Official Ban/Warning/Fine thread

[Precambrian]

To the players of course,

Esp given the increasing instances of players being summoned and charged by the Match Referee, thought it could get a thread of it;s own.

To start with,

Gambhir cops a one match ban.

http://content-gulf.cricinfo.com/ind...ry/376236.html

He is likely to miss the 4th test. And the match referree seems to have given him a relatively lighter sentence on account of the fact that he was provoked into doing the elbow thing and the spat.

Originally Posted by Cricinfo

"The decision to find Gambhir guilty of a Level 2 offence is indicative of the fact that any degree of physical contact is unacceptable," Broad said. "Had Gambhir been charged with and found guilty of a charge under 2.4 [for deliberate or inappropriate physical contact], due to his previous offence, I would have been obliged to impose a minimum penalty of a two-test match ban. In the view of the umpires, the facts of this case - the lightness of the physical conduct and the element of provocation - would not justify such a penalty."

Watson was found to have been "verbally engaging with Gambhir in a manner that was not in keeping the spirit of cricket" and was fined 10% of his match fee. He pleaded not guilty to the Level 1 charge and has no right to appeal.

Gambhir was fined 65% of his match fee for his run-in with Afridi in 2007 while batting in an ODI in Kanpur. In that case, he was found guilty of a Level 2 charge of inappropriate and deliberate physical contact between players as well as a Level 1 charge of not conducting himself within the spirit of the game.

The current disciplinary measures follow Zaheer Khan being docked 80% of his match fee last week for his celebration when Matthew Hayden was dismissed in the second innings of India's 320-run win in the second test at Mohali. The tense series, which India currently leads 1-0, follows a fractious contest in Australia's 2-1 series win at home in 2007-08.

Guess Katich probably missed out.

Gambhir to appeal against the decision, but it's obvious that it is to delay the ban, as he's been the top batsman in the current Indo-Aussie series.

[gettingbetter]

I'm not sure where I saw it, but I think it was a cricinfo article that highlighted the most fined players. A lot of Pakistani and Indian players were at the top of the list, Inzamam, Ganguly, Dravid and Tendulkar were rather prominent on the fine list considering that they were captains and the honus is upon them to maintain over rates, it is understandable.

[Matt79]

Ponting will be joining that list soon, unless we can find a reliable spinner - he's already come out and said that it "does his head in" after only a couple of series without Warne/MacGill

[Cevno]

I think the ban is appropriate.

Having said that, I just hope that we see consistency in such decisions. That ALL players from ALL countries are given similar treatment.

It is because of perceived inconsistency that most people are pissed off with match referees. Not with the decision itself. If you are tough, be tough with everybody. If you are a bit tolerant, be tolerant towards everybody. As simple as that.

[Matt79]

Originally Posted by Cevno

I think the ban is appropriate.

Having said that, I just hope that we see consistency in such decisions. That ALL players from ALL countries are given similar treatment.

It is because of perceived inconsistency that most people are pissed off with match referees. Not with the decision itself. If you are tough, be tough with everybody. If you are a bit tolerant, be tolerant towards everybody. As simple as that.

Any recent examples of tolerance being extended to undue physical contact with another player? (genuine question)

[howardj]

As a general rule, physical contact between players should result in suspensions, whether the offender is Indian, Australian or whoever. There is no way that sort of thing should ever be tolerated in a non-contact sport.

[four_or_six]

Looking back through, I can't see anyone being found guilty of physical contact twice in a year, so it's difficult to have any comparison.

That said, presumably Gambhir was told last time that if he did it again he'd be banned. If that's the case then he's been pretty daft.

[Polo23]

I reckon a ban is a bit of an overreaction. Yeah, he made light contact with his elbow, so what? It's not like he smacked him in the back of the head with his bat, which I think would have been forgiveable, given how annoying and arrogant Watson is.

The punishment should be relevant to the extent, and intent of the offense. By all means ban him for an ODI or take his whole match fee off him or both..but a banning from a whole test, and one which may prove to be so crucial is a little much for mine.

[brockley]

Saw the banning thread and thought someone or few were going to get banned.
Was just hoping it wasn't me can be a provocoter at times
Gambier did the same thing to afridi not surprised he got a ban,he should just cop it.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Polo23

I reckon a ban is a bit of an overreaction. Yeah, he made light contact with his elbow, so what? It's not like he smacked him in the back of the head with his bat, which I think would have been forgiveable, given how annoying and arrogant Watson is.

The punishment should be relevant to the extent, and intent of the offense. By all means ban him for an ODI or take his whole match fee off him or both..but a banning from a whole test, and one which may prove to be so crucial is a little much for mine.

If the offence occurs in a Test, the ban should relate to a Test IMO.

Similar with ODIs.

Only time offences should involve bans for both should be when it's off-field offences.

[Matt79]

Originally Posted by Polo23

I reckon a ban is a bit of an overreaction. Yeah, he made light contact with his elbow, so what? It's not like he smacked him in the back of the head with his bat, which I think would have been forgiveable, given how annoying and arrogant Watson is.

The punishment should be relevant to the extent, and intent of the offense. By all means ban him for an ODI or take his whole match fee off him or both..but a banning from a whole test, and one which may prove to be so crucial is a little much for mine.

As if by the time they appeal etc he'll miss the next test (unless of course, India seal the series here). The team management is canny enough to ensure whatever test he misses will be either a dead rubber or against a much weaker team.

[Cevno]

Originally Posted by Matt79

Any recent examples of tolerance being extended to undue physical contact with another player? (genuine question)

How about katich against gambhir yesterday.
He clearly got in the way of gambhir physically.

As for watson,when he was going for the first run watson deliberately put his hand/shoulder in frond of gambhir which gambhir managed to avoid.

Though tendulkar(being the gentleman/older breed of indian cricketer he is) did not react clarke clearly took him down to prevent him from taking the run in the CB series.

[Cevno]

Originally Posted by four_or_six

Looking back through, I can't see anyone being found guilty of physical contact twice in a year, so it's difficult to have any comparison.

.

He was never found guilty of deliberate physical contact with afridi.

It was more to do with the fact that standing on the middle of the pitch they hurled abuses at each other.

Quote:
Gambhir, Afridi fined for clash at Kanpur
DH News Service,Gwalior:
India's Gautam Gambhir and Shahid Afridi of Pakistan have been fined after being found guilty of breaching the ICC's Code of Conduct during the third one-dayer in Kanpur on Sunday.


Gambhir has been fined a total of 65 per cent of his match fee, while Afridi's fine comes to a total of 95 per cent. The punishments were handed down by ICC match referee Roshan Mahanama, following hearings on Wednesday.
The players were charged under two counts of the Code of Conduct, C2, at Level 2, which deals with conduct unbecoming to their status which could bring them or the game into disrepute. The other section under which the duo has fined is Level 2.4 which relates to inappropriate and deliberate physical contact between players in the course of play.
Gambhir had hit the third ball of the 20th over of the innings bowled by Afridi for four and there was an altercation between the players. The next ball, Gambhir had worked to third man region for single, and in the process of taking the single Gambhir collided with Afridi. A heated verbal exchange took place between the two players that forced umpire Ian Gould to intervene.
Commenting on the action, Mahanama said, "Both players pleaded not guilty to the charges, but even if the collision between them was viewed as an accident I still felt it was inappropriate. On top of that, there was a build up to that incident and then they stood toe-to-toe arguing in mid-pitch immediately afterwards. It is not the sort of example that players should be setting at any time, least of all in a series as high-profile as this one."
On the disparity of the fine imposed, the Sri Lankan said, "In handing down these fines I took into account the fact that this was the first time Gambhir has appeared before a disciplinary hearing, hence his punishment is below that of Afridi."

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Matt79

As if by the time they appeal etc he'll miss the next test (unless of course, India seal the series here). The team management is canny enough to ensure whatever test he misses will be either a dead rubber or against a much weaker team.

We'll see how "much weaker" England are than Australia by the time the India series against us is up.

[Matt79]

^^ the ref. noted that he was unimpressed with the contact, but opted for a charge of "conduct unbecoming". He then fined Gambhir less than Afridi because Gambhir then had a clean record. Now Gambhir has done something very similar and the ref has taken into account he's already got a warning on this issue, and is taking that record into accout. It's the old adage about something happening once being unfortunate, twice being careless, and three times signifying that something's rotten.

Gambhir is too good a cricketer to let his career get derailed by something so silly as not being able to control his temper well enough to avoid crashing into people. Sure, lots of players aren't saints, but you have to be able to keep your actions close enough to within the law if you're going to last. Hope he learns his lesson from this and lets his bat do the talking, and failing that, at least his mouth rather than his elbow.