Baggy Green ball tampering: Bancroft, Smith and the Aussie "Leadership Group"

[Prince EWS]

But you were basically implying the captain should have no accountability for his teammates' actions. That's crazy imo.

Right, but I think the accountability should fall onto your role as captain. If players are developing conspiracies to cheat under your watch then you clearly aren't a very good captain and should probably have the position taken away from you, but I don't think you are personally responsible for their actions beyond those repercussions on your captaincy, especially if you're not actually aware, or you raise objections and they do it anyway.

The problem with this in this instance was that Smith stated that he was effectively in on it the entire time. I'm sceptical that this was true, but once he said it they basically had to treat it as true.

I've long held that Smith should've been sacked as captain and there should have been basically no punishment beyond that, other than of course whatever the ICC handed out. And I still pretty much think this. If they sent them all home from the tour and gave them fines that would've been fine too, but I don't think they should've been missing Tests after the tour.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Right, but I think the accountability should fall onto your role as captain. If players are developing conspiracies to cheat under your watch then you clearly aren't a very good captain and should probably have the position taken away from you, but I don't think you are personally responsible for their actions beyond those repercussions on your captaincy, especially if you're not actually aware, or you raise objections and they do it anyway.

The problem with this in this instance was that Smith stated that he was effectively in on it the entire time. I'm sceptical that this was true, but once he said it they basically had to treat it as true.

Right. I'd be with mr_mister if Warner and bancroft cooked up the plan alone. Smith admitted he knew and didn't stop it. One tearful press conference doesn't mean he gets to go scot free.

 

[StephenZA]

A lot of it had to do with a level of embarrassment due to what had gone on in the tour prior..... but it was always such a stupid overreaction by cricket Australia. The whole episode said more about the administration than the players.

 

[Borges]

Why does Warner not deserve a lighter ban then? He's neither the captain nor was he the guy caught doing the deed.

Yes. If there were going to be graded sanctions, Warner should have been treated more leniently than Smith.

Agree that they should have removed Smith as the captain, and then left it to the ICC to decide, as per their rules, the amount of sanctions to be imposed.

 

[Starfighter]

A lot of it had to do with a level of embarrassment due to what had gone on in the tour prior..... but it was always such a stupid overreaction by cricket Australia. The whole episode said more about the administration than the players.

The stupid overreaction says the most about the hysteria that was generated. The vindictive media attacks, the sponsor dropping the tests like a hot potato, the prime minister sticking his nose into things and so on. When SA were in the same situation they put the rug back down then went to pop the broom back in the cupboard.

 

[Prince EWS]

Yeah if anything I think it says more about the cricketing culture in Australia than anything else. Because of its status here there are a lot of hangers on who on-the-face-of-it care about what the Test cricketers do both on and off the field despite never actually watching any Test cricket at all, let alone away from home Test cricket in the middle of the night. They all woke up that morning and went into full outrage mode.

 

[StephenZA]

The stupid overreaction says the most about the hysteria that was generated. The vindictive media attacks, the sponsor dropping the tests like a hot potato, the prime minister sticking his nose into things and so on. When SA were in the same situation they put the rug back down then went to pop the broom back in the cupboard.

The administration still reacted pretty badly. To be honest it takes a lot more than a bit of ball tampering to get on the front page of a SA newspaper nowadays, with the issues we have....

 

[Gnske]

Yeah if anything I think it says more about the cricketing culture in Australia than anything else. Because of its status here there are a lot of hangers on who on-the-face-of-it care about what the Test cricketers do both on and off the field despite never actually watching any Test cricket at all, let alone away from home Test cricket in the middle of the night. They all woke up that morning and went into full outrage mode.

Fun fact, I thought it'd be a hell of a thing to drop a line about the whole fiasco in with my old man while smashing out a flat white. Since he saw the underarm thing and what not. His opinion was that everyone should be given life bans, it was 1000 times worse than underarm and was undoubtedly more heinous than match fixing.

He then asked who the hell Cameron Bancroft was anyway and why Michael Clarke wasn't playing.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Yeah if anything I think it says more about the cricketing culture in Australia than anything else. Because of its status here there are a lot of hangers on who on-the-face-of-it care about what the Test cricketers do both on and off the field despite never actually watching any Test cricket at all, let alone away from home Test cricket in the middle of the night. They all woke up that morning and went into full outrage mode.

Damn casuals ruin everything.

 

[stephen]

The stupid overreaction says the most about the hysteria that was generated. The vindictive media attacks, the sponsor dropping the tests like a hot potato, the prime minister sticking his nose into things and so on. When SA were in the same situation they put the rug back down then went to pop the broom back in the cupboard.

The sponsor dropping the tests was an amazing deal for them. They signed for three years, got their Ashes year in and then didn't have to pay for the rest of the time. For them it was a business bargain.

The outrage was justified. How dare someone wear the baggy green and cheat. Especially in a premeditated way.

I've always maintained that Smith was banned for so long more due to his dire press conference than for his on-field and off-field actions. The presser basically threw petrol onto the fire and then sprayed it with rocket fuel for good measure.

 

[harsh.ag]

If CA think punishing captains for bombing at a presser is justified, they should bite the bullet and hire an expert who does the pressers instead.

 

[Top_Cat]

I dunno, I'm still really bugged by the fact that skip and fall guy both fronted the presser with an in-depth attempt at explanation and taking accountability and were found to be lying even after all that. I maintain the bowlers were involved too. Nothing to support this, of course, other than playing experience. I'm not saying they needed worse penalties or that the standing of Australian cricket is shot rah rah, etc. How it went down just doesn't sit well.

Puncturing the bubble of self-righteousness around Aussie cricket is a good thing - just like everyone else, they have cheaty scumbags in their midst. The only positive.

 

[vcs]

Does this incident rule Smith out from captaining Australia again when he comes back?

 

[weldone]

Right, but I think the accountability should fall onto your role as captain. If players are developing conspiracies to cheat under your watch then you clearly aren't a very good captain and should probably have the position taken away from you, but I don't think you are personally responsible for their actions beyond those repercussions on your captaincy, especially if you're not actually aware, or you raise objections and they do it anyway.

The problem with this in this instance was that Smith stated that he was effectively in on it the entire time. I'm sceptical that this was true, but once he said it they basically had to treat it as true.

I've long held that Smith should've been sacked as captain and there should have been basically no punishment beyond that, other than of course whatever the ICC handed out. And I still pretty much think this. If they sent them all home from the tour and gave them fines that would've been fine too, but I don't think they should've been missing Tests after the tour.

why sceptical?

 

[Gnske]

why sceptical?

Well the word is he came across Warner and Bancroft planning the thing, told them them to "not be ridiculous," and then walked off when lo and behold ridiculousness came to pass.

 

[marc71178]

If CA think punishing captains for bombing at a presser is justified, they should bite the bullet and hire an expert who does the pressers instead.

Ashwin will do it.

 

[the big bambino]

Yeah, I don't think captaincy matters in pure cricketing terms but when it comes to things like doing something against the rules, of course it matters.

That said, I don't think any of them deserved a long ban. They admitted to tampering, got punished appropriately according to the ICC rulebook and that should've been the end of it. CA felt the need to appease the masses of Australian fans who wanted to pat themselves on the back for not tolerating cheating instead of doing the sensible thing and accepting the stipulated punishment as sufficient. It was just another opportunity for them to appear high and mighty and above cheating and portray themselves as the vanguards of the #rightway to play cricket. Watching complete ****s like Michael Clarke feigning horror on television that someone would break rules in a ****ing sport was the height of nonsense hypocrisy. Made me puke.

Your players broke a rule which almost every other team also breaks. It's not a big ****ing deal. Pretending you're above it is what caused the over-reaction.

This is why I don't think Australia should be concerned about criticisms as to the way we play our cricket. Play cricket #hardbutfair and the critics squeal. Implement punishments that are at least reflect Australia is serious about the conduct of the players and impact on the game then the cynics come out and attack that too. Can't win so don't bother reasoning with them. Anyway I don't think the fans wanted punishments like this. CA was reacting to pressure from a hysterical press. They formed a perception that newspaper outrage was communal outrage and fearful of the consequences issued the punishments to placate that anger. It was more a sacrifice than a just punishment and that's one of the things that upsets me.

When you hear the phrase 'second most important position in Australia after the prime minister' thrown around, even facetiously, well you know the importance of a sport captain is overstated.

Compared to other sports I think cricket captaincy is an important job but compared to real positions in businesses/politics/society it's nothing


Steve Waugh is probably what made me realise we overvalue it

If that's the comparison then I don't think so. It would be a rare business let alone politician that is as important to Australia culturally as is cricket. If anything I think we give our leaders way too much respect and tend to accept their opinions without questions because of their status. In fact they are fortunate to hold their positions and be accountable to the society that has given them that privilege. They should be questioned and viewed with suspicion and only when proven their accountability, respected.

 

[Burgey]

So, how do we all feel in retrospect? Especially given the dust and bones had settled before the last post in this thread had been made arguably.

Now it just feels somewhat annoying that it took place. Which feels highly hypocritical knowing what my posts were like earlier in the thread. The takeaways for me:

1. Smith didn't seem equipped as an individual to handle the situation and compounded the situation to his detriment. The 'mateship' clause was enacted poorly and without thought. I'd still love to know the methodological process behind that press conference with Bancroft;

2. Warner cracked again under pressure in his life in general, and dragged two others down with him this time in his low state;

3. They all could have come back far sooner with only the partisans really giving a damn; and

4. The question might still be asked, if it even still matters. I'm interested to know if it does. Does Australian cricket need David Warner?

1. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but this episode showed Smith was not the right bloke to be made captain given his age, personal intensity and the slightly aspy nature of his personality.

2. Agree. Strange little fellow.

3. Definitely. The bans were way out or proportion to the deed. CA is a joke, and how someone like Sutherland can preside for a decade over an organisation which he then says has massive cultural issues, appoint a bloke as coach who grew up in and of that system and knows nothing but the workings of it, then announce his retirement a year early before riding off into the sunset without any ramifications is ****ing beyond me.

4. Not as much as David Warner needs Australian cricket.

 

[stephen]

Burgey nails it.

The bans were way out of proportion and they're doing more harm to the Australian cricket team than the sandpaper incident did.

 

[Daemon]

Cameron Bancroft: 'Self-explanatory' that bowlers were aware of ball-tampering tactics in Newlands Test

CA says that the governing body is still open to hearing and investigating any new information about the Newlands incident

www.espncricinfo.com

I mean this was always kind of obvious to all but the stephens, but nice of Bancroft to return the favour and throw them under the bus like that