David Warner

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Then his PR team needs a kick up the arse.

If that's the case, it's this simple: "I'm sorry I can't answer that question, I've got a CA hearing coming up and I'm not supposed to prejudice that with any answers now. I'll do my best, but please understand that's the process."

Even Warner could have memorised that.

I think they'd have preferred to leave out any reference to Warner trying to wiggle out of his penalty down the track.

But after the fallout from his non-answers was so fierce figured they had to.

 

[PrideOf]

I think they'd have preferred to leave out any reference to Warner trying to wiggle out of his penalty down the track.

But after the fallout from his non-answers was so fierce figured they had to.

Surely they could see the whole non-answer would be perceived as guilt. SURELY?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Surely they could see the whole non-answer would be perceived as guilt. SURELY?

?

The perception is that there is a lot that has been left unsaid.

Who else knew, whether it has happened before etc.

 

[PrideOf]

?

The perception is that there is a lot that has been left unsaid.

Who else knew, whether it has happened before etc.

He knew the questions were coming, so he had two ways to answer.

1. "I am taking full responsibility for my part in this ... I am taking full responsibility for my part in this ... I am taking full responsibility for my part in this"
2. "I can't provide the detail I want to because I'm about to face a CA hearing and been advised not to say anything now, but I will."

He chose (or was advised) to take the wrong one.

 

[The_Reaper]

CA would love Warner to appeal.

Then they get to take the moral high ground with massive bans and then lose the appeal and get Smith back after six months instead while pretending that this reduction in ban is because they are getting forced to do so by the law.

Smith gets to still keep the sympathy by not appealing but once you've reduced Warner's suspension because of an appeal you naturally have to reduce Smith's as well.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

He knew the questions were coming, so he had two ways to answer.

1. "I am taking full responsibility for my part in this ... I am taking full responsibility for my part in this ... I am taking full responsibility for my part in this"
2. "I can't provide the detail I want to because I'm about to face a CA hearing and been advised not to say anything now, but I will."

He chose (or was advised) to take the wrong one.

The second one would be a DISASTER

He would basically be saying "this is a complete snowjob by Cricket Australia so they've asked me to keep my trap shut until we've had a chance for our own private hearing and then they can stage-manage which details to release"

 

[JackOutback]

Surely they could see the whole non-answer would be perceived as guilt. SURELY?

Do you apply the same logic to Bancroft? He was explicitly asked what went down and said he wouldn't talk about other players. Some double standards really being applied here.

CA would love Warner to appeal.

Then they get to take the moral high ground with massive bans and then lose the appeal and get Smith back after six months instead while pretending that this reduction in ban is because they are getting forced to do so by the law.

Smith gets to still keep the sympathy by not appealing but once you've reduced Warner's suspension because of an appeal you naturally have to reduce Smith's as well.

Absolutely; had a feeling it would go down this route the moment the bans were announced. They would definitely prefer Warner to appeal than Smith, given his role as CA's chosen sacrificial lamb.

 

[PrideOf]

Do you apply the same logic to Bancroft? He was explicitly asked what went down and said he wouldn't talk about other players. Some double standards really being applied here.

I haven't mentioned Bancroft at all, and yet you've already decided there are double standards.

BigFooty, never change.

 

[JackOutback]

I haven't mentioned Bancroft at all, and yet you've already decided there are double standards.

BigFooty, never change.

I didn't say you did, I asked you a question that you chose not to answer. The double standards comment refers to the past several pages pillorying Warner for not answering questions and crying crocodile tears, while praising Smith and Bancroft, who also didn't answer questions and shed tears. This is a fast evolving thread, don't take every post personally, I just responded to yours, that was all.

 

[Dixie Normous]

He sounds like a brain damaged 15 year old from some backward country town. Did he even finish high school??

 

[revo333]

Atleast he has realised he may never play for Australia again.

Adios Amigos!

 

[DazalenkoUBewty]

Atleast he has realised he may never play for Australia again.

Adios Amigos!

may never = will

 

[Frank Bunn]

My take is that he doesn't want to burn the house down if there's a chance he can sue his way back, but he also didn't want to close the door on telling the 'full story'. If CA doesn't play ball he'll probably go for a tell-all payday.

Sounds about right.

He knows the full story but he's holding back. If CA slaps him too hard he'll spill the beans which brings the whole house down on the leadership group, the coaching staff, and whether they pulled this trick in previous games.

 

[thejockey]

Out of the 3 I thought Bancroft clearly performed the best

Warner hedging his bets at this stage I don't really think he actually has a clue what he is doing or even what his advisers have pathed out for him
One sentence he wants to play for Australia in 12 months , then he might retire .

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Sounds about right.

He knows the full story but he's holding back. If CA slaps him too hard he'll spill the beans which brings the whole house down on the leadership group, the coaching staff, and whether they pulled this trick in previous games.

What could possibly be the point of this? When the house comes down, what then? Give us the consequences, in order (other than feeding another media and social media frenzy).

 

[Frank Bunn]

What could possibly be the point of this? When the house comes down, what then? Give us the consequences, in order (other than feeding another media and social media frenzy).

They are all gambling on the house not coming down.

The problem is that they have all been shown to have lied. Why should we believe their latest story?

 

[Bumpswithagrin]

Warner just wasn't as adept at deflection as Smith and Bancroft and his questions were a bit more pointed as the journos now knew what to hone in on from the previous two press conferences. As I stated already it was clear to me from the first presser (Bancroft) that there were some questions they weren't going to answer, at least not satisfactorily, i.e. has it happened before and was there anyone else involved.

 

[Dockerjonz]

No wonder CA operates in the way it does.
No difference between what Warner, Bancroft and Smith said but people are happy to fall for the crocodile tears from Smith & Bancroft but not Warner.

What a joke.

I haven't,only reason they crying is coz they got sprung cheating and will be branded cheats for the rest of their lives that's why they cryin'

 

[zucchini]

You goose... lol. I'm actually allowed to quote a person before they've quoted me.

Clown.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

So you were pretty much wrong on all counts

He certainly came across as more genuine than I expected him capable of. And I doubt he is a good actor, so maybe this time he does actually recognise he did the wrong thing.

 

[Wolfs]

I don't care if it's Alan Jones, the weather guy on SBS or Spongebob.

If the end result is Sutherland is gone, I'll back them.

I would want to hear Spongebob's take on this tbqh

 

[RegHickeyStand]

The first rule of ball tampering club is: there is no ball tampering club

Ha ha!

But also, for the past several year we have had decent swing bowlers in the side with international experience, but they cannot come close to matching other teams. Teams which have been caught cheating in the past.

 

[DazalenkoUBewty]

Clown.

zucchini...

 

[zucchini]

zucchini...

Prelim.....

 

[gordo2016]

With CA due to lose millions over the TV rights deal, they will hardly be able to hire a decent QC for the Warner appeal. Expect Davey to take them to the cleaners, 12 months suspension for that is definite restraint of trade. There are millions who would back all three of these players to appeal their severity of their suspensions. You can hardly take the opinions of some people here seriously. It is obvious they have never pulled the whites on in their lives and have no idea or knowledge of cricket.