australia's most shameful day

[JohnS]

23 minutes ago, Ken Gargett said:

john, i have read a number of idiots on various cricket sites claiming that bancroft and smith should only receive the same punishment as faf and others. as determined by the spineless ICC. and i can sort of understand that but my view is that we are better than this and that the punishment imposed should reflect this. if other countries want to whitewash their players and don't care about the long term ramifications, up to them. i will be so utterly disgusted if we do the same. 

 

 

At the very least, Rabada should definitely be banned. He will transgress again and be jettisoned on the scrapheap. His reprieve is not good for the game or himself because he's not addressing his issues.

People have short memories. Faf du Plessis scored a century after being convicted of ball tampering in the 3rd test in Adelaide in 2016. He should have actually being banned more than one test since it was his second offence.

[Ken Gargett]

15 minutes ago, Andy04 said:

CA needs to take the lead and set the precedent for handling these situations. That only leaves 2 options:

 

1) Lifetime ban for anybody directly involved with the tampering  

2) Lifetime ban for anybody directly involved, and a 12 month suspension for all CA cricket for the remainder of the team. 

 

Harsh? Yes.

But these men men were selected to represent Australia, and their actions clearly don’t represent the majority of Australians values in sport. 

i agree harsh penalties but i don't think you can ban people just for being part of the team, if there is no suggestion that they were part of it.

i'd sack lehmann asap. smith and warner and anyone else in 'the leadership group' (there's an oxymoron of sorts) should be told that they will never again be considered for the captaincy. and then 12 months ban for anyone involved, from all forms of cricket. if, during that period, they involve themselves in any way with cricket (as they could head off and play 20-20 or whatever, though i read where smith's IPL side has already sacked him as captain), that is to be extended by a further 12 months. 

[westg]

12 hours ago, 99call said:

It's all in context. As fans we like to think the hero's of the last 100yrs were as clean as a whistle.  What I'm saying is. If you reach the very highest echelon of your sport, and your captain foists the idea of cheating on you. It's one thing if he says this is the first time we've ever done anything like this, but if he (i'm not genuinely casting any aspersions) suggests "ah stuff like this goes on all the time, all you hero's of yesteryear got up to this kind of stuff.    All of a sudden the press-ganging becomes a hell of a lot more psychologically powerful.

It's a bit like Serpico.  On one hand your thinking "shit, if I do this, I may destroy my career" on the other your thinking "shit, if I don't do this, these guys now know, I know there cheats!!!. If I'm not now complicit, am I going to get deselected asap". Think about it. If deselected, then two weeks later Bancroft come out saying, "I was de-selected, because I wouldn't cheat for the team" He has zero proof, and it would be super easy for the senior leadership group to say "I think this is just sour grapes" end of.

Yes, I, and everybody on here would like to think we have teak tough moral codes, but until your in that room, and someone presents you with a decision, that could end your career, which ever option you decide, it's bloody tough. 

I would have said no all day long... 

[Ken Gargett]

2 minutes ago, JohnS said:

At the very least, Rabada should definitely be banned. He will transgress again and be jettisoned on the scrapheap. His reprieve is not good for the game or himself because he's not addressing his issues.

People have short memories. Faf du Plessis scored a century after being convicted of ball tampering in the 3rd test in Adelaide in 2016. He should have actually being banned more than one test since it was his second offence.

fully agree on all that but it merely highlights the cowardice of the ICC. 

i'm much more interested in what CA do. for me, they must step up and bring forth heavy penalties. 

[Ken Gargett]

1 minute ago, westg said:

I would have said no all day long... 

agreed. not difficult at all. they know it is wrong. if they even have to weigh up those options, they have already done the wrong thing.

a bloke was on tv asking what he should say to his 11 year old as that 11 year old had asked him why the australian cricketers had done the wrong thing. if an 11 year old knows, please don't tell me it is some moral dilemma for an adult. bancroft knew it was wrong and he chose to do it. simple as that. 

[Wertman]

@Ken Gargett. Look at Tom Brady he got made MVP.  He's a cheat too.  But oh well Bills fan here.   No one actually like Brady.

[99call]

5 minutes ago, westg said:

I would have said no all day long... 

I would say the same thing.  But, it's like pub talk isn't it. 

Often when people do bloody idiotic things, they have gone through a process where the odds have been raised incrementally, where it's not a case of someone turning around to you one day and going "hey mate, do you want to be a cheat?". It's much more insidious than that. What I'm saying is that the very best sportsmen operate right on that tipping point, where they utilise absolutely everything at there disposal, but critically never go beyond that red line of cheating. Bancroft, is yes, guilty of being bloody stupid and a cheat. but his punishment should be seen in context of a greater punishment that should be handed to Smith

Smith is guilty of being bloody stupid, a cheat, and pressurising a newcomer into being a cheat. Was there some reason that tape couldn't be in Smiths pockets? absolute coward.

I'm not defending these guys, I'm just saying that young sportsmen idolise those above them, and are often pretty vulnerable if they receive poor direction. 

In short, I think Bancroft should receive a weighty punishment, but not one that ultimately destroys his career, whereas I think Smith does not deserve leniency 

 

 

 

[Ken Gargett]

5 minutes ago, 99call said:

I would say the same thing.  But, it's like pub talk isn't it. 

Often when people do bloody idiotic things, they have gone through a process where the odds have been raised incrementally, where it's not a case of someone turning around to you one day and going "hey mate, do you want to be a cheat?". It's much more insidious than that. What I'm saying is that the very best sportsmen operate right on that tipping point, where they utilise absolutely everything at there disposal, but critically never go beyond that red line of cheating. Bancroft, is yes, guilty of being bloody stupid and a cheat. but his punishment should be seen in context of a greater punishment that should be handed to Smith

Smith is guilty of being bloody stupid, a cheat, and pressurising a newcomer into being a cheat. Was there some reason that tape couldn't be in Smiths pockets? absolute coward.

I'm not defending these guys, I'm just saying that young sportsmen idolise those above them, and are often pretty vulnerable if they receive poor direction. 

In short, I think Bancroft should receive a weighty punishment, but not one that ultimately destroys his career, whereas I think Smith does not deserve leniency 

 

 

 

penalties for this have never been as severe as they should be but yes, agree not a career destroying penalty. but certainly a very hefty one for bancroft. i doubt smith will get the career ending penalty - but he has forever labelled himself a cheat and that will be the ultimate penalty. in 20 years, we will still see smith as the bloke who cheated. he should certainly get a serious suspension. i'd love to see a year. 

and i know what you are saying re bancroft but i still do not buy it. your boss comes to you at work and says he wants you to commit an act that is illegal. sure, he can say all your competitors are doing it and it is not really that bad and that they really want you to do it, with whatever implication that holds. but in the end, you know it is wrong. that it is illegal. your defence can hardly be that the boss wanted you to do it. you make the decision to commit the illegal act or not. you make that choice. bancroft made that choice. he chose to commit the illegal act. 

as for why not smith, i suspect they thought that the focus is so often on him that he'd be caught. 

[MIKA27]

On 3/25/2018 at 10:58 AM, Ken Gargett said:

just read he believes he should keep the captaincy. i would suggest that this is delusional. the sad thing is that one suspects administrators will cave in and slap him on the wrist and all be forgiven. 

And they have!

One match ban! Is that right, am I going deaf when I heard this news today?

[MoeFOH]

So glad I am out of the country, at this time, and particularly being in a place (the US) that generally has no idea of, or concern for, cricket (except for my current host, who happens to be an Aussie). I kind of want to ignore this and pretend it hasn't happened. 

[gweilgi]

1 hour ago, Ken Gargett said:

penalties for this have never been as severe as they should be but yes, agree not a career destroying penalty. but certainly a very hefty one for bancroft. i doubt smith will get the career ending penalty - but he has forever labelled himself a cheat and that will be the ultimate penalty. in 20 years, we will still see smith as the bloke who cheated. he should certainly get a serious suspension. i'd love to see a year. 

As others have pointed out, cheating happens.  There is enormous pressure to win, and sometimes people step over the line.

The idiocy of this affair was how utterly bloody STUPID it was.  How in the name of all that's holy did they think they could get away with this in full view of tens of thousands of fans, the umpire, and enough cameras to accurately determine the dangle of a player's angle?  

What grates me the most is that neither of them really owned up to what they did.  You get caught, you step up and apologise to your team, your fans and your nation.  Then you resign from the team.  You take what's coming with what little grace you have left.  Maybe it's the Catholic in me, but contrition and repentance MATTER.  Without that, how can there be redemption?  How can either Smith or Bancroft resurrect their careers and work their way out from under that stain without doing what's right?  We teach this to our children every damn day, and what message does it send when those sporting idols and role models cannot even do what any five year old knows is right?

 

 

[Andy04]

https://www.pedestrian.tv/sport/cameron-bancroft-ashes-sugar-south-africa-ball-tampering/

 

Cheating during the Ashes?

 

 

[Ken Gargett]

9 minutes ago, Andy04 said:

https://www.pedestrian.tv/sport/cameron-bancroft-ashes-sugar-south-africa-ball-tampering/

 

Cheating during the Ashes?

 

 

you would not put anything past this lot but it would be a bit rich for england to complain. they have a history of cheating in the ashes themselves. trescothick, for example. 

[JohnS]

1 hour ago, Ken Gargett said:

you would not put anything past this lot but it would be a bit rich for england to complain. they have a history of cheating in the ashes themselves. trescothick, for example. 

That's correct. He admitted it years after both Andrew Flintoff and Simon Jones used tampered balls to produce reverse swing to such good effect in the 2005 Ashes.

[encephalization]

Whole story makes me sad.

Also feel bad for Morne Morkel who had a great, perhaps his best, day of cricket on his life. Who will remember this day for his nine?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

[99call]

14 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

and i know what you are saying re bancroft but i still do not buy it. your boss comes to you at work and says he wants you to commit an act that is illegal. sure, he can say all your competitors are doing it and it is not really that bad and that they really want you to do it, with whatever implication that holds. but in the end, you know it is wrong. that it is illegal. your defence can hardly be that the boss wanted you to do it. you make the decision to commit the illegal act or not. you make that choice. bancroft made that choice. he chose to commit the illegal act. 

Yep, I can definitely agree in principle. However

I think when the man in the pub/cigar forum talks about what he would do in a stressful situation, the only thing they're calling upon, is the experience of stress in their own life, their imagination of what they would do in the situation in question.  Critically neither of these things are a dead set promise of what that person would do, if actually in that situation.  Some bloody brilliant people in history have been caught up in cheating. Muhammed Ali, being complicit in having his glove sliced by his ring man when fighting Henry Cooper etc etc. 

All I'm talking about is occupying two mental positions at the same time. One which is saying "I would never do that", and the other is "I cannot 100% know I wouldn't do that, when placed in that position, because I never have".  Someone would say "i would never sleep with my best mates wife" but people do, and they are horrified with themselves afterwards (some aren't), and wonder what happened to their moral compass.   

Perfect example. Donald Trump saying he would rush with his bare hands, at a teenager holding loaded assault riffle. HHmmm!!?? Ok Donald, nice thought, but in all reality, you'd be in a dumpster, worrying about whether you'd ruffled your hair or not. 

[ayepatz]

19 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

you would not put anything past this lot but it would be a bit rich for england to complain. they have a history of cheating in the ashes themselves. trescothick, for example. 

Check out Atherton’s column in the Times yesterday. Talk about pot and kettle!

[Ken Gargett]

11 hours ago, 99call said:

Yep, I can definitely agree in principle. However

I think when the man in the pub/cigar forum talks about what he would do in a stressful situation, the only thing they're calling upon, is the experience of stress in their own life, their imagination of what they would do in the situation in question.  Critically neither of these things are a dead set promise of what that person would do, if actually in that situation.  Some bloody brilliant people in history have been caught up in cheating. Muhammed Ali, being complicit in having his glove sliced by his ring man when fighting Henry Cooper etc etc. 

All I'm talking about is occupying two mental positions at the same time. One which is saying "I would never do that", and the other is "I cannot 100% know I wouldn't do that, when placed in that position, because I never have".  Someone would say "i would never sleep with my best mates wife" but people do, and they are horrified with themselves afterwards (some aren't), and wonder what happened to their moral compass.   

Perfect example. Donald Trump saying he would rush with his bare hands, at a teenager holding loaded assault riffle. HHmmm!!?? Ok Donald, nice thought, but in all reality, you'd be in a dumpster, worrying about whether you'd ruffled your hair or not. 

was Ali ever proved to be complicit? not that i would put it past him but i thought that was always something that was 'disputed'. 

i do know what you are saying but i don't see how it in any way absolves bancroft or lessens his guilt. what you are, or seem to be saying, is that plenty of people have acted in what is an illegal or dishonest manner. agreed. but they should all face the appropriate penalties. as should bancroft. if a person fails his own standards, up to them. whether bancroft is horrified by his failings or simply unhappy he was caught, matters little. he did the crime. 

[99call]

7 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

 what you are, or seem to be saying,

Definitely not absolving Bancroft, simply saying his punishment should be weighted by the fact, he may of felt his career in jeopardy which every option he took. And as a young player I think he's been failed by the system. A weighty punishment, but not career ending.

Whereas there is something a whole lot more dark, and slimey about what Smith has done, and I think he deserved to have the book thrown at him

My other tangent was just to suggest, we all self certify ourselves in the pub whilst watching the sport to be the most righteous, skilled person in the world, saying "i wouldn't of done that" "I'd of caught that" "you've just got to tackle Lomu low!" ha!. But, sometimes I think we need to really think a little longer, respect the pressures at play, and determine, that maybe at the very zenith of sport, many get found out, and the standards people hold dear on 'civvy street' are ones they may fall short of, under that spotlight.

[Ken Gargett]

28 minutes ago, 99call said:

Definitely not absolving Bancroft, simply saying his punishment should be weighted by the fact, he may of felt his career in jeopardy which every option he took. And as a young player I think he's been failed by the system. A weighty punishment, but not career ending.

Whereas there is something a whole lot more dark, and slimey about what Smith has done, and I think he deserved to have the book thrown at him

My other tangent was just to suggest, we all self certify ourselves in the pub whilst watching the sport to be the most righteous, skilled person in the world, saying "i wouldn't of done that" "I'd of caught that" "you've just got to tackle Lomu low!" ha!. But, sometimes I think we need to really think a little longer, respect the pressures at play, and determine, that maybe at the very zenith of sport, many get found out, and the standards people hold dear on 'civvy street' are ones they may fall short of, under that spotlight.

have said not careering ending for any of them but certainly severe. seems that warner was behind much of it. big surprise. 

but to me, the fact that you are a relatively young bloke and fairly new in the team is no possible excuse. i'd be horrified if they gave that as a reason for anything resembling leniency. don't care about the pressure. he is playing cricket, for christ's sake, not in the nuclear bunker. he had to grow a pair. he failed. he should be treated accordingly. 

but agree, not career ending for him. or the others. but it better be seriously hefty. 

[marty922]

If these allegations are true, it won't surprise some of our more outspoken Warner detractors

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/david-warner-at-heart-of-ball-tampering-scandal-20180326-p4z6d3.html

"Those in the hierarchy at CA have been made aware of suggestions that the vice-captain was the chief conspirator and that Smith foolishly agreed"

[timsan8]

Don’t see much (any) cricket coverage here in the US. And I’ve enjoyed your comments here. But this incident has put a spotlight on. For all the wrong reasons of course.

http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/27/news/australia-cricket-scandal-sponsors/index.html?sr=fbmoney032718australia-cricket-scandal-sponsors0725PMStory


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LordAnubis]

I can’t believe there wasn’t an instant forfeit of the series and bans for those involved. The longer you drag out action, the worse the reputation of Cricket Australia gets. Ban em all. Wipe the slate clean. Rebuild. So that it’s never a question on a future players mind to even entertain the thought of it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JohnS]

I still feel too 'gutted' to respond as appropriately as I'd like to, Mus. Overall, and I know Ken would understand, I just feel so let down. Perhaps following the game for 4 decades has influenced this hollow feeling. Perhaps too, it explains Australian Radio Commmentator Jim Maxwell's tears the other day.

I think there's still yet more to come. I wonder if David Warner will play for Australia again. One positive...I'm really glad for Matt Renshaw coming back into the team. I think Steve Smith will be back, but this episode proves he's no Ed Cowan (former test cricketer mentored by Peter Roebuck and educated at an exclusive private school in Sydney...a rarity for Australian cricketers) in the brains department.

[Ken Gargett]

9 hours ago, timsan8 said:

Don’t see much (any) cricket coverage here in the US. And I’ve enjoyed your comments here. But this incident has put a spotlight on. For all the wrong reasons of course.

http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/27/news/australia-cricket-scandal-sponsors/index.html?sr=fbmoney032718australia-cricket-scandal-sponsors0725PMStory


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

it was actually covered reasonably extensively in the New York Times.