Sympathy For The Devil? Smith, Bancroft and Warner Banned: Ball Tampering Fallout
Before I start this article in earnest, I have to put in the following disclaimers; I work for (one of) Australia's biggest Cricket retailers, and am lucky enough to be called upon by Cricket NSW at times to be a net bowler at the SCG for the International teams most years and as such I have met, bowled at and conversed with Steve Smith, David Warner and briefly with Cameron Bancroft. Through these roles I have made many contacts in the game of cricket but in no way do I have an inside view of the events which have recently taken place in South Africa with the Australian Cricket team. The views expressed in this article are my own personal opinions and not those of my employers, or anyone I am affiliated or in contact with.
As usual, sitting back and contemplating events as a whole leads to a much clearer view of events. On Sunday it was a piece of yellow tape, we now know it was sandpaper. On Sunday it was the leadership group in the Australian team, we now know it was Warner coercing the young Bancroft and Steve Smith happened upon the conversation but didn't prevent it from happening while Messrs Lyon, Starc, Hazlewood distanced themselves from any suggestion of knowledge. Of course I am referring to the sensational story that the Australian cricket team are embroiled in a cheating saga, that they deliberately took sandpaper onto the field and used it on the cricket ball in order to induce swing. For those of you not familiar with cricket, keeping one side of the ball shiny and the other side rough will make the ball curve through the air. As a batsman it is hard enough to hit a ball coming straight at you at 90mph/145kmh, even more so when it curves, or "swings" through the air.
The crime of "Ball Tampering" is not a new one, but it is one of the bigger crimes in cricket; Not quite on a par with match-fixing or spot-fixing, but worse than refusing to walk as a batsman when you know you are out. The Australian team have put themselves on a pedestal in recent years, claiming to be "tough but fair", and to "headbutt the line" of what is right and what is wrong. To a certain extent they have, and they have certainly manipulated their home media in order to get an advantage over the opposition; Remember the Jonny Bairstow headbutt saga a few months ago? The truth is that they were, and still are, a very good cricket side with possibly the best bowling attack in the world with only South Africa who could realistically contest that assessment. Do they need to resort to those tactics? Do they need to be as verbal as they have been?
The subject of verbals is one which is dependent on your cricket background. Older fellows and much of the English culture is that sledging is a little beyond the pale, and despite there being several instances of the English getting into opposition, they do rather take it personally. Similarly, sub-continental nations take exception to being on the end of sledging having been raised to respect cricket as a "gentleman's game". Australians, somewhat infamously, do not feel the same way and even down to club cricket or park cricket it is not unusual to hear players giving plenty of verbals to opposition but then be perfectly happy to sit down and have a beer with them afterwards. It's almost as if Australians are looking at batsman and thinking "If this guy can put up with my shit and play well, he's worth sitting down and having a drink with." For the most part, it isn't personal but where Australians tend to fall foul is when the tables get turned.
South Africans are known for being blunt, to the point and matter of fact. One time a South African overseas player named Keith Van Dyk was coaching us at my English club in Devon and had set up an exercise where anyone who bowled a short ball would have to do 5 press-ups. 15 year old me bowled a very full delivery but way outside leg stump, this is how the (shouted across the field) conversation went, for full effect read Keith's comments in a strong Johannesburg accent:
That was all the effects microphones picked up, this was as the players were leaving the field for a break. You can't imagine David Warner would have not been saying worse things for the two hours of the session beforehand, out of range of microphones, or that he hadn't been giving de Kock a hard time. But allegedly de Kock made a reference to Warner's wife Candice's ex (rugby star Sonny Bill Williams, whom she had a very public sexual encounter in an Eastern Sydney pub toilet before she met Warner) being in town the following week and suddenly that's beyond the pale. That's too personal.
The exact wording is unknown to the public, however it's not the first time an Australian player has been on the receiving end of a good sledge about their spouse. Glenn McGrath once asked West Indian batsman Ramnaresh Sarwan what a certain part of Brian Lara's anatomy tasted like, Sarwan retorted "I don't know, ask your wife." At the time, McGrath went crazy, and somewhat understandably considering the health issues Jane McGrath was having at the time, however Glenn McGrath has subsequently said on a few occasions that Sarwan's comeback was a very good one, he just saw red in the heat of the moment.
What was alarming to me about the Warner/de Kock incident was the reaction from the Australian players and staff, complaining about it getting too personal, seemingly forgetting Warner's "scared-eyes" taunt at Jonathan Trott a few years ago to name but one. Or how about coach Darren Lehmann in particular, who came out and said that the behaviour of the South African crowd and the abuse they were giving his players was unacceptable. The same man who invited the whole Australian public to "give it to" Stuart Broad, and that he hoped Broad would "cry and go home". It's all fun when the crowd are behind you and your boys, isn't it Boof? But when you're out of Australia and out of your comfort zone, not so fun is it? The secret to beating Australia, and any other sporting side for that matter, is to make them uncomfortable.
And so we get to the crux of the matter, the actual ball tampering incident. The latest version we have been told is that during the Lunch break David Warner and Cameron Bancroft were having a discussion about using sandpaper to rough up one side of the ball. Steve Smith joined the conversation mid-way through, failed to tell Warner/Bancroft it was not to happen, and led his men out onto the field. South African TV broadcasters had been suspicious of something untoward all series, and basically followed the ball and whoever was looking after it when Cameron Bancroft was seen to take something from his pocket and use it on the ball. This was picked up and played on the big screen and the umpires noticed. Simultaneously, Darren Lehmann noticed and jumped on the 2-way radio to the Australian 12th Man Peter Handscomb and uttered six words which appear to be his alibi; "What the fuck is going on?!"
Shortly after, Handscomb went onto the field and engaged Bancroft in discussion, shortly after which Bancroft tried to subtly remove the sandpaper from his pocket and put it down the front of his pants. The cameras certainly picked that up, although perhaps the Umpires did not, but they asked to speak to Bancroft. Presumably they asked him to empty his pockets, and he produced a black cloth pouch for his sunglasses, although curiously he wasn't wearing them. This part of the controversy is important, because it is the first act of deception to cover up the act of cheating. Although the umpires decided the condition of the ball had not changed enough to justify them awarding 5 penalty runs, it was Bancroft clearly lying by suggesting this soft cloth had been used on the ball to shine it (legal) rather than a course piece of sandpaper to rough it up (very much illegal).
Immediately after the cessation of play that day, Smith and Bancroft fronted up to the media. Some say this was an act worthy of praise, facing the fire and showing contrition; others felt after subsequent revelations that this was a second act of deception to the public by lying about what had happened. Bancroft said he had used tape to gather rough from the footmarks, clearly we now know it was sandpaper. Smith said it was the leadership group who had come up with the plan, when in reality the leadership group consists of Captain, Vice Captain and Coaching Staff along with senior players; we now know that only Smith, Warner (VC) and Bancroft were in on it.
And now we move on to the sanctions, which have split the cricket community. People have compared the actions of Smith, Bancroft and Warner to previous ball tampering incidents such as Faf Du Plessis, who used a sweet on his tongue to enhanced the shine on the ball. He received a one match ban for his actions from the ICC, and no further ban from Cricket South Africa. Smith and Bancroft also received a one match ban from the ICC, however their sanctions from Cricket Australia are far more draconian. David Warner received no ICC sanction, but Cricket Australia are throwing the book at him.
In some ways, I feel the punishments handed down are justified; Steve Smith banned for one year, stripped of the Captaincy for a minimum of two years; David Warner banned for one year, stripped of the Vice Captaincy and will never be considered for a leadership role again; Cameron Bancroft, banned for nine months. These punishments are for bringing the game into disrepute, for sullying the image of the Australian cricket team who saw themselves as the example to the world when it came to how the game should be played. To so openly state such a thing and to then be found culpable for one of the worst cricketing crimes is as about as far as you can fall from grace.
David Warner in particular deserves this most. He is the most abrasive, most controversial, most aggravating of the three culprits by far, and probably holds the same rank in the whole squad. He is Australia's version of Kevin Pietersen in that he is an incredible batsman but seen to be a negative influence on a dressing room. He is polarising, and many Australian cricket fans do not think much of him at all. Clearly he has a fan base, and his Kaboom bat had been a big seller across Australia up to this point. But of those who have personal experience with him it is difficult to find anyone who has nothing but praise.
Stories of ignoring kids who have waited hours for autographs, for the chance to meet him; stories of drunken nights out in the city and narrowly avoiding fights before ever being picked for NSW or Australia, stories of punching opposition players in nightclubs overseas, stories of arrogance follow Warner around. Then there was 2017's story of the pay dispute between players and Cricket Australia, where Warner was the most vocal about it. Then there's the hypocrisy, in the aftermath of the Faf Du Plessis incident where Warner stated he would be "very disappointed if anyone in our team did that." and then hatched a worse plot himself! I read an article this week that stated there was a large appetite at Cricket Australia to see the back of David Warner, and I believe this may just be it. If it hadn't been for the man's obvious talent as a batsman we may already have seen that years ago. As Kevin Pietersen knows all too well, sometimes even the talent isn't enough to secure your career future.
While Warner deserves this ignominy, he has not actually come forward to face the media and has hidden behind a tweet and a statement. Where I do have bucket loads of sympathy and the desire to give another chance is to Steve Smith and particularly Cameron Bancroft. Each of them gave press conferences upon their return to Sydney and Perth respectively and, flanked by a parent, faced up to questions, showed contrition and appeared devastated by their terrible mistake. They realise that there is no excuse for lying and attempting to deceive, and have both accepted that they deserve their punishment. It is so easy to criticise and there is clearly not a shortage of journalists or columnists ready to do so, however it must not be forgotten that these are human beings with feelings, and in many cases have the same basic fundamental values as we do. One comment from Steve Smith deserves to be highlighted, not just because of him breaking down in front of the world, but gesturing to the man behind him as he said:
NB: While I was writing this article, Darren Lehmann announced that he is standing down from his role as Coach of the Australian team. Whilst Lehmann has done an excellent job as coach overseeing two Ashes victories on home soil, I believe his decision to be the correct one at a time where the culture of the Australian team is under such scrutiny and in need of change. My personal opinion is that Jason Gillespie should be the next coach, and that England missed a trick by not employing the South Australian a few years ago.
The crime of "Ball Tampering" is not a new one, but it is one of the bigger crimes in cricket; Not quite on a par with match-fixing or spot-fixing, but worse than refusing to walk as a batsman when you know you are out. The Australian team have put themselves on a pedestal in recent years, claiming to be "tough but fair", and to "headbutt the line" of what is right and what is wrong. To a certain extent they have, and they have certainly manipulated their home media in order to get an advantage over the opposition; Remember the Jonny Bairstow headbutt saga a few months ago? The truth is that they were, and still are, a very good cricket side with possibly the best bowling attack in the world with only South Africa who could realistically contest that assessment. Do they need to resort to those tactics? Do they need to be as verbal as they have been?
The subject of verbals is one which is dependent on your cricket background. Older fellows and much of the English culture is that sledging is a little beyond the pale, and despite there being several instances of the English getting into opposition, they do rather take it personally. Similarly, sub-continental nations take exception to being on the end of sledging having been raised to respect cricket as a "gentleman's game". Australians, somewhat infamously, do not feel the same way and even down to club cricket or park cricket it is not unusual to hear players giving plenty of verbals to opposition but then be perfectly happy to sit down and have a beer with them afterwards. It's almost as if Australians are looking at batsman and thinking "If this guy can put up with my shit and play well, he's worth sitting down and having a drink with." For the most part, it isn't personal but where Australians tend to fall foul is when the tables get turned.
South Africans are known for being blunt, to the point and matter of fact. One time a South African overseas player named Keith Van Dyk was coaching us at my English club in Devon and had set up an exercise where anyone who bowled a short ball would have to do 5 press-ups. 15 year old me bowled a very full delivery but way outside leg stump, this is how the (shouted across the field) conversation went, for full effect read Keith's comments in a strong Johannesburg accent:
Keith: "Charlie, that'll be five press-ups!"
Me: "But it wasn't short!"
Keith: "Nah, but it was shit."
South Africans are very good at getting the mental disintegration side of sledging across, perhaps it is the sharpness of the accent? Perhaps it is the demeanour? It is like Australian sledging but a little more intelligent. Case in point; Look at David Warner's altercation with Quinton de Kock, where all Warner could muster up as they were leaving the field was:
"Fucking have a look at ya! You fucking sook! Have a look at yourself!"
That was all the effects microphones picked up, this was as the players were leaving the field for a break. You can't imagine David Warner would have not been saying worse things for the two hours of the session beforehand, out of range of microphones, or that he hadn't been giving de Kock a hard time. But allegedly de Kock made a reference to Warner's wife Candice's ex (rugby star Sonny Bill Williams, whom she had a very public sexual encounter in an Eastern Sydney pub toilet before she met Warner) being in town the following week and suddenly that's beyond the pale. That's too personal.
The exact wording is unknown to the public, however it's not the first time an Australian player has been on the receiving end of a good sledge about their spouse. Glenn McGrath once asked West Indian batsman Ramnaresh Sarwan what a certain part of Brian Lara's anatomy tasted like, Sarwan retorted "I don't know, ask your wife." At the time, McGrath went crazy, and somewhat understandably considering the health issues Jane McGrath was having at the time, however Glenn McGrath has subsequently said on a few occasions that Sarwan's comeback was a very good one, he just saw red in the heat of the moment.
What was alarming to me about the Warner/de Kock incident was the reaction from the Australian players and staff, complaining about it getting too personal, seemingly forgetting Warner's "scared-eyes" taunt at Jonathan Trott a few years ago to name but one. Or how about coach Darren Lehmann in particular, who came out and said that the behaviour of the South African crowd and the abuse they were giving his players was unacceptable. The same man who invited the whole Australian public to "give it to" Stuart Broad, and that he hoped Broad would "cry and go home". It's all fun when the crowd are behind you and your boys, isn't it Boof? But when you're out of Australia and out of your comfort zone, not so fun is it? The secret to beating Australia, and any other sporting side for that matter, is to make them uncomfortable.
 |
| Cameron Bancroft in action Boxing Day Ashes Test MCG 2017 |
Shortly after, Handscomb went onto the field and engaged Bancroft in discussion, shortly after which Bancroft tried to subtly remove the sandpaper from his pocket and put it down the front of his pants. The cameras certainly picked that up, although perhaps the Umpires did not, but they asked to speak to Bancroft. Presumably they asked him to empty his pockets, and he produced a black cloth pouch for his sunglasses, although curiously he wasn't wearing them. This part of the controversy is important, because it is the first act of deception to cover up the act of cheating. Although the umpires decided the condition of the ball had not changed enough to justify them awarding 5 penalty runs, it was Bancroft clearly lying by suggesting this soft cloth had been used on the ball to shine it (legal) rather than a course piece of sandpaper to rough it up (very much illegal).
Immediately after the cessation of play that day, Smith and Bancroft fronted up to the media. Some say this was an act worthy of praise, facing the fire and showing contrition; others felt after subsequent revelations that this was a second act of deception to the public by lying about what had happened. Bancroft said he had used tape to gather rough from the footmarks, clearly we now know it was sandpaper. Smith said it was the leadership group who had come up with the plan, when in reality the leadership group consists of Captain, Vice Captain and Coaching Staff along with senior players; we now know that only Smith, Warner (VC) and Bancroft were in on it.
And now we move on to the sanctions, which have split the cricket community. People have compared the actions of Smith, Bancroft and Warner to previous ball tampering incidents such as Faf Du Plessis, who used a sweet on his tongue to enhanced the shine on the ball. He received a one match ban for his actions from the ICC, and no further ban from Cricket South Africa. Smith and Bancroft also received a one match ban from the ICC, however their sanctions from Cricket Australia are far more draconian. David Warner received no ICC sanction, but Cricket Australia are throwing the book at him.
In some ways, I feel the punishments handed down are justified; Steve Smith banned for one year, stripped of the Captaincy for a minimum of two years; David Warner banned for one year, stripped of the Vice Captaincy and will never be considered for a leadership role again; Cameron Bancroft, banned for nine months. These punishments are for bringing the game into disrepute, for sullying the image of the Australian cricket team who saw themselves as the example to the world when it came to how the game should be played. To so openly state such a thing and to then be found culpable for one of the worst cricketing crimes is as about as far as you can fall from grace.
David Warner in particular deserves this most. He is the most abrasive, most controversial, most aggravating of the three culprits by far, and probably holds the same rank in the whole squad. He is Australia's version of Kevin Pietersen in that he is an incredible batsman but seen to be a negative influence on a dressing room. He is polarising, and many Australian cricket fans do not think much of him at all. Clearly he has a fan base, and his Kaboom bat had been a big seller across Australia up to this point. But of those who have personal experience with him it is difficult to find anyone who has nothing but praise.
 |
| Steve Smith has lost the Captaincy for now and has much to ponder over the next year. |
While Warner deserves this ignominy, he has not actually come forward to face the media and has hidden behind a tweet and a statement. Where I do have bucket loads of sympathy and the desire to give another chance is to Steve Smith and particularly Cameron Bancroft. Each of them gave press conferences upon their return to Sydney and Perth respectively and, flanked by a parent, faced up to questions, showed contrition and appeared devastated by their terrible mistake. They realise that there is no excuse for lying and attempting to deceive, and have both accepted that they deserve their punishment. It is so easy to criticise and there is clearly not a shortage of journalists or columnists ready to do so, however it must not be forgotten that these are human beings with feelings, and in many cases have the same basic fundamental values as we do. One comment from Steve Smith deserves to be highlighted, not just because of him breaking down in front of the world, but gesturing to the man behind him as he said:
"Any time you think about making a questionable decision,
think about affecting your parents. To see the way my old man has been,
and my mum, it hurts. I just want to say I'm sorry for the pain
I have brought to Australia and the fans and the public."
These weren't crocodile tears. Steve Smith was genuinely devastated by his failure to prevent the events in Cape Town. We speak a lot about on-field mental disintegration in cricket to gain a competitive advantage but we also need to be mindful of off-field mental disintegration. Steve Smith and Cameron Bancroft will be severely depressed and whilst the enormity of their actions is beginning to sink in they are not murderers. They are not criminal. They are men who have made a terrible terrible mistake and are being punished (correctly) by their employers in a very public way. This does not mean they deserve to be ostracised and I hope Cricket Australia, the cricketing public and the Australian public in general do the right thing and support Smith and Bancroft all the way back to the top of their games. David Warner...? I'm not sure he realises the size of the damage he has caused and frankly I'd say he's only sorry about the loss of sponsorship from LG, Asics and the loss of his lucrative IPL contract. I'm not sure he's truly sorry, or if he's sorry he got caught out.
The Australian team has a period of rebuilding in the next 12 months or so leading up to the Ashes. As an Englishman, of course I want England to win the Ashes in 2019 and Steve Smith will be available again by the time it rolls around. I hope to see Cameron Bancroft involved too. Cricket is a world game, and as much as the world has been let down by these three men I hope the world embraces two of them back into the game as deep down they are both very good men. What cricket really needs is to weed out the bad ones, who instigate this kind of dishonest, cheating and unacceptable behaviour. Never seeing David Warner in Australian colours again would be a start.
 |
| David Warner needs to follow his own advice to Quinton de Kock and "Have a look at yourself." |
NB: While I was writing this article, Darren Lehmann announced that he is standing down from his role as Coach of the Australian team. Whilst Lehmann has done an excellent job as coach overseeing two Ashes victories on home soil, I believe his decision to be the correct one at a time where the culture of the Australian team is under such scrutiny and in need of change. My personal opinion is that Jason Gillespie should be the next coach, and that England missed a trick by not employing the South Australian a few years ago.
Comments
Post a Comment