zipper on the ball is just as bad. bottlecaps from the Pakistan team was a classic. Its been a part of cricket for yonks and nothing i've seen is telling me their transgressions were approximately 10x worse than anyone else had previously been sanctioned for. Their ban was the kind of ban you get for match fixing.
Cultural review of Australian cricket.
- Thread starter kidgorgeous
- Start date
- Tagged users None
zipper on the ball is just as bad. bottlecaps from the Pakistan team was a classic. Its been a part of cricket for yonks and nothing i've seen is telling me their transgressions were approximately 10x worse than anyone else had previously been sanctioned for. Their ban was the kind of ban you get for match fixing.
https://www.cricketaustralia.com.au/cricket/-/media/20A51657C8FC48BC91C446549C9015F7.ashx
I found some CA thing from 2017 and level 4 penalties didn't have a specific section for ball tampering the specifics seem to be for things like sexual assault physical violence ect but i could be looking at the wrong document so obviously what i say below should be disregarded if i read the wrong document )
the only specific mention of ball tampering i could find in that document was 2.2.8 changing the condition of the ball in breach of law 41.3, this is under level 2 offenses.
If this is still under the ambiguous umbrella of simply being against the spirit of the game and thus you could charge one tampering player with a level 4 and other player with a lower level offence then i don't really see why that would change what i said?
If i looked at the wrong document and its the former and all ball tampering must be a level 4 penalty fair enough they had to go level 4 but if its the latter well we are still in the same place, it's all just opinion on whether this warranted that level 4 penalty or charge.
p.s. i didn't look at the updated version of this document as it says it was from effective from sept 2018 on and thus wasn't applicable at the time
edit.... it also appears this section they were charged under is a generic catch all for serious offenses but the exact same wording appears in all sections from level 1 to level 4, it is not a level 4 and only a level 4 charge and disrepute or on field cheating can be covered by this generic catch all section but the level charged is discretionary.
Last edited:
I can't believe the press release. They say:
1. Howard a distinct lack of cricket nous - It took them 8 years to work that out?
2. His lack of attention to domestic and grade cricket led to his downfall - no s**t Sherlock. People have been saying this for quite some time.
3. He didn't have a feel for the job or a feel for the game - once gain, it took them 8 years to work that out?
So he won the position based purely on a powerpoint presentation. Well done CA. Why is it most people in sports administration in Australia can't see past making $$$$$$? There should be a few nervous people in the AFL right now. They're no good at paying attention to domestic football either.
Fundamentally - I don’t care what Pakistan and Sri Lanka do with their players - they are both unstable countries - the ICC is a weak body - we all know this - I want CA to be the squeakiest board and hold the game up to the highest standard, they’ve performed poorly at doing that and despite having $$ in the bank the game is at an all time low. Regardless the players involved in Capetown had to face bans - it’s possibly the only thing that they’ve got right for a long time.
Because we're just a little bit better than them. We actually have standards and principles, unlike the others.
sherb
Hall of Famer
Because the standards CA requires of its players (and penalties it imposes for breaches of those standards) are completely independent of those of the boards of other countries. They can be either more harsh or more lax.
I really can't believe I have to explain this.............
IMHO, where they've made a mistake was allowing anyone to shine the ball. When I played cricket, the only person who could shine the ball was the bowler. This meant getting the ball back to the bowler ASAP. No bowler would have liked to carry sandpaper around in his jocks
It seems to me, most, if not all of the ball tampering incidents in the past 20-30 years have been enacted by non-bowlers.The bit about sun cream made me smile. When I played, it seemed all the rage for bowlers to take the field covered in thick layers of cream which seemed to disappear very quickly. I often wondered about this.
sherb
Hall of Famer
I've only just noticed this.
What a wonderfully bizarre response to my opinion on the matter.
They were charged under 2.4.5, which is level four. And they weren't charged for ball tampering, it was the cover up and lying about it. Specific wording is in this thread about five times already.
There is nothing in that document that says what they were accused of can only be dealt with under level 4, they could have listed those exact charges and made it a level two or three offence which is all I was saying.
I understand they were charged with more than just tampering, I also understand ca had scope to charge them with a lower level offense rather than a level four. a level which seems to primarily be for things as serious as sexual assault and physical assualt.
Ca had a variety of options available to them, they made a judgment call and went for the harshest charge followed by a harsh penalty but it wasn't their only option available in their code of conduct so why can't I then disagree with their call here?
This whole thread is people shitting on ca for the awful moves they have made in recent years but on this judgement call I'm not allowed to disagree? As I said earlier I know this is only my opinion but it's not less valid than those who agree with the bans simply because their views are in line with ca.
Last edited:
Yep pretty much spot on, also the fact that they let public opinion have a big bearing on the penalties , what a crock of s**t these penalties were, looks like the bans will be lifted now melt downs imminent.
It’s like when players slide on the ground when the ball has stopped. They just want to get their creams dirtyIMHO, where they've made a mistake was allowing anyone to shine the ball. When I played cricket, the only person who could shine the ball was the bowler. This meant getting the ball back to the bowler ASAP. No bowler would have liked to carry sandpaper around in his jocks
The bit about sun cream made me smile. When I played, it seemed all the rage for bowlers to take the field covered in thick layers of cream which seemed to disappear very quickly. I often wondered about this.
Zero chance the bans will be lifted. Players accepted them at the time. And they are more than halfway through. Cricketers Association were grandstanding.
I don't think anyone is actually expecting the entire ban to be lifted, but rather that the ban on FC cricket be removed at least for the second half of the shield season and maybe the BBL
IMHO, where they've made a mistake was allowing anyone to shine the ball. When I played cricket, the only person who could shine the ball was the bowler. This meant getting the ball back to the bowler ASAP. No bowler would have liked to carry sandpaper around in his jocks
The bit about sun cream made me smile. When I played, it seemed all the rage for bowlers to take the field covered in thick layers of cream which seemed to disappear very quickly. I often wondered about this.
I often wondered about Warnie running his finger through his hair then polishing the ball. Was it sweat or hair wax/ product?
probably a bit of both, but like the poms nearly turning diabetic in '05 after sucking on so many mints. iirc they found a mint that basically turned into a paste within a couple of seconds then just lathered it on the ball it was practically varnish.
The longer it goes on the more i think we are realizing Reverse swing is like the Doosra - impossible to do without breaking the rules.
Can we get back onto the cultural and management issues at CA?
https://www.news.com.au/sport/sacke...t/news-story/8c4c874aa667a5389fab28727e9ba901
Like this bloke, who wanted his secretary to cook breakfast for him.
https://www.news.com.au/sport/sacke...t/news-story/8c4c874aa667a5389fab28727e9ba901
Like this bloke, who wanted his secretary to cook breakfast for him.
Gee, I wonder where the arrogant and elitist culture came from...
You really need to question how a boofhead like Amarfio got the job in the first place, let alone survived for 6 years. It's amazing what's rising to the surface all because someone scraped a cricket ball with sandpaper. I'm starting to think there is a lot more to come yet. This is what happens when administration is unaccountable ...... AFL beware.
Ball tampering may end up being the best thing to happen to Australian cricket.
Ball tampering may end up being the best thing to happen to Australian cricket.
Fortunately for Cricket there is still a moral compass that it has to answer to - because the game is international. The AFL not so much, many secrets remain untold from the Essendon supplements saga - that was the opportunity for bloodletting that was missed
Smoooothy
TAKE THAT BACK!!
- Jan 12, 2005
- 24,302
- 22,266
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- North Adelaide; ConeyIslandWarriors
see, w***ers like that will just move on to the next job, and will continue doing it. some poor woman will be providing him breakfast again very soon
- Nov 13, 2006
- 4,329
- 3,194
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Boston Celtics
I remember reading that at the time - *ing disgrace
Similar threads
