Dravid Fined for Ball Tampering

[Blewy]

Report from Cricinfo

Dravid fined for ball-tampering

Wisden Cricinfo staff

January 20, 2004



Rahul Dravid has been fined 50% of his match fee, after being found guilty of ball-tampering during India's 24-run victory over Zimbabwe at Brisbane.


Dravid was caught by the TV cameras rubbing a cough lozenge on the shiny side of the white ball and is believed to have been reported to Clive Lloyd, the match referee, by the third umpire Peter Parker. He was subsequently charged under clause 2.10 of the ICC's code of conduct.

Dravid had earlier top-scored with 84 in India's total of 255 for 6. His case echoes that of Sachin Tendulkar at Port Elizabeth in 2001-02, who was handed a 75% fine and a one-match suspended sentence by Mike Denness for a similar offence.

It was one of a host of decisions - including the banning of Virender Sehwag for excessive appealing - that so enraged the Indian Cricket Board that they demanded his removal as referee for the subsequent match at Centurion, which was deemed unofficial by the ICC.

Players caught performing such acts should automatically be banned, It was clear cut on camera and what does a fine do for cricketers on HUGE pay packets... The only ones who are disadvantaged are the batting side and the fine does nothing for them...
:!( :!( :!(

 

[PY]

Players caught performing such acts should automatically be banned, It was clear cut on camera and what does a fine do for cricketers on HUGE pay packets... The only ones who are disadvantaged are the batting side and the fine does nothing for them...
:!( :!( :!(

I completely agree with you Blewy! How can someone who holds such a high position in world cricket not be banned for basically cheating? It beggars belief. Not only did he cheat but he did it on worldwide TV where countless youngsters may have seen him doing.

I've also been told (by Andre) that straight after this incident, Nehra 'pounded' the rough side with sawdust as well. Not sure whether this is allowed or not but surely it must have helped swing the ball.

Bet Zimbabwe are peeved now......:!(

 

[Tom Halsey]

I'm with you two. What does a fine do?

 

[warrioryohannan]

Well Dravid said that he accidently did that, as that substance was in his mouth and all he was trying to do was to use saliva to shine the ball.

Don't think so taht many would buy that argument though!

 

[Tom Halsey]

Codswallop, if you ask me.

 

[krkode]

Report from Cricinfo



Players caught performing such acts should automatically be banned, It was clear cut on camera and what does a fine do for cricketers on HUGE pay packets... The only ones who are disadvantaged are the batting side and the fine does nothing for them...
:!( :!( :!(

And what does the ban do for them? Remove Dravid for x number of games so there will be no more ball-tampering? Well, if he's fined, then you can be assured that there still won't be any ball-tampering. The batting side gains the same thing from both instances - no ball-tampering.

You're just jeleous that Dravid doesn't play for your side. :P

just kidding (although it may be true)

A 1-2 match ban would have been justified. I don't know what you mean when you say "ban," so generally.

 

[Pratters]

If Draivd tampered, even 'accidently' as he is putting it with the thing of trying to rub saliva from the logense, he should have been banned. He is a senior player now and should have behaved more responsibly. He should have set a precedent.

Also, I hope the media doesnt drag the Tendulkar tampering issue into this which I am sure will happen as that incident is completely apart from this one.

 

[Sanz]

Dravid Should have been banned for entire VB series. Only that can teach all the cheaters a lesson. Shame on you, Dravid.

Btw - Anyone jumping to say that I am jealous because he doesn't play in my team., I am an Indian and deeply ashamed of his act. :!(

 

[NikhilN]

Players caught performing such acts should automatically be banned, It was clear cut on camera and what does a fine do for cricketers on HUGE pay packets... The only ones who are disadvantaged are the batting side and the fine does nothing for them...

How bout you go talk to ICC about doing that?o wait you cant because they know what they are doing and you dont.do you have any idea how many players break the laws of cricket?

and for why he did this is because he got money from someone

 

[Neil Pickup]

How bout you go talk to ICC about doing that?o wait you cant because they know what they are doing and you dont.do you have any idea how many players break the laws of cricket?

and for why he did this is because he got money from someone

What are you babbling about?

I suggest you find some evidence, sharpish, and I'll just bang in a legal bit here:

CricketWeb, its owners, administrators, staff and moderators take NO responsibility for the opinions of regular forum members on the boards

 

[Langeveldt]

Can someone tell me what the difference between this and the Atherton affair v SA was???

Didnt everyone come down a lot harder on Athers? Why the double standards?

I rated Dravid up with the very best sportsmen ive encountered, Ive suddenly lost a whole lot of respect for him now :!(

 

[Tim]

Im really surprised by this, I thought Dravid would have been one of the last players in international cricket to tamper with a ball.

 

[krkode]

Can someone tell me what the difference between this and the Atherton affair v SA was???

Didnt everyone come down a lot harder on Athers? Why the double standards?

I rated Dravid up with the very best sportsmen ive encountered, Ive suddenly lost a whole lot of respect for him now :!(

And to reference an article at hand, Tendulkar got a 75% match fee cut and a one match ban; but Dravid just gets 50% cut and forget the ban.

Why the double standard? I don't know. Maybe there are other factors to consider. Ooooh... :wow:

Rudi Koertzen on day X gave batsman Y out even though he was not out. Steve Bucknor on Day Z gave batsman Q not-out even though he was clearly plumb. Why the double standard? I don't know. I guess it'll always remain a mystery...:rolleyes:

 

[Rich2001]

Re: Re: Dravid Fined for Ball Tampering

Bet Zimbabwe are peeved now......:!(

They have no need to be as what has been missed off in this thread so far is that basically stright after the "ball-tampering" the umpires had the ball changed.

Still agree with you though it was wrong and the excuse of he didn't know the sweet had dropped out of his mouth is quite laughable, I mean you can't feel it under your fingers...Right :rolleyes:

 

[marc71178]

Can someone tell me what the difference between this and the Atherton affair v SA was???

To me they appear both to have been innocent mistakes.

 

[Thelwell]

Your all not perhpas being a little over the top?

what will a cough sweet do to the ball? Cant see how it'd help the bowler? Its just spit at the end of the day, which everyone puts on the ball anyway?

If i'm wrong and there's is a benefit for some reason from a cough sweet, i agree with you all 100% and think he should be banned from the rest of the VB Series.

Not saying its ok to cheat! just that i cant see what advantage a cough sweet would bring? Not gonna have the same effect as shoaib picking the seam is it really? Altohugh i know its the same principle in one sense.

Til i see that a cough sweet definately brings a benefit for the bowler i think its abit of an over reaction.

Here comes the backlash...........

 

[PY]

No backlash from me because it's a fair question about whether a cough sweet does cause an advantage. I've never tried :P

Just a thought though.

Courtesy of www.bbc.co.uk:
"In the Laws of Cricket, law 42.3 allows fielders to polish the ball as long as "no artificial substance is used".

May help you but probably not

 

[Thelwell]

Thats fair enough then but think after this event the ICC must clarify what an artifical substance is. A cough sweets an artifical substance but you could argue that he simply spat, or licked his fingers to polish the ball and the sweet came out as well as spit. Meaning it wasnt deliberate.

The way the laws are set Dravid has no one to blame but himself, should know better being so experienced. Though stil cant see how a sweet would of helped the bowler?

 

[krkode]

No backlash from me because it's a fair question about whether a cough sweet does cause an advantage. I've never tried :P

Just a thought though.

Courtesy of www.bbc.co.uk:
"In the Laws of Cricket, law 42.3 allows fielders to polish the ball as long as "no artificial substance is used".

May help you but probably not

Are nails artificial substances? Weren't some Pakistanis criticised for "scratching" the ball? :P

 

[PY]

Depends what type of nails they were. :P