The recent implosion shows that the fault lines stemming from the sandpaper scandal still persist in Australian cricket
In a notorious year of discontent, Cricket Australia has once again found itself staggering on the eve of what is usually a celebrated occasion in the annual calendar, as 2018 sandpapers such controversy in South Africa The little square shatters its soul. Australian Cricket.
An unprecedented embarrassment at the time, tempers flared up again the day before the Adelaide Test, thanks to David Warner's unusually public complaints about his treatment. In a growing scandal hours before the start of the second Test against the West Indies, the batsman’s wife Candace accused California of putting her family through ‘hell’.
He told Sydney radio station Triple M: "We've been through this pain since 2018, we've been through this pain, and we've reached a point where enough is enough. Dave's comments were very powerful and they should be." It is. We have been through a hell of a situation for our family as well as his colleagues, through it all again and the frustrating thing for David is that it dragged on for so long."
Its objection followed Warner’s decision to withdraw on Wednesday from an independent review of whether the CA should lift the captain’s lifetime ban against him. The process began informally in February but only became official when he submitted an application for a review of the decision in late November, including personal references from Greg Chappell and current Australian captain Pat Cummins.
But the dispute led to a major crisis in 2008 as the CA slipped from one controversy to another.
From the chaotic end of Justin Langer’s tenure as coach to a long saga surrounding the value of his aired deal with Seven, from the botched T20 World Cup defense to the poor crowd at last week’s Perth Test, bar -There have been frequent challenges.
That said, the success cards slipped through the cracks in all teams. While traditionally the national team’s form has been solid, the recent blast has shown that the fault lines in Australian cricket coming out of the Newlands Test are still fraught.
In a Test where Steve Smith, who had been penalized as a co-offender alongside Warner at Newlands, was returned as captain in place of Pat Cummins, the Australians were once again in the limelight.
Both Warner and his wife said their decision to withdraw was driven in part by a desire to protect their colleagues from further questioning. But after making his anger public, Warner will strike out with colleagues who have repeatedly made clear their concerns about being linked to the scandal.
Just 18 months ago the Australian bowling attack of Cummins, Mitchell Starc, Josh Hazlewood and Nathan Lyon issued a statement to the 'Australian public' saying they knew nothing about sandpaper until they were at Newlands I didn’t see the pictures on the big screen.
Declaring that he was proud of his integrity, he said he was disappointed that his integrity was being called into question and felt “compelled to re-record key facts”. Charged with bowling the West Indies twice over the next five days, and then backing South Africa in three Tests in a short space of time, he must again be disappointed.
Whoever is at fault for causing the latest outburst, the body language of the Australian team will be scrutinized at length in the coming days at Adelaide Oval.
Warners and CA contradictorily expressed frustration Wednesday night at the Independent Commission’s desire to have its hearings public. Warner expressed unbridled anger at what he said was South Africa’s determination to recover the coal still bubbling from the disaster. The CA, too, apparently expects any hearings to be held behind closed doors, as has traditionally been the case for the NCA.
But CA and The Warners aren’t the only reputable parties to consider. The CA's Integrity Department - headed by Jackie Partridge - and committee professionals including Alan Sullivan, Robert Heath, Jane Seawright, Leon Zwer and Adrian Anderson have established a reputation.
Hearings closed to the public, even those investigating corrupt behaviour or fraud, are routine. But to borrow the word “purge” from Warner’s angry description of how the proceedings unfolded, highlighting the public inquiry promotes fairness, something the independent commission must take into account.
It is disingenuous to suggest that the Committee would not accept the Newlands test as a baseline for personality testing if the purpose of the review is to test the sincerity of Warner's remorse and improvements in his behaviour.
Those who have cheered Warner and released character references clearly think the editorial has hit solid ground. He may have proven himself to be an outstanding captain. But no painting worth its salt would ever issue a rubber stamp without a thorough inspection.
Comments
Post a Comment