• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

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

S

SteveNZ

Cricketer Of The Year
kykweer.proteas said:
Actually kind of feel for the guy... He is completely humiliated.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10155358653392555
Click to expand...
If ever you wanted evidence of how important (or overimportant, depending on your viewpoint) sport is in society....I don't know if expedited murderers or fiddlers would get that sort of treatment.

I feel sorry for Smith in a way, wasn't his idea. But he was completely thick, naive, overemotional whatever he was at the time to do anything but shut Warner's plan down out of hand straight away.
 
Fusion

Fusion

Global Moderator
I know you all have been breathlessly waiting for my take on all this, so here goes. While I think Australia and Smith/Warner/Bancroft deserve all the scorn and mockery they have received, a one year ban seems pretty ridiculous. The governing body of the game considers their offense to be worth 5 runs and a one-match ban. I understand that CA sets its own standards for conduct and their punishment can/will be different from the ICC, but this large of a difference is astounding. Either ball tampering should be universally treated as a big deal, or it shouldn't. Even if the ICC's punishment was too lenient, there must have been a better middle ground than a year ban. Just seems like an extreme overreaction to me.
 
Athlai

Athlai

Not Terrible
Fusion said:
I know you all have been breathlessly waiting for my take on all this, so here goes. While I think Australia and Smith/Warner/Bancroft deserve all the scorn and mockery they have received, a one year ban seems pretty ridiculous. The governing body of the game considers their offense to be worth 5 runs and a one-match ban. I understand that CA sets its own standards for conduct and their punishment can/will be different from the ICC, but this large of a difference is astounding. Either ball tampering should be universally treated as a big deal, or it shouldn't. Even if the ICC's punishment was too lenient, there must have been a better middle ground than a year ban. Just seems like an extreme overreaction to me.
Click to expand...
ICC aren't trying to protect Cricket Australia's image and relationship with sponsors, Cricket Australia are.
 
MagicPoopShovel

MagicPoopShovel

U19 12th Man
What a few days eh.

I just wonder what the bigger picture here is now..should the ICC look at increasing their bans for tampering based on what's happened. As I said before it's funny to me that the ICC bans a player for a game (if at all) and then a board bans a player for a year for the SAME thing (Image issued to board/country not withstanding).

What does this mean for other boards going forward? Surely they would be expected to take similar actions too.

I am glad the precedent has been set but curious to know what this means for the future for the next time this happens..

Hopefully, there is an instant knock-on effect with players thinking twice (at least) before trying to meddle with the ball.
 
NZTailender

NZTailender

I can't believe I ate the whole thing
Gob said:
**** thats hard to watch. Warner you dumb ****
Click to expand...
Heartbreaking, but you also have to wonder: has anyone ever stopped mid perp-walk (to put it harshly) to actually answer these dumb**** questions? Honestly why bother, other than to please your slimy boss just to say "yeah mate I gave steve a real grilling at the airport! hoo boy"
 
Larwood's_boots

Larwood's_boots

U19 Debutant
Fusion said:
I know you all have been breathlessly waiting for my take on all this, so here goes. While I think Australia and Smith/Warner/Bancroft deserve all the scorn and mockery they have received, a one year ban seems pretty ridiculous. The governing body of the game considers their offense to be worth 5 runs and a one-match ban. I understand that CA sets its own standards for conduct and their punishment can/will be different from the ICC, but this large of a difference is astounding. Either ball tampering should be universally treated as a big deal, or it shouldn't. Even if the ICC's punishment was too lenient, there must have been a better middle ground than a year ban. Just seems like an extreme overreaction to me.
Click to expand...
The weird X favor is that Australia didn't have any particularly tricky fixtures coming up in the next six months (at test level anyway), so a six month ban might have been more sensible but the optics would have looked extremely lenient. Also, and this has been covered a lot elsewhere but most would concede there are different degrees of ball tampering, and that this bringing on sandpaper is pretty much as far as it can be realistically pushed.
 
S

SteveNZ

Cricketer Of The Year
NZTailender said:
Heartbreaking, but you also have to wonder: has anyone ever stopped mid perp-walk (to put it harshly) to actually answer these dumb**** questions? Honestly why bother, other than to please your slimy boss just to say "yeah mate I gave steve a real grilling at the airport! hoo boy"
Click to expand...
Haha, yeah I ask myself exactly what you've said every time I see that lizard journo behaviour. I think they think it's a good grab, them asking the hard questions on film. But actually it just looks like snakes in the grass sniping at animals higher up the food chain than them.
 
Larwood's_boots

Larwood's_boots

U19 Debutant
Here's a bigger question and I'll be curious to hear people's takes- over the last decade or so I feel like there's been a massive increase in the amount of bowlers who are able to use reverse swing at some point in an innings of a test match (I remember about ten years ago a lot of conversations with friends about how the test format was doomed because of the proportion of games that were drawn, which seems to have gone out of the window as an issue since then). At this point it's pretty hard to look at that fact without a bit of cynicism- I think it's safe to say there should be some suspicion on any bowler who can get it to reverse after anything less than 50 overs, and even then it really shouldn't be anywhere near as common as it is (baring in mind it requires the ball getting that scuffed on one side and remaining that shiny on the other in the normal course of play, which should not be happening any near in even half of games). So presuming the ICC are going to start cracking down on ball tampering pretty hardcore following this incident, is reverse swing on it's way out? And how is that going to affect the entertainment value of test cricket and it's ability to pull in especially newer and younger viewers? I know in the States where I'm now based everyone universally thinks it's terrible that doping was so widespread in baseball but there's a lot of people who can't talk about that era without a little smile of recognition at just how great the games were.
 
weldone

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
Is there any chance of CA changing this later so that they can play the test series at home against India?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top