Randiv and Dilshan receive 100% match fees. Randiv also gets one match ban

[King Tendulkar]

Well done SL. Took right action. It was awful unsportsman conduct by lankans. However, sanga and his 4 byes was shocking unsporting behaviour. He got away scott free. And no doubt behind the Randiv no ball as well. Well done SL board for action taken. They recieve a lot of credit for this. Although sanga getting away scott free is wrong

[Lord]

poor guy,was just following orders,very harsh

[Hell Raiser]

Very harsh. Ban wasn't necessary. The issue was blown out of proportion. Shouldn't have come this far.

[Don Sharma]

I feel, Randiv has been made a scapegoat amidst all this. One can't really fault him, if his captain and senior team-mate instruct him to do something.

[Shane]

how slow !! pcb would hv b& and unb& immediately

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

[Ram]

One match ban for over-stepping deliberately? That’s essentially whats given out in Pakistan for murder charges Some are calling this harsh, which it might well be. But it all depends on your perspective. SLC have obviously taken a tough stand on this issue and decided to act swiftly and decisively, in an attempt to set an extremely clear precedent. Was banning Randiv necessary for doing what he did? Definitely not. Will it contribute in prevent further such transgressions by Lankan players, thus avoiding collective embarrassment down the line? Probably yes. In that sense, this ban was probably worth it (unless of course, you’re Suraj Randiv. In that case, you have every reason to feel completely miffed..)

[Gunner_Mania]

I wonder if I am desperately out of sync with this but I am quite bemused by the colour Suraj Randiv’s century-denying no-ball to Virender Sehwag has acquired. Having been persuaded out for dinner with the family, I missed the last half hour of the match and caught Sehwag’s six on a shop window around which a crowd had gathered. The crowd rejoiced as Sehwag raised his bat and I walked on. It was only after logging on at home that I realised Sehwag had been stranded on 99. When I watched the replay it felt schoolboyishly petty. The overstepping looked deliberate and, coming after the four byes conceded three balls previously, it seemed the Sri Lankans had a design to deny Sehwag a well-earned hundred. Overall, it felt mean-spirited. It was immediately apparent that there would be a few headlines about it next day. But even making allowances for the media’s ability to exaggerate, there’s a touch of ridiculousness about the way the matter has played out. The forthright manner in which Sehwag expressed his disappointment was characteristic of him; you expected him to move on quickly. And when it turned out that Randiv had come over to say sorry, the matter should have ended there. Instead, it took a turn for the ridiculous. Whispers emerged about the complicity of Kumar Sangakkara in the crime – after all, the four byes had slipped through his gloves – and the Sri Lanka captain was forced to protest his innocence. Some newspapers devoted a whole page to the incident, summoning the ICC and MCC for explanations. There was even a reference to Monkeygate somewhere in there. The most bizarre play, though, came from the Sri Lankan cricket board. It apologised for the breach of spirit and, more, it announced an enquiry into the incident. Little fazes Sehwag but it’s not unreasonable to assume that even he might find this a bit embarrassing. Centuries matter, but cricketers move on swiftly after the missed ones. By issuing a public apology, the Sri Lankan board merely belittled the concept. At worst, Randiv’s no-ball was petty; at best, it was naughty. But he broke no law; he didn’t even contravene the ICC code of conduct as it is laid out. He can be accused of breaching the spirit of the game, but the spirit of cricket is a fuzzy concept. Batsmen rarely walk when they know they are out, fielders do their worst to cheat a favorable decision out of the umpires; and wives and girlfriends are sometimes brought into the equation to rile an opponent. If Sehwag was owed an apology it was from the bowler. The bowler apologised, the batsman accepted; where do the rest of us come in?

http://blogs.cricinfo.com/fromeditor/archives/2010/08/out_of_proportion.php

[Don Sharma]

I don't think, he would have been banned, if he had done it against some other team. Period. Would he do it against any another team is another story altogether.

[Guest Hiten.]

Don't agree with this. Where exactly did Randiv or anyone who instructed him to overstep go wrong when the rules clearly stated that no ball call supersedes runs hit by a batsman ? I agree it was not sporting, but banning is not an answer to it. Such issues are to be taken care of behind the scenes and SLC should have organized a meeting highlighting the need to play the game with right spirits and that should have done it. To me this banning is parallel to Gilly's famous walking off charade, to show the world how they're the angels amongst the devils.

[Ram]

Everyone’s looking at this from the prism of ‘Did Randiv deserve to be banned for doing what he did..’? I think we should look at this as some of sort of insurance policy by SLC to make sure similar, more serious ethical violations that can cause a lot more damage does not happen in the future.

[achilles]

Okay, I'd like to point out a tiny detail for everyone's benefit- "Sri Lanka Cricket is extremely proud of its team and their achievements over the years. It is of paramount importance to maintain the discipline of the Gentlemen's game, especially with Sri Lanka Cricket being winners of the 'ICC Spirit of the Game' award for two consecutive years," it said.

[cowboysfan]

Everyone’s looking at this from the prism of ‘Did Randiv deserve to be banned for doing what he did..’? I think we should look at this as some of sort of insurance policy by SLC to make sure similar' date=' more serious ethical violations that can cause a lot more damage does not happen in the future.[/quote'] i dont agree with the ban but i see what you are saying,if these guys blatantly made sure that Veeru did not get a hundred then they might be upto something which cannot be picked up by the stump mike or discerned from the telecast.

[ZodiaC]

Everyone’s looking at this from the prism of ‘Did Randiv deserve to be banned for doing what he did..’? I think we should look at this as some of sort of insurance policy by SLC to make sure similar' date=' more serious ethical violations that can cause a lot more damage does not happen in the future.[/quote'] Is it SLC who took this decision? Or is it match referee/ICC? coz I've seen people get away with much worse things than this ala Broad and Steyn.

[achilles]

Is it SLC who took this decision? Or is it match referee/ICC? coz I've seen people get away with much worse things than this ala Broad and Steyn.

SLC. ICC said they would "wait to see the decision taken by SLC".

[ZodiaC]

SLC. ICC said they would "wait to see the decision taken by SLC".

Alrighty then. Anyways poor Randiv, who'd have thought this would've blown out of proportion like this. Would've been really demoralizing in the initial phase of his career. But agree with mm, would stop whinga and co. from doing such stuff for a while. :hatsoff:

[achilles]

Alrighty then. Anyways poor Randiv, who'd have thought this would've blown out of proportion like this. Would've been really demoralizing in the initial phase of his career. But agree with mm, would stop whinga and co. from doing such stuff for a while. :hatsoff:

I'm feeling a bit sorry for Suraj, for his image has taken a major beating at such a nascent stage in his career. But bowling the ball was his decision. Hope he gets over this incident soon and that this punishment teaches him a few virtues of playing cricket. As for his teammates, hope they understood that they don't have the kind of leverage Australia and England do.

[coffee_rules]

SLC competing with PCB for the joker board award.

[jhakati]

good decision by SLC

[Ram]

Is it SLC who took this decision? Or is it match referee/ICC? coz I've seen people get away with much worse things than this ala Broad and Steyn.

ICC has had little do with it so far. In fact, ICC cannot take action against Randiv even if it wants, because what he did does not constitute as violation of any of the ICC rules.

i dont agree with the ban but i see what you are saying,if these guys blatantly made sure that Veeru did not get a hundred then they might be upto something which cannot be picked up by the stump mike or discerned from the telecast.

There are aspects to this story that is not apparent in first glance; Firstly, there’s the question of setting a tough precedent (that’s already been talked about before..). SLC is essentially saying ‘If this is how tough we can get on such a frivolous incident, imagine what our reaction would, if you do something a lot more serious..’ And that is a good message to send, else you’ll end up with a ball-munching, pitch tampering/dancing, cheating, match-fixing, drug-abusing team like Pakistanis where players get banned and unbanned depending upon whether the PCB chief had a fight with his wife the previous night. And then, there’s this whole question of Board vs Players power. Most cricketing nations around the world are grappling with this issue of player power. Obviously, the Lankan board harbored secret grudges at the rise of the some its senior players and were simply waiting for an opportunity to set the balance straight. In essence, this is also them saying ‘We respect you, but you should also remember who’s the Boss…’ And finally, there’s the whole PR angle. By acting so tough on such a small incident, SLC is trying sending out a very strong message to the rest of the world that they abide by the highest standards of moral/ethics. Who knows, this might even win them so favorable responses in future ICC issues, where they can claim the moral high-ground. It might even be the case the one of the SLC top-brass is gunning for an ICC post at some point in the future and wants to score some easy brownie points.. But whatever be the case, you gotto pity the fate of poor Randiv. For no real fault of his, he has become the center-stage of what is probably a board vs team squabble.

[Andy]

Dilshan should have been Fined Only. Randiv action is just a bit OTT.