Quote:
|
I think as a matter of principle there does have to be one level of appeal. ....I do believe sporting discipline should be a matter for the sporting authorities and not the civil courts - much as I feel that my own professional discipline should be a matter for the Institute of Chartered Accountants - but if they are to do it properly, they must allow for appeals against referees' or tribunals' decisions.
|
OF, you have hit the nail on the head, and forced me to make a few honest confessions. Apparently I have a serious issues with the ICC over the consistency with which they (or their referres for that matter) fine players for breaking their much malinged code of conduct.
In the recent Australia Pakistan series, there were numerous occasions were bowlers on either sides used obsence language against each other, yet the only person fined was Danish Kaneria, the poor lad was so embarrased he publically apoligised for his send off to Michael Clarke later. Yet, Shane Watson, who was equally obsence in his language towards Shahid Afridi in the final test, escaped unfined, unremrimanded even - apart from this obvious example, ALL, the other Australian bowlers, had more often than not, something to say to our batsmen (at least that's what my local urdu papers tell me anyway, they also said, that not only were the bowlers used "swear" words, fielders too used 'em and at their fore front was Justin Langer). Yes, yes, I know sledging probably should be accpeted now-a-days as a part of the game, and I think I have done that already, but I'm still not sure if I'm ready for swearing and all - any personal remarks should always be condemned, shouldn't they be? And if they are not, then its not too difficult an ask to have the same rules applied with consistency on all players from all countries, or is it? Shoaib Akhtar was fined 60% of his match fee after the first test, for guestering Hayden towards the pavillion using his fingers, which was a legal offence under the code of conduct, and even though I didn't not think the fine was harsh (I actually said the rule was ridicolous) I did think Shoaib probably should have known better. It was significant to note, however, that other /Australian/ bowlers also made similar if not identical guestures towards our batsmen, yet they were not even remprimanded, let alone fined.
In this SA-ENG test match too, as we all have seen Michael Vaughan was fined as much as his entire fee for dishing out some harsh, although justified criticisms of the umpires, (but he still shouldn't have said it in public) yet we saw both skippers, Vaughan, and Smith, get away without any sort of remprimanding, fines or bans what so ever for consistent poor over rates, that showed no signs of improving. If anyone at all should have been fined for any reason, Vaughan and Smith, and both teams, as a whole, should have been them, and that for denying fans the amount of cricket we dererve to see after having paided to watch, so shoud have been Pakistan in our test series, and so should be any other team who doesn't bowl 15 over in an hour. I don't get it, is it really that difficult to bowl 15 in an hour, aren't these guys professionals, who are paid to do what they do? If people go to stadiums to watch 15 and pay to see 15 an hour, they should get that, nothing less. Perhaps in this case, my argument may stand thinner ground, since we had a result in this test match, but in the longer context, my argument, I would think, stand firm.
Under normal circumstances, when I'm not carried away or this frustrated at the ICC, I would proabably have my self too said that 100% for Vaughan was harsh, but after having witnissed quite some time of it happening to my own players, I really couldn't control my emotions at all. I probably should have...
I said before that I was not comfortable with players apealing against bans/fines, because some how it made me feel it was going to make referres lose creditability, but then on reconsideration, OF, I think you are right, may be players should have that right, other wise, what's going to happen to all the lawyers? And, coming to think of it, as an individual, you should have the right to appeal against what is primarly an accusation made against you. But I would still think, jus like you, that that right should be reserved to severe cases, and not just every now and then.
And you are right again about the Ganguly affair, why in all the world was that Ganguly case conducted by some one off NZ private judge - shouldn't that have been between the ICC and its lawyers and Ganguly and his lawyers. In Vaughan's case, I have now found out that PCA are going to advice the ICC to relook at the Code of Conduct, that is what their plan is, so its perhaps not all about Vaughan getting back his winning bounus. I will be very, very glad if some changes are made to the CoC, I definately think it needs some, so perhaps I'm going to change my opinion on the appealing against the fine bit too - if that leads to a few changes in the CoC conduct - than it can't be bad.
PS: everyone is right about Greame Smith, he does deserve some credit, not only for his post match comments, but more so for the way he batted in the 2nd innings. I also agree that it is not often that we see him being gracious in defeat - his past record in this respect is ..lesser said about it the better. He is not one of my favortie personalities in cricket, but I do think despite that, that in the past few months, especially since the time SA have been going through a bit of struggling patch, he has matured tremendously as person, skipper and batsmen. And improved from his former very very annoying self to perhaps only annoying self. Enough evidence in his career to suggest, that first impression, doesn't necessarily have to be, after all, the last or correct impression. My first impression of him was that he was an arrogant, immature person, who couldn't see beyond his own nose, and who didn't deserve to be captain of SA. But to be fair to him, he has given plenty of food for thought to his critics in recent times, and at least on the captaincy front he has forced me to change my mind. For a lack of suitable alternatives, he is right now the best man for the job. It is not difficult to see why however some England fans can still find more reasons do dislike him. He'll never be a favorite of mine as well, but off late I have been prepared to give Jonny Bravo (that is what I like to call him) much more respect than I was at one stage.
18-01-2005, 10:18 AM
in reply to Maranello's post starting "Well, well, that boy Smith is full of..." 
Linear Mode
