belief that I was on the bloody pitch! Playing for your country should mean everything, and cheating should be far from your mind, it happens sadly in all sports, we are not excluded, but this clip of the greatest little man ever to wear our jersey, says it all, this was prior to his last test:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBpQqQ87JOg

[buttsie]

Originally Posted by m100

It's hardly any different to match fixing so a one year ban isn't enough. The australians have acted quickly in the hope that the ICC doesn't take further action which would likely be longer bans. Personally I think it should be lifetime but I reckon if they get away with less than three years they are very lucky.

Match fixing has almost to a game been about losing

Ball tampering the exact opposite

The real problem is the ICC have treated ball tampering like picking up a speeding fine
even when it turned & won games for the cheats because its too hard to police every possible way.

From mints , sunscreen , lip balm , hair gel , returning ball to keeper on the bounce
sugar in pocket , dirt on hands , ball on zippers , finger nails on ball ,

The ICC are bound by their own code

ICC to review code of conduct, ball-tampering set to be bigger offence

http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/...bigger-offence


Maybe evening up the balance of bat v ball might be a start

Drop in pitches have been a grave yard for bowlers on far too many occasions

[old alal]

Originally Posted by buttsie

Drop in pitches have been a grave yard for bowlers on far too many occasions

That and the dreadful Kookaburra ball.

There are no winners here, but for me the real culprit is yet to face the world.

[buttsie]

This is how it should have played out



If only someone had a brain

[Roger Allott]

I find it very hard to believe that none of the Aussie bowlers were involved with Sandpapergate. At the very least, one of them must surely have been there to tell Bancroft what sort of scuffing was good for reverse swing.

So Mitchell Starc's omission from the 4th test (and announcement that he'll take no part in the IPL) looks suspiciously like he's been punished without putting him through the ignominy of public scrutiny. Is the 'tibial bone stress in his right leg' just a cover story?

Something I'm finding very strange is Smith's use of the phrase "leadership group". A group surely has to consist of more than two people, doesn't it? Particularly when one of them (i.e. Smith) seemingly was only involved by saying "What are you guys (i.e Warner & Bancroft) discussing? I don't want to know."

We know that Bancroft wasn't part of this "leadership group", but it just doesn't ring true that it was only Warner plus a bit-part role for Smith.

.

[Hikarufan]

The bowlers had no part in it and shunned Warner big time. It seems to be Warner's idea and Smith being the captain took the blame. Smith is a broken man over this.

Starc, he was having trouble with the foot holes here during the Ashes on that leg. So I would not be surprised if that's the reason. He seems to land on the edge of the front foot hole.

[judy84]

I think Wood and Leach would do better opening the batting for England than Cook and Stoneman.

[Motorboater]

Cricket is a game for cheats with a guilty conscience, for people who love to express utter contempt towards others for performing similar actions that they themselves would or do feel guilty about. Little wonder the game originated from England

[bp666]

Originally Posted by Roger Allott

Something I'm finding very strange is Smith's use of the phrase "leadership group". A group surely has to consist of more than two people, doesn't it? Particularly when one of them (i.e. Smith) seemingly was only involved by saying "What are you guys (i.e Warner & Bancroft) discussing? I don't want to know."

We know that Bancroft wasn't part of this "leadership group", but it just doesn't ring true that it was only Warner plus a bit-part role for Smith.

The charges against Smith read:
(a) knowledge of a potential plan to attempt to artificially alter the condition of the ball;

(b) failure to take steps to seek to prevent the development and implementation of that plan;

(c) directing that evidence of attempted tampering be concealed on the field of play;

(d) seeking to mislead Match Officials and others regarding Bancroft’s attempts to artificially alter the condition of the ball; and

(e) misleading public comments regarding the nature, extent and participants of the plan.

The last one is relevant regarding your question on Smith's use of the term "leadership group".

CA have stated their investigations have revealed only 3 players were involved which is why they then charged Smith with (e) in response to his statement that the "leadership group" was involved, plus saying it was tape rather than sandpaper.

Would the bowlers have to know? Given the umpires get given the ball at the end of every over and will inspect it, I expect that any planned sandpapering would need to be done in small increments. Teams also will agree as a group which side to polish and which will be allowed to rough up. A ball manager is appointed to do most of the ball polishing. If the ball gets hit into a hard surface (concrete or steel drain grates) causing particular gouges on one side then the side to polish may get switched. Once Bancroft's dodgy actions were highlighted on the big screen, the umpires spoke to him and Smith, and also had a close inspection of the ball. They choose not to replace it, or award 5 penalty runs indicating they felt nothing of note had changed. This was at over 43 of SA's 2nd innings. Looking at Cricinfo's commentary, only 2 mentions mention of the ball reversing prior to the 43rd over, in over 35 and 39 and not with any significant deviation. That was first mentioned for one ball in over 48, and then after that it was only in reference to Bancroft's down the front of the trou comedy show and possible cheating.

Whatever sanding Bancroft did to the ball didn't seem to have any significant effect since the plot was hatched over lunch, noting that the SA 2nd innings was 21 overs old at lunch.

So I think it's possible that the bowlers didn't know as nothing special was happening for them.

All in all, looks like a very ham-fisted, keystone cops plan to cheat that didn't actually deliver any real results. Doesn't take away from the attempt to cheat and doesn't change my mind that the Cricket Australia punishments are a fair and reasonable response. Funny how the ICC are now going to review their sanctions for ball-tampering.