-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Australian cheating at Newlands, where to from here?
- Thread starter Gough
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Aug 9, 2016
- 5,005
- 6,210
- AFL Club
- Sydney
Not expecting we'll win a lot in the 12 mths but importantly 3 fringe players will be blooded and usually the learning process leads to a strengthening of those 3 but here players of high standard may come back in.
What they do in the 12 mths is a mystery. Some have said full time participation in the 20-20 circuit.
I highly suspect that's it's possible the bans will be challenged and overturned. Why? Well the ICC has dealt with numerous ball tampering incidents since the 1990s. Not one has involved any more than a 1 match ban and some only a fine. There is documented precedent therefore of governing these matters at ICC level. To suddenly depart from that and impose 12 mths bans rightly or wrongly places the decisions at disparity to customary sanctions. That leaves a gaping hole for legal manouvering. I think the bans will be cut significantly because of that- perhaps to as little as 1-2 mths. If that occurs you may find selectors will be instructed not to select them. What a mess.
Personally I think that ICC are disgraceful in not imposing greater sanctions but it is as it is avd the fact it is will offer legal precedent
- Sep 15, 2011
- 33,431
- 52,360
- AFL Club
- West Coast
I would lean that way, but don't rule out anything in sport. As I say, they love a redemption angle, if he makes up with the team then I could see it happening.
Was wondering this myself. There is an avenue of appeal, does anyone think they will take it up?
- Aug 9, 2016
- 5,005
- 6,210
- AFL Club
- Sydney
A number of articles today suggest both Smith and Warner have been approached by solicitors who know the penalties exceed precedent. It was said that Warner in particular was contemplating the appeal
Agree with the idea of your post but they weren't honest - they lied in the press conference, they lied to the coach and word is Warner kept lying to the integrity unit until he knew the other two had given it up. They were not given CA suspensions for ball tampering.
- Sep 15, 2011
- 33,431
- 52,360
- AFL Club
- West Coast
He's probably got less to lose, if the thinking is that he won't play for Australia again; Smith will shut up and take his medicine because he knows his career can resume the moment the ban is up. Likewise, Bancroft probably won't have this held against him too long and there's still plenty of time to make the case for coming back into the team.
- Feb 6, 2013
- 12,473
- 17,288
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
For those wondering how Smith and Warner will spend the year, a possible option emerges:
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,341
I was for a suspension (although 12 months was too long IMO) but those scenes in the airport with Steve Smith were terrible. That was an absolute shambles and CA should never have allowed that to happen.
what precedent?
do we have an Australian who has been found guilty of ball tampering?
do we have an Australian Captain who has fronted a presser and confessed to premeditated cheating? (even then, lying about the
scale of the cheating)
Actually - do we have a precedent of an Australian cricket player being accused of cheating on the field?
The only real precedent I can think of is Warne/Waugh taking money from a bookie - and that was covered up and certainly neither fronted a press conference and confessed all in the stupidest PR move I have ever seen.
Remember - they are not being charged with ball tampering - they are being charged with breaching the code of conduct.
Having said that, I have no doubt that the players will appeal. What have they got to lose really?
do we have an Australian who has been found guilty of ball tampering?
do we have an Australian Captain who has fronted a presser and confessed to premeditated cheating? (even then, lying about the
scale of the cheating)
Actually - do we have a precedent of an Australian cricket player being accused of cheating on the field?
The only real precedent I can think of is Warne/Waugh taking money from a bookie - and that was covered up and certainly neither fronted a press conference and confessed all in the stupidest PR move I have ever seen.
Remember - they are not being charged with ball tampering - they are being charged with breaching the code of conduct.
Having said that, I have no doubt that the players will appeal. What have they got to lose really?
Nah once your team see you as a rat you are finished, Warner will likely become a 20/20 league specialist.
- Feb 6, 2013
- 12,473
- 17,288
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Yeah, that absolute removal of any shred of dignity, getting manhandled through a gauntlet of soulless media vultures would only be a fitting treatment if Smith had run over a kid with his car or something.
- Jul 8, 2015
- 11,392
- 7,868
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
The mics SHOULD be turned off between overs, not to hide banter, but it's no-ones ****ing business what they talk about, plus f-bombs etc can get dropped accidentally and that's not great for live tv..
- Sep 15, 2011
- 33,431
- 52,360
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Nah, it's newsworthy. These players (and CA) use their media when it suits them, lap up the fawning coverage, then think they should **** off when there's actually something newsworthy to report? Perhaps if they had answered the questions people had suitably, the response might be a little more muted.
- Aug 9, 2016
- 5,005
- 6,210
- AFL Club
- Sydney
When I first heard I was disgusted and still am. But tbh all these ex players from other countries coming forward laying the boot in riles me. Ffs sachin tendulkar even stuck the knife in and he was one if those guilty of ball tampering in his career!!!! Lmao. Have a look at your own behaviour champ!
I hate weak character. Cheating is weak.........but what is even weaker is using two faced hypocrissy to attack a vulnerable person for what you yourself do/ have done.
Now I'm in this quandary hating what was done but hating the weak bastards hurting them at their most vulnerable
I hate weak character. Cheating is weak.........but what is even weaker is using two faced hypocrissy to attack a vulnerable person for what you yourself do/ have done.
Now I'm in this quandary hating what was done but hating the weak bastards hurting them at their most vulnerable
- Jan 25, 2016
- 9,490
- 7,895
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Seattle Seahawks
This is the point that needs to be rammed home, muCh like the Geebung 4
McFooty
Debutant
McFooty
Debutant
They admitted to cheating at the presser, if they had not everything would have been remained in house
They still lied at the press conference
They didn't own up to anything
Couldn't CA argue that the legal parameters around the bans were based on bringing the game into disrepute and the other accompanying charges rather than the precedent of ball tampering? The interesting part would be the precedent of bringing the game into disrepute and i can't think of any examples off the top of my head.
- Aug 9, 2016
- 5,005
- 6,210
- AFL Club
- Sydney
Ultimately the essence of what they did was ball tampering. There is a great deal of international precedent dealing with that- some 10-15 cases in fact none of which resulted in any sanction beyond one match. Where there is no local precedent the international ones will take that role.....how legal precedent works. The ICC are the arbiters of what happens in the international game. No other country has imposed sanctions beyond the ICC sanctions which itself is a precedent.
There is a valid argument to say legally that the bans are on shaky ground. Hence solicitor enthusiasm
- Aug 9, 2016
- 5,005
- 6,210
- AFL Club
- Sydney
Yes certainly but the substance of what was done that caused that was still ball tampering. You can't avoid that
- Feb 6, 2013
- 12,473
- 17,288
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
If I'm not mistaken CA charged them with CA code violations which included planning the tampering and implementing resulting plan and misleading public comments though, rather than just te tampering itself though, so the pure ICC precedent isn't the whole story.
There's a point that bringing the game into disrepute isn't punished as harshly by the ICC (Inzamam-ul-Haq got a four match ban for it) which is probably the most comparable thing, but I don't think that would work in court.
McFooty
Debutant
The only thing lied about was Bancroft saying it was tape and not sandpaper the rest of the presser was admission of guilt
- Aug 15, 2015
- 38,675
- 92,396
If they appeal and get bans reduced, whats to stop CA from just not selecting them?
- Feb 6, 2013
- 12,473
- 17,288
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Technically true, but we already saw on camera they rubbed something on the ball, so the only thing their admission changed was letting us know what it was, so given they lied about it it's not unfair to assume ulterior motives for the whole presser.
