Anonymous
Anonymous asked in SportsCricket · 4 years ago

Was it fair to charge Du plesis with ball tampering?

13 Answers

Relevance
  • Rohan
    Lv 6
    4 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    It is ridiculous on so many levels:

    First of all, he was chewing on mint and while the laws seem to prohibit it, this has never been a problem before. The laws, furthermore, are open to interpretation and not well drafted in this matter.

    Secondly, it had little or no impact on the result of the game, as both teams’ players have repeatedly said in every press conference since the incident came to light.

    Thirdly, it was a matter that began with the host broadcaster’s observations. Channel 9 have been known to have a fiercely pro-Australia bias, their professionalism (bias, knowledge) coming under question repeatedly, most notably in this Geoff Lemon article almost 18 months ago:

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2015/feb/13...

    When the host broadcaster is allowed to, with its biases, rake up a fuss that the ICC then sanctions the opposition for, you’re treading on very tricky territory. Would they have also highlighted and reported the same incident if Steven Smith had done it? They did not, for instance, speak of the times DAVID WARNER has done the same thing, as argued by Faf’s defence (with video evidence) during the hearing.

    So the biases involved in starting the process is unacceptable.

    Finally, the rules have to be improved. They need to cater to the practicality of the game. Many cricketers chew gum so are they breaching the law when they shine the ball?

    All-in-all, I really think this was a non-issue that became such a big deal because it was more convenient to put the spotlight on Faf while Australian cricket seemed to be in its worst state in a couple of decades. South Africa won the Test playing superior cricket all round. The law needs to be revised. And the people who are making such a massive noise over all of it need to get back to the game and find better things to talk about and report on.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 4 years ago

    Faf du Plessis, South Africa's remain in skipper, could be suspended for a Test coordinate in the wake of being charged by the ICC over a claimed ball-altering offense.

    Du Plessis has argued not blameworthy and is looking for lawful exhortation to further challenge the charge. A hearing before match official Andy Pycroft will be held, yet a date for the hearing has not yet been set by the ICC.

    The ICC affirmed in an announcement on Friday that du Plessis had been charged for rupturing Article 2.2.9 of the ICC Code of Conduct, which identifies with "changing the state of the ball".

    The ICC proclamation said: "The asserted occurrence happened on Tuesday morning when TV footage seemed to demonstrate du Plessis applying salivation and deposit from a mint or sweet, a counterfeit substance, to the ball trying to change its condition."

    Level 2 breaks of the Code of Conduct convey a punishment of a fine of 50-100% of the match charge or potentially up to two suspension focuses, and three or four fault focuses. Two suspension guides likens toward one Test coordinate.

    The charge has been laid by ICC CEO David Richardson. Cricket Australia did not make a grumbling about the occurrence.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 4 years ago

    Faf du Plessis, South Africa's remain in skipper, could be suspended for a Test coordinate in the wake of being charged by the ICC over a claimed ball-altering offense.

    Du Plessis has argued not blameworthy and is looking for lawful exhortation to further challenge the charge. A hearing before match official Andy Pycroft will be held, yet a date for the hearing has not yet been set by the ICC.

    The ICC affirmed in an announcement on Friday that du Plessis had been charged for rupturing Article 2.2.9 of the ICC Code of Conduct, which identifies with "changing the state of the ball".

    The ICC proclamation said: "The asserted occurrence happened on Tuesday morning when TV footage seemed to demonstrate du Plessis applying salivation and deposit from a mint or sweet, a counterfeit substance, to the ball trying to change its condition."

    Level 2 breaks of the Code of Conduct convey a punishment of a fine of 50-100% of the match charge or potentially up to two suspension focuses, and three or four fault focuses. Two suspension guides likens toward one Test coordinate.

    The charge has been laid by ICC CEO David Richardson. Cricket Australia did not make a grumbling about the occurrence.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    ICC (Indian Cricket Council) will definitely overlook that Chutiya Kohli's ball tempering footage. ICC is an Indian mafia council which only targets all cricketers excepts F*ucked up Indians.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Bill P
    Lv 7
    4 years ago

    of course it was. It is cheating. First of all he said that he wouldn't do anything like that. Then hearing pointed out he had been done previously for tampering with the ball. Then he admitted it. Goose!

    • ...Show all comments
    • Mr Jinx
      Lv 7
      4 years agoReport

      Zaq77 so do you think you presented a decent argument? All you are doing is talking rubbish.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • zaq77
    Lv 5
    4 years ago

    No not when the Aussies were doing the same....only they were sucking on a batch of really sour Aussie grapes. However they are just as sticky as a mint, probably more so !

  • 4 years ago

    yes

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 4 years ago

    It was outside the rules but most players will concede all teams do it. Charging him was right and not banning him from the 3rd test was right also. I believe a fine was sufficient.

  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    My balls got tampered with.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    Of course the f@ggot indian lap dog thought he shouldnt be charged by then again he comes from a country of cheaters and corruption

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.