Baggy Green ball tampering: Bancroft, Smith and the Aussie "Leadership Group"

[SteveNZ]

Because Cam didn't use the sandpaper with much force, there's multiple ways to do it without getting caught. A gentle rub every over or two would not be noticeable, unless you have eagle eyes, could also explain why it didn't reverse right after that rub.

Lehmann then Asks Peter to relay the message that they've been caught on tape. The more I think about it the more sinister it looks, you can draw your own conclusions.

Nah hold on. I was replying to a post about Gough saying the bowlers must've known because they're so intimate with the ball. Yet you say it's not noticeable. Which one is it?

And what evidence do you have that Lehmann said that to Handscome? I'd suggest none. You seem to think you know a lot, the 'Bancroft only rubbed softly' part too but unless youre in SA wearing yellow and green I'd suggest youre guessing and quite likely have no idea at all.

 

[Rasimione]

Mickey Arthur gives his thoughts on the situation and the culture of Australian cricket in general.

Whatever you think of Arthur, it's a pretty interesting read.

I'm speechless. Totally gobsmacked.

 

[TheJediBrah]

My personal opinions on Micky Arthur and "homeworkgate" and the other issues have definitely changed over the last 5 years. At the time I thought he was out of line and not up to the job, now I'm more inclined to think it's the players more so at fault, that they just didn't respect him at all and were unprofessional with regard to how they treated him.

 

[vcs]

And now the main sponsors of the Test team (Magellan) have ended their sponsorship two years early. I can understand why many think the punishments for Smith and co are harsh but when you factor this in with the TV rights at a very delicate stage, this has been a financial catastrophe for Cricket Australia.

At least we won't have to endure Marcus and his bloody perfect life any more.

living in a global world, using German trainers, listening to a British band, eating in a Japanese restaurant, using an American smart phone blah blah blah

 

[R!TTER]

Nah hold on. I was replying to a post about Gough saying the bowlers must've known because they're so intimate with the ball. Yet you say it's not noticeable. Which one is it?

And what evidence do you have that Lehmann said that to Handscome? I'd suggest none. You seem to think you know a lot, the 'Bancroft only rubbed softly' part too but unless youre in SA wearing yellow and green I'd suggest youre guessing and quite likely have no idea at all.

Not noticeable to the umpires, it doesn't imply that it wasn't pre planned with the bowlers in on it.

Considering the lies that were floating around till yesterday i.e. tape, first time incident (hello DRSgate) or what the leadership group constitutes, I have a fair idea that this could be more malignant then first imagined. The first press conference was full of lies trying to dampen the magnitude of their actions, I wouldn't assume anything after that as 100% of the truth. Unless you have insider knowledge yourself, you cannot dismiss some theories as BS.

I am also going by what Fannie said & a graph on reddit which correlates the amount of (reverse)swing after a certain number overs, that Aus got consistently in the last few tests.

 

[Starfighter]

Lying in front of the whole world is a big thing when he had the opportunity to state things as they are. What's the point in saying that they had used a tape (and tried to pick up granules using it) instead of stating that it was sandpaper.

I seriously wonder if part of the lying is that Smith didn't want to somehow implicate Warner, almost like he's slightly intimidated by him.

Because Cam didn't use the sandpaper with much force, there's multiple ways to do it without getting caught. A gentle rub every over or two would not be noticeable, unless you have eagle eyes, could also explain why it didn't reverse right after that rub.

Lehmann then Asks Peter to relay the message that they've been caught on tape. The more I think about it the more sinister it looks, you can draw your own conclusions.

A gentle rub or two an over probably wouldn't be very effectual, probably not much more than throwing the ball back to the keeper on the bounce, or getting Starc to bowl with his funny seam position. You need to apply a bit of force to get sandpaper to bite.

 

[Borges]

This sounds ominous:

I apologise for my part and take responsibility for it. ... You will hear from me in a few days."

Warner apologises for 'stain on the game' - ESPNcricinfo

 

[Starfighter]

Considering the lies that were floating around till yesterday i.e. tape, first time incident (hello DRSgate) or what the leadership group constitutes, I have a fair idea that this could be more malignant then first imagined. The first press conference was full of lies trying to dampen the magnitude of their actions, I wouldn't assume anything after that as 100% of thee truth. Unless you have insider knowledge yourself, you cannot dismiss some theories as BS.

I am also going by what Fannie said & a graph on reddit which correlates the amount of (revers)swing after a certain number overs, that Aus got consistently in the last few tests.

Actually, it seems less malignant now. Originally it seemed like something that was planned well ahead of time and involved a much larger part of the team that seems to be the case from the available facts. That graph was bull****, the guy would not have access to that data across several broadcasters in different countries unless he was some kind of hawkeye insider, which comes with its own implications. Fanie is a plain old bull**** artist, especially as the broadcaster has denied that he tipped them off. And he's extremely nationally biased to think that early reverse swing is suspicious from Australia when his team, who have history, were doing the same thing.

 

[R!TTER]

A gentle rub or two an over probably wouldn't be very effectual, probably not much more than throwing the ball back to the keeper on the bounce, or getting Starc to bowl with his funny seam position. You need to apply a bit of force to get sandpaper to bite.

A rub on the same spot could do enough damage for the ball to reverse after some time. I have no idea how much force needs to be applied, nor anyone else on this board, but it does constitute ball tampering & depending on how you do it, it'll yield positive results.

 

[Starfighter]

A rub on the same spot could do enough damage for the ball to reverse after some time. I have no idea how much force needs to be applied, nor anyone else on this board, but it does constitute ball tampering & depending on how you do it, it'll yield positive results.

You could get the same result much quicker by getting Starc, who tends to land the ball consistently on the side, to bowl. Just because something is not allowed doesn't make it effectual, and their plan clearly wasn't.

 

[vicleggie]

Who wrote that note for Warner. Surely he's illiterate

 

[Spark]

My personal opinions on Micky Arthur and "homeworkgate" and the other issues have definitely changed over the last 5 years. At the time I thought he was out of line and not up to the job, now I'm more inclined to think it's the players more so at fault, that they just didn't respect him at all and were unprofessional with regard to how they treated him.

To be honest, a lot of people actually thought this at the time on here and then slowly walked it away. We should have stuck to our original guns tbh.

But lmao, failing to complete three sentences of self-assessment is risible.

 

[Starfighter]

Who wrote that note for Warner. Surely he's illiterate

You mean published author David Warner.

 

[Daemon]

This sounds ominous:

Warner apologises for 'stain on the game' - ESPNcricinfo

Articles like these are pretty annoying and a waste of bandwidth. All they did was quote his tweet and added absolutely nothing else besides rehashed facts of the whole incident so that the article doesn't look too short. They may as well have put up a screenshot of his tweet.

 

[Starfighter]

Articles like these are pretty annoying and a waste of bandwidth. All they did was quote his tweet and added absolutely nothing else besides rehashed facts of the whole incident so that the article doesn't look too short. They may as well have put up a screenshot of his tweet.

Not like this is out of the ordinary in modern 'journalism'.

 

[GIMH]

To be honest, a lot of people actually thought this at the time on here and then slowly walked it away. We should have stuck to our original guns tbh.

But lmao, failing to complete three sentences of self-assessment is risible.

I don’t know what my opinion was at the time, but thinking on it now it seems a logical coaching exercise. Self-assessment is a key part of development, surely? But regardless of how sensible or otherwise it was, it’s three ****ing sentences, respect the coach and crack on with it FFS

 

[Spark]

There was a lot of media/public misrepresentation around the issue, a lot of people seemed to think it was, like, powerpoint presentations or show-and-tell.

 

[Starfighter]

I don’t know what my opinion was at the time, but thinking on it now it seems a logical coaching exercise. Self-assessment is a key part of development, surely? But regardless of how sensible or otherwise it was, it’s three ****ing sentences, respect the coach and crack on with it FFS

I remember gaining the impression from the chatter at the time that it seemed a little more involved than that, hence the term 'homework'.

Cricinfo was full of comments about Phil Hughes doing an interpretive dance. They were funny at the time, I suppose.

Edit: this:

There was a lot of media/public misrepresentation around the issue, a lot of people seemed to think it was, like, powerpoint presentations or show-and-tell.

 

[Prince EWS]

I don't see why it has to be either/or in that situation -- both the players and the coach were at fault there. Obviously the players who failed to do the task were at fault, but as coach if you have to suspend players for not writing three sentences then you're doing something seriously wrong for it to get to that point at all. You have to learn how to manage and get the best out of the players you've got, and there were surely better ways of doing this than setting them trivial homework and then suspending them when they failed to do it.

Given the head coach rarely gets involved with anything really technical these days, a huge chunk of the job is managing talented but dumb and/or lazy players. Arthur totally failed at this. If it was one particularly dumb player he just couldn't click with then I'd give him a pass, but it wasn't.

 

[MagicPoopShovel]

Mickey Arthur gives his thoughts on the situation and the culture of Australian cricket in general.

Whatever you think of Arthur, it's a pretty interesting read.

Wow.