What Sanctions should Kohli face for lying?

[Malcolm Merlyn]

1 minute ago, MCGGG said:

Mate, your captain accused a touring captain of systematic cheating without evidence, and lied about telling the umpires, it deserves it's own thread, no matter if you like it or not.

 

He was caught cheating.The umpires have made no statement.

 

Its you who is lying.

[Malcolm Merlyn]

1 minute ago, MCGGG said:

Any more straws you want to clutch?

 

The CA CEO ran to mumbai to meet BCCI Ceo.Everyone can see who was in the need of a truce.Try again.

[Malcolm Merlyn]

1 minute ago, Stumped said:

Not nessecarily if both parties feel Smith was likely to face further sanctions either way on the basis of the complaint.

Smith was anyway in more trouble and now Handscomb as well. Thats why Sutherland made a dash to save face.

[sandeep]

7 minutes ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

 

Let people express their opinion.

So you like the outrageous baiting as long as it stirs the pot.    Disappointing.  Babu-giri infecting the forums now as well. Watch out now, supreme court might get involved - as it is they have lots of spare time to dwell on such issues  

[maniac]

As much as this is a crap thread...I think it is better to focus on the task at hand rather than all these off-field shenanigans...do not want an Anderson Saga part-2

[Malcolm Merlyn]

Just now, sandeep said:

So you like the outrageous baiting as long as it stirs the pot.    Disappointing.  Babu-giri infecting the forums now as well. Watch out now, supreme court might get involved - as it is they have lots of spare time to dwell on such issues  

 

Well we should not muzzle dissenting views.

[MCGGG]

1 minute ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

 

If Kohli is proved right then Smith is banned.If he is wrong then he is banned and not Smith.Either way only one captain banned.

Smith doesn't get banned no matter what, if evidence emerges that he's guilty then he'll be fined accordingly, but not banned.

 

The point some of you guys are missing is you can't accuse touring teams publiclly of cheating, you use the proper channels.

[maniac]

Just now, MCGGG said:

Smith doesn't get banned no matter what, if evidence emerges that he's guilty then he'll be fined accordingly, but not banned.

 

The point some of you guys are missing is you can't accuse touring teams publiclly of cheating, you use the proper channels.

Can you please enlighten what these proper channels are? Umpires,Match Referee,ICC etc etc now what else?

[sandeep]

4 minutes ago, Stumped said:

Not nessecarily if both parties feel Smith was likely to face further sanctions either way on the basis of the complaint.

I don't think some minor fines or sanctions is what CA would have been afraid of.  An official ICC investigation into whether other instances occurred in the test match would be massively dangerous for CA.  CA should get credit for getting this sorted - it was a tough spot to be in - VK had already notified the umpires  and gone public about it - push comes to shove, I highly doubt the likes of Nigel Long would perjure themselves just to save Australia - and video analysis could lead to some major embarrassing finds.   Only way to save themselves was a "settlement" with BCCI facilitated by the ICC.  That's exactly what happened.  Predictable - I posted about it a few hours ago on the main thread, before this was announced.  

[MCGGG]

4 minutes ago, sandeep said:

So you like the outrageous baiting as long as it stirs the pot.    Disappointing.  Babu-giri infecting the forums now as well. Watch out now, supreme court might get involved - as it is they have lots of spare time to dwell on such issues  

Australia have also withdrawn their complaint, very interesting.

[MCGGG]

3 minutes ago, maniac said:

Can you please enlighten what these proper channels are? Umpires,Match Referee,ICC etc etc now what else?

Umpires first, they will report any complaint by a captain to the match referee, he then deals with it as far as I know, then he'll.send his report to the ICC as far as I know.

Edited March 9, 2017 by MCGGG

[kosingh]

Just now, MCGGG said:

Smith doesn't get banned no matter what, if evidence emerges that he's guilty then he'll be fined accordingly, but not banned.

 

The point some of you guys are missing is you can't accuse touring teams publiclly of cheating, you use the proper channels.

There are no sanctions relating to slander in the ICC rule book. The only thing Kohli could have been charged with is for making serious public criticisms of match related incidents- a level 2 offense. It does not matter whether Kohli was right or wrong. That is punishable by

• Level 2: Fine of 50% to 100% of match fee and/or ban for 1 Test

BCCI also happened to want Smith charged with another level 2 offense- engaging in conduct against the spirit of the game. The possible punishments are of course the same.

Kohli's mistake was of course making the criticisms at the press conference. Had he not done so, and followed the official protocol, India would have amuch stronger case against Smith. But by going off at the press conference, he himself committed an offense that the ICC considers equal to what it wanted Smith to be charged with - a level 2 offense

 

[sandeep]

9 minutes ago, MCGGG said:

Smith doesn't get banned no matter what, if evidence emerges that he's guilty then he'll be fined accordingly, but not banned.

 

The point some of you guys are missing is you can't accuse touring teams publiclly of cheating, you use the proper channels.

 

4 minutes ago, MCGGG said:

Umpires first, they will report any complaint by a captain to the match referee, he then deals with it as far as I know, then he'll.send his report to the ICC as far as I know.

And that's exactly what Kohli did - reported it to the umpires - luckily for him, and extremely unluckily for Smith and CA - before the Smith "oneoff brain fade" occurred.  He only went public with it after the Smith incident provided him public evidence of his allegation.  That's why he's not at risk of bans of any severe action.    

 

Oh to be a fly on the wall when CA has to pay up on the quid pro quo for burying this matter.   Wonder how BCCI is going to cash in this particular IOU.  

 

Virat and Co are going to know at least the contours of what has happened, if not all the gory details.  Something tells me we are going to see a quite subdued australian team next match - the chirping and all is about to get one-sided.  

[MCGGG]

14 minutes ago, sandeep said:

I don't think some minor fines or sanctions is what CA would have been afraid of.  An official ICC investigation into whether other instances occurred in the test match would be massively dangerous for CA.  CA should get credit for getting this sorted - it was a tough spot to be in - VK had already notified the umpires  and gone public about it - push comes to shove, I highly doubt the likes of Nigel Long would perjure themselves just to save Australia - and video analysis could lead to some major embarrassing finds.   Only way to save themselves was a "settlement" with BCCI facilitated by the ICC.  That's exactly what happened.  Predictable - I posted about it a few hours ago on the main thread, before this was announced.  

Rubbish, anyone who recorded the game could look up if Smith looked for dressing room approval, nothing has been found.

 

IMO this series was in serious danger of being abandoned, IMO CA would've demanded VK publicly apologise, and I'm guessing we'll see at least a veiled apology in the next day or 2.

Edited March 9, 2017 by MCGGG

[sandeep]

14 minutes ago, Stumped said:

Also worth mentioning that I believe this was the same CEO who specifically referred to to Kohlis accusations as outrageous in he media.

As if he had a choice.  If he didn't defend his players, that would have raised more questions.  Once he got a bit of traction with the ICC (Broad made a vaguely worded favorable statement) and was in discussion with the BCCI, he felt comfortable enough to make a generic statement defending his player - not unlike the type of statement PCB made when Inzamam's boys were pulled up for ball tampering.  "Our boys are role models.  They represent our country.  Its outrageous to suspect them!"  Never mind they just got caught doing exactly what was suspected.  

[sandeep]

3 minutes ago, Stumped said:

The Smith incident only provides him evidence of a single incident though, not systematic cheating with it happening on multiple occasions and Kohli suggested in the press conference.

Agreed.  But further investigation could have proved it.  Even if incriminating video wasn't found, the umpires would have to go on record testifying the truth regarding Kohli's prior warning.  Its already been reported that there was one "provable" instance - the Mitchell Marsh LBW - where the aussie dressing room was observed attempting to get the great allrounder to review.  Apparently the umpires decided that since the attempt failed, it wasn't a punishable offence.   But this going on the record, along with the umpire's testimony that they were indeed forewarned about DRS dressing room communication would have completely destroyed the "brain fade" cover story - even if further incriminating video was not found.  Think about it - that was the best case outcome - and the worst case would be a lot worse.  CA had no choice but to get on its knees to BCCI.  

[kosingh]

At the end of the day, I'm glad that neither captain is getting banned. The series wihout Kohli or Smith wouldn't be the same.

[sandeep]

1 minute ago, Stumped said:

The fact that Kohli apparently had to tell the umpires about it and no incident occurred on the field previously makes it clear that they didn't witness any incidents personally until the Smith one. If any footage of any other occurrences of cheating were found by the BCCI then surely they'd had sent that alongside their complaint about Smith to the ICC?

 

The Marsh wicket intrigues me given the highlights show neither of the batsmen showing any slight consideration of a review and Mitch Marsh walking straight off, and again, if footage was available of cheating occuring here why wasn't it featured in the complaint to the ICC.

 

Look, we can both trade the known facts back and forth - but I think you are smart enough to follow the logic of what I posted above.  I don't see anything that you've written that can disprove what I posted.  Occam's razor is your friend.  

[express bowling]

46 minutes ago, sandeep said:

I don't think some minor fines or sanctions is what CA would have been afraid of.  An official ICC investigation into whether other instances occurred in the test match would be massively dangerous for CA.  CA should get credit for getting this sorted - it was a tough spot to be in - VK had already notified the umpires  and gone public about it - push comes to shove, I highly doubt the likes of Nigel Long would perjure themselves just to save Australia - and video analysis could lead to some major embarrassing finds.   Only way to save themselves was a "settlement" with BCCI facilitated by the ICC.  That's exactly what happened.  Predictable - I posted about it a few hours ago on the main thread, before this was announced.  

This.

 

Smith saved by Sutherland's negotiating skills or some serious pending favours from CA.

 

As Sutherland flew to India, it is quite clear that he is the one who was desperate for a  pre-enquiry settlement.

[Brainfade]

1 hour ago, sandeep said:

Unlikely.  All VK needs to do is point to the umpires and ask them to testify that he notified them of his suspicions prior to the Steve Smith dismissal.  VK kept his allegations private until there was public evidence confirming his complaint - the smith dismissal.  Actually, he kept his allegations private until Smith dismissed the entire thing as a "one-off brain fade".    

 

Only way Virat would be in trouble is if he in fact did not notify the umpires.  In which case, I don't think he'd be stupid enough to claim he did so, in an official post match press conference.  The only other thing VK could be on the hook for, is excessive sledging during the game.  

 

Look, both boards are more interested in making money, and a drawn out investigation embarrassing Australia does not benefit the BCCI financially.   But having them owe a favor to the BCCI does.  Simple as that.

Exactly.