The ball tampering scandal: What's next for cricket and Australia?
Now that the dust in the Australian’s pockets has settled what has been the effect on the players involved, the sport and the country as a whole? I have a look at the facts and fallout of cricket's and Australia’s biggest sporting scandal for years.
Rewind a few weeks and it was impossible, cricket fan or not, to escape the constant headlines breaking surrounding the ball tampering scandal fronted by the Australian men’s team. During the third test match against South Africa, Cameron Bancroft was spotted on the cameras attempting to manipulate the condition of the ball with an outside object that was later revealed as being sandpaper. This was admitted by the Australians who claimed it was an idea dreamed up by the ‘leadership group’ and that it was unique to this fixture only. Although, Steve Smith, the then captain of the test team did not name names, the group in question was perceived as himself, vice-captain David Warner and the man caught red-handed Cameron Bancroft.
So why is ball tampering so bad? Cricket is governed by a set of rules which outline what you can and cannot do on the pitch, a fundamental presumed part and an underlying cornerstone of the game is that all matches are played within the ‘spirit of cricket’. Tampering with the ball is a more specific misdemeanour under Law 41.3.2 which says how its ‘an offence for any player to take any action which changes the condition of the ball’. Breaking a rule fairly emphatically like in this instance is clearly contrary to both the written rulebook and the unwritten moral standards the game associates itself with.
Major debate has risen from whether or not the punishments handed out were in fact fair, too lenient or for some people too severe. Bancroft received a nine-month suspension from the game with a ban preventing him from undertaking any leadership roles for a further year afterwards. Both Smith and Warner were banned for a year with Smith then prevented from taking up any leadership responsibilities for an additional year. Warner on the other hand has been banned for the entirety of his career from taking up any such roles.
The ACA (Australian Cricketers’ Association) have led the complaints that the bans are ‘disproportionate’ stating effectively that because in their press interviews the players broke down in tears they should be given softer sentences. Greg Dyer, president of the ACA, said that ‘the distressed faces have sent a message across the world as effective as any sanction could’. He continued, claiming he believed ‘Australia cried with Steve Smith’ and asked that ‘this extraordinary contrition’ be considered. It was impossible not to compare the distraught faces of Smith and Warner to their hysterical ones earlier in the year as they fabricated a media attack on the England team, an infamous nothing headbutt by Jonny Bairstow the focal point. Couple this with the fact this is an Australian team regularly involved in acts of sledging that have come close to the line of acceptability on various occasions. For me there is no sympathy for players that have rode their luck and thrown caution to the wind when it comes to the ‘spirit’ of the game many times before.
As for the tears of the Australians watching at home, it’s likely any that were shed were not out of sympathy, more shame. The national cricket team is the nation’s pride and joy and the subsequent betrayal of trust has rocked the country. The sounds of Australian broadcaster Jim Maxwell breaking down live on air at the very thought of what state his beloved team’s reputation was in should ring loud in the ears of the guilty trio. Perhaps any tears shed by the Australian people were more similar to Maxwell’s than out of sympathy to the apologetic, whimpering Australian ‘leadership group’.
For me personally the sentence is kind as it is, if anything it should be longer. There is no argument in my eyes that just because punishments in the past have been kinder, that the players on this occasion should be given the same sympathy. In the past the likes of Faf Du Plessis (on more than one occasion), Michael Atherton and in the most bizarre incident, Pakistan’s Shahid Afridi have all been embroiled in similar allegations. For some the punishments have been purely financial, some, more recently have led to bans for a couple of games. In comparison the playing bans of the three Australians for either nine or twelve months are clearly far longer.
However the actions of Smith, Warner and Bancroft, I believe, were punished more acceptably. The Australians admitted to their actions and proved that it was a pre-empted plan clearly designed for altering the condition of the ball. Blatant cheating. The bodies responsible for punishing now had everything they needed to be able to lay down a precedent strong enough to deter any sensible player to attempt the like again. Admitting to their actions should not offer them a decreased sentence, merely a clearing of their consciences.
Sports like football, for example, have been ruined by failures to stamp out diving and simulation, the game has slipped into an era where deception and trickery are considered fundamentals. Cricket still has the opportunity to distance itself from this kind of toxic atmosphere and to uphold its stoic traditional values. It would be naïve to think that no cricketer will ever cheat or deceive again but by stamping out the problem when you are given the chance it sets out a much stronger message that will deter most.
A captain deliberating cheating will weigh up his chances of success against the potential risks and dangers of being caught. With financial and media gains so great if you win the temptation is going to be high. To counter this the governing bodies must begin to lay down stricter punishments to put players off even considering cheating. A one game ban is quite frankly pathetic and for players like Steve Smith who care little for morality this is a risk they are prepared to take.
Regardless of what your own personal views are on the punishments served up there is one undeniable and undebatable fact from the fallout of the scandal. The Australian reputation has been hit hard. Prime Minster Malcolm Turnbull even commented on the incident expressing his disappointment and sadness at the whole incident. Australian sports teams and stars have always had a win at all cost attitude, which normally, provided you don’t cheat or use underhand tactics, is a good trait to have.
On this occasion the magnifying glass exposes questions about the Australian approach to sport and winning. Steve Smith made reference to the fact the decision was made by a ‘leadership group’. Either, he is telling the truth and three players, led by greed and arrogance, went behind their own teams back undermining the trust of every other player or the whole team knew and there are guilty men walking free.
Rewind a few weeks and it was impossible, cricket fan or not, to escape the constant headlines breaking surrounding the ball tampering scandal fronted by the Australian men’s team. During the third test match against South Africa, Cameron Bancroft was spotted on the cameras attempting to manipulate the condition of the ball with an outside object that was later revealed as being sandpaper. This was admitted by the Australians who claimed it was an idea dreamed up by the ‘leadership group’ and that it was unique to this fixture only. Although, Steve Smith, the then captain of the test team did not name names, the group in question was perceived as himself, vice-captain David Warner and the man caught red-handed Cameron Bancroft.
So why is ball tampering so bad? Cricket is governed by a set of rules which outline what you can and cannot do on the pitch, a fundamental presumed part and an underlying cornerstone of the game is that all matches are played within the ‘spirit of cricket’. Tampering with the ball is a more specific misdemeanour under Law 41.3.2 which says how its ‘an offence for any player to take any action which changes the condition of the ball’. Breaking a rule fairly emphatically like in this instance is clearly contrary to both the written rulebook and the unwritten moral standards the game associates itself with.
 |
| Bancroft being questioned by the umpires (Pic/Getty) |
Major debate has risen from whether or not the punishments handed out were in fact fair, too lenient or for some people too severe. Bancroft received a nine-month suspension from the game with a ban preventing him from undertaking any leadership roles for a further year afterwards. Both Smith and Warner were banned for a year with Smith then prevented from taking up any leadership responsibilities for an additional year. Warner on the other hand has been banned for the entirety of his career from taking up any such roles.
The ACA (Australian Cricketers’ Association) have led the complaints that the bans are ‘disproportionate’ stating effectively that because in their press interviews the players broke down in tears they should be given softer sentences. Greg Dyer, president of the ACA, said that ‘the distressed faces have sent a message across the world as effective as any sanction could’. He continued, claiming he believed ‘Australia cried with Steve Smith’ and asked that ‘this extraordinary contrition’ be considered. It was impossible not to compare the distraught faces of Smith and Warner to their hysterical ones earlier in the year as they fabricated a media attack on the England team, an infamous nothing headbutt by Jonny Bairstow the focal point. Couple this with the fact this is an Australian team regularly involved in acts of sledging that have come close to the line of acceptability on various occasions. For me there is no sympathy for players that have rode their luck and thrown caution to the wind when it comes to the ‘spirit’ of the game many times before.
 |
| Smith and Bancroft when talking about the Bairstow headbutt (Pic/Reuters) |
As for the tears of the Australians watching at home, it’s likely any that were shed were not out of sympathy, more shame. The national cricket team is the nation’s pride and joy and the subsequent betrayal of trust has rocked the country. The sounds of Australian broadcaster Jim Maxwell breaking down live on air at the very thought of what state his beloved team’s reputation was in should ring loud in the ears of the guilty trio. Perhaps any tears shed by the Australian people were more similar to Maxwell’s than out of sympathy to the apologetic, whimpering Australian ‘leadership group’.
For me personally the sentence is kind as it is, if anything it should be longer. There is no argument in my eyes that just because punishments in the past have been kinder, that the players on this occasion should be given the same sympathy. In the past the likes of Faf Du Plessis (on more than one occasion), Michael Atherton and in the most bizarre incident, Pakistan’s Shahid Afridi have all been embroiled in similar allegations. For some the punishments have been purely financial, some, more recently have led to bans for a couple of games. In comparison the playing bans of the three Australians for either nine or twelve months are clearly far longer.
However the actions of Smith, Warner and Bancroft, I believe, were punished more acceptably. The Australians admitted to their actions and proved that it was a pre-empted plan clearly designed for altering the condition of the ball. Blatant cheating. The bodies responsible for punishing now had everything they needed to be able to lay down a precedent strong enough to deter any sensible player to attempt the like again. Admitting to their actions should not offer them a decreased sentence, merely a clearing of their consciences.
Sports like football, for example, have been ruined by failures to stamp out diving and simulation, the game has slipped into an era where deception and trickery are considered fundamentals. Cricket still has the opportunity to distance itself from this kind of toxic atmosphere and to uphold its stoic traditional values. It would be naïve to think that no cricketer will ever cheat or deceive again but by stamping out the problem when you are given the chance it sets out a much stronger message that will deter most.
A captain deliberating cheating will weigh up his chances of success against the potential risks and dangers of being caught. With financial and media gains so great if you win the temptation is going to be high. To counter this the governing bodies must begin to lay down stricter punishments to put players off even considering cheating. A one game ban is quite frankly pathetic and for players like Steve Smith who care little for morality this is a risk they are prepared to take.
Regardless of what your own personal views are on the punishments served up there is one undeniable and undebatable fact from the fallout of the scandal. The Australian reputation has been hit hard. Prime Minster Malcolm Turnbull even commented on the incident expressing his disappointment and sadness at the whole incident. Australian sports teams and stars have always had a win at all cost attitude, which normally, provided you don’t cheat or use underhand tactics, is a good trait to have.
 |
| Malcolm Turnbull and Steve Smith (Pic/AAP) |
On this occasion the magnifying glass exposes questions about the Australian approach to sport and winning. Steve Smith made reference to the fact the decision was made by a ‘leadership group’. Either, he is telling the truth and three players, led by greed and arrogance, went behind their own teams back undermining the trust of every other player or the whole team knew and there are guilty men walking free.
If it is the former then it rips apart the idea of trust and togetherness that a team should be built on. The biggest losers are the bowlers who now question their ability thinking whether every wicket they’ve taken was out of skill or because their teammates were cheating. Thus we gather that Smith as captain and Warner as vice want to win so badly that they would completely disregard all trust and belief in their own teammates. They would also keep this information from the majority of their colleagues segregating themselves, a far cry from the inclusion and togetherness that all team sports promote.
If on the other hand every player knew then the problem runs much deeper, Australian cricket would be left disgraced and it would warrant a full scale investigation into how the sport is managed and coached. Unfortunately, for the ACA is there no way that they can ever truly prove this not to be the case, the dark cloud will loom for much longer. How unlikely is it that a bowler or fielder handling the ball would not be aware that its disintegration was happening at an unusual rate? The majority of onlookers would certainly have their doubts, myself included.
With cricket at its all-time low in Australia, new captain Tim Paine has now said that his side will ease up on their sledging, traditionally a staple part of the game for the Ozzies. A sensible move for a man who clearly recognises that a change in ethos is necessary to restore respect, winning is no longer the priority.
Besides the loss of its star players the scandal has also had its affect on the country off the field. Various companies like LG Australia, Sanitarium, and Asics have already terminated their sponsorship contracts with those involved quoting that the players and their actions did not sit in line with the companies respective ethics. Qantas, one of the team's main sponsor, haven't cut ties yet but have made it clear that their multi-million pound deal is on shaky ground. Alan Joyce the chief Executive called for Australian cricket to 'do the right thing' and has made various comments alluding to just how thin the ice is the national team are skating on.
A few weeks later Australia was put under the public spotlight again, this time in the shape of the Commonwealth Games arriving on the Gold Coast. The games offered an opportunity to restore national sporting pride, but everything had to be right, winning the most golds (which they did) wouldn’t be enough. The perfect example of this was when tabloids and media scrutinised Matthew Shelley the marathon runner for powering past Scottish athlete Callum Hawkins who had collapsed in a visibly distraught manner. Shelley went on to win but in doing so missed the perfect chance to apply the first bandage to a nation’s damaged reputation.
One of Australia’s greatest sporting moments still remains when John Landy, in 1957, stopped mid race and went back to check on a fellow competitor Ron Clarke who had been tripped. Landy then having realised Clarke was okay emphatically caught the rest of the runners and won the race. This was the kind of moment that Australian sport was crying out for. For Shelley, it was always a difficult decision to make, most runners run their own races but occasionally we do see these moments of camaraderie. There’s certainly no obligation to stop, it is perhaps unfair to blame him for continuing but it does highlight the scrutiny Australian sportsmanship is under. Would the fallout have been the same, or would the picture have even surfaced if it was a Chinese or South African athlete passing?
Smith, Warner and Bancroft have taken the fall, punished quite rightly, for their part in a scandal that has not only damaged the image of cricket globally and nationally but also the Australian sporting mentality as a whole. Australia is under the spotlight now more than ever, the whole incident has highlighted a need in a change in ethos, one that should be heeded around the globe. Never has a country that loves to win cried out more for someone to show them a different side of sport. That it’s not all about winning. That it’s about doing the right thing. It’s about being able to turn back and pick your rival off the floor, and not trying to find a way to put him there unjustly.
Besides the loss of its star players the scandal has also had its affect on the country off the field. Various companies like LG Australia, Sanitarium, and Asics have already terminated their sponsorship contracts with those involved quoting that the players and their actions did not sit in line with the companies respective ethics. Qantas, one of the team's main sponsor, haven't cut ties yet but have made it clear that their multi-million pound deal is on shaky ground. Alan Joyce the chief Executive called for Australian cricket to 'do the right thing' and has made various comments alluding to just how thin the ice is the national team are skating on.
 |
| Callum Hawkins is overtaken by Shelley (Pic/Tracey Nearmey, AP) |
One of Australia’s greatest sporting moments still remains when John Landy, in 1957, stopped mid race and went back to check on a fellow competitor Ron Clarke who had been tripped. Landy then having realised Clarke was okay emphatically caught the rest of the runners and won the race. This was the kind of moment that Australian sport was crying out for. For Shelley, it was always a difficult decision to make, most runners run their own races but occasionally we do see these moments of camaraderie. There’s certainly no obligation to stop, it is perhaps unfair to blame him for continuing but it does highlight the scrutiny Australian sportsmanship is under. Would the fallout have been the same, or would the picture have even surfaced if it was a Chinese or South African athlete passing?
Smith, Warner and Bancroft have taken the fall, punished quite rightly, for their part in a scandal that has not only damaged the image of cricket globally and nationally but also the Australian sporting mentality as a whole. Australia is under the spotlight now more than ever, the whole incident has highlighted a need in a change in ethos, one that should be heeded around the globe. Never has a country that loves to win cried out more for someone to show them a different side of sport. That it’s not all about winning. That it’s about doing the right thing. It’s about being able to turn back and pick your rival off the floor, and not trying to find a way to put him there unjustly.
Comments
Post a Comment