What Sanctions should Kohli face for lying?

[veer]

i think we should make Kohli stand outside Principal's office.. In this case, Dave Richardson's office...

[Gollum]

Let our players win the series 3-1 and then vent out their inner feelings. I just hope the team isn't distracted by this saga.

 

Sent from my SM-G350E using Tapatalk

 

 

[sandeep]

3 minutes ago, Stumped said:

As I said above I don't see how pointing out your suspicions to the umpires (who didn't witness any of the previous occurrences in person) is evidence for publicly accusing a team of systematically cheating to the media?

But he was smart enough to say just enough without "accusing".  He said he suspected the Aussies of communicating and notified the umpires.  Kept it private until the aussies themselves made it public via the Smith and Handscomb "brain fade".   And he said that he personally would "never do this on a cricket field".   

 

And isnt it an amazing co-incidence that an opposition player suspects you of a type of cheating, observes it multiple times, reports it to the umpires, and then you get caught doing exactly that.  But somehow the suspicions are still considered 'baseless'.   Very "fair and balanced" thinking right there.  Tell me something, do you also believe 9/11 was a Jewish conspiracy and Bin laden was not responsible?  I mean, there's no video evidence or otherwise of him directly instructing the hijackers, is there?

[veer]

2 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Let our players win the series 3-1 and then vent out their inner feelings. I just hope the team isn't distracted by this saga.

 

Sent from my SM-G350E using Tapatalk

 

 

All depends on the pitch and who wins the toss..

[MCGGG]

3 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Let our players win the series 3-1 and then vent out their inner feelings. I just hope the team isn't distracted by this saga.

 

Sent from my SM-G350E using Tapatalk

 

 

Rule 1 section A, Don't piss Australia off.

Rule 2 section A, see above

Rule 3 section A, Don't eat Indian food

[Cricketics]

24 minutes ago, express bowling said:

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.

Does law says that he can be banned for for looking at his dressing room? Until that is enforced he can not really br banned.

 

That said, Smith did "cheat". Contrary to what wannabe Aussie suggests.  

[express bowling]

1 minute ago, Cricketics said:

Does law says that he can be banned for for looking at his dressing room? Until that is enforced he can not really br banned.

 

That said, Smith did "cheat". Contrary to what wannabe Aussie suggests.  

 

Who is talking about a ban   ?

 

Whatever punishment is there for severely violating the spirit of the game, should have been Smith's punishment for signalling to the dressing room and trying to cheat.

[Cricketics]

Just now, express bowling said:

 

Who is talking about a ban   ?

 

Whatever punishment is there for severely violating the spirit of the game, should have been Smith's punishment for signalling to the dressing room and trying to cheat.

Yes, should be may be 20% or some match fee ban which I said earlier. But we can't bre cribbing about that either.

 

This was one of the first instances and hence he got away. We need to move on now. 

[express bowling]

3 minutes ago, Cricketics said:

Yes, should be may be 20% or some match fee ban which I said earlier. But we can't bre cribbing about that either.

 

This was one of the first instances and hence he got away. We need to move on now. 

 

Moving on is a given as the 2 Boards have settled this mutually.

 

That does not mean the fans and the cricket world will think that  justice has been served.

Edited March 9, 2017 by express bowling

[sandeep]

4 minutes ago, Stumped said:

I'd call saying that this cheating has been going on for days a pretty clear accusation.

 

Ironic that above you referenced Occam's razor above yet then say that the ICC regulations should be adjudicated on the basis of assumptions (as evidence for this cheating occuring before) rather than the solid fact that there's a lack of any video evidence.

I didn't call for anything to be "adjudicated" based on assumptions.  Prima facie there is enough evidence to require a proper investigation -

 

• A pre-existing complaint by the opposing captain (publicly confirmed)
• A clear proven instance of the behavior complained about - with inarguable video evidence.
• A repeat of the complaint, this time publicly by the opposing captain.

Based on these 2 facts, not assumptions - the obvious thing to do is investigate.  But the ICC is choosing to exactly the opposite.  Wonder why :)

[Cricketics]

4 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

That does not mean the fans and the cricket world will think that  justice has been served.

Problem is that Smith's crime wasn't extremely big. He wasn't cursing of hit someone or tampered the ball. He simply tried to be cheeky and looked at his mangemrnt to get the approval.

 

He got one warning from the umpire that time when the umpire intervened.

 

Even bowlers who end up stepping on the pitch get warned first then get taken off. So Smith is fine here. Bowlers who step on the pitch and mess up and create the rough aren't fined right away. They get warned first. 

 

We do not really need any justice in this particular scenario.

 

 

 

 

[sandeep]

2 minutes ago, Stumped said:

And in reply to this bit, perhaps I would if 20+ high quality broadcastings cameras had been pointed in his general direction for his entire life and none of them had had happened to pick up this event occuring.

And why doesn't the ICC want to review and examine the footage from the broadcasting cameras?  :)  Because doing so, would open an official investigation, necessitating umpire's statements on the events.  Statements that would blow the "one off brain fade" cover story to smithereens.  (sorry couldn't help the pun).  

[sandeep]

1 minute ago, Stumped said:

@sandeep

 

You're trying to tell me that basing guilt based off of "an amazing co-incidence that an opposition player suspects you of a type of cheating, observes it multiple times, reports it to the umpires, and then you get caught doing exactly that." is a fact showing guilt rather than an assumption of guilt? A fact showing guilt would be footage showing it happening on more than one occasion which clearly hasn't been found.

 

I'm not saying its a fact showing guilt - I'm saying that's enough to warrant a full investigation.  One with an official report that gets publicly released.  I agree that guilt of cheating beyond the Smith dismissal requires further video proof.  Which we don't have yet.  But why no investigation?  Why the silence from the umpires?  :)  

[Iconoclast]

Kohli should have left the team manager to deal with this stuff.

 

I think he was trying too hard to become a public hero or something.

[Late Cut]

Stop feeding the Troll.

[sandeep]

3 hours ago, MCGGG said:

Man, I started posting here prior to the last WC, I was called a Pakistani then (first time for everything), I couldn't give a flying * about your rivalry with Pakistan, I only come here when you play Australia, check my posting history.

"Man" when you start using certain phrases "Dude", you tend to give away your origins "bro".  

[gattaca]

Get well soon op.

[Muloghonto]

5 hours ago, MCGGG said:

Now that the Indian board have found no fault with Steve Smith regarding improper use of the DRS system, it's time to discuss the penalties for the Indian captain for making such outlandish allegations.

 

First of all, he must be stript of the Indian captaincy, I think we can all agree with that, he not only made the unfounded claims publicly, he also lied about telling the umpires.

 

Second, a 12 month ban from international cricket.

 

3rd, He should be sent to Americas hardest prison for 6 months wearing only pink hot pants with ass cut out.

 

Thoughts?

Since you come from a nation that believes in precedent, if you can prove that Kohli lied and Smith is not guilty of breaking the spirit of the game, he should face exactly the same penalties Australian cricketers have faced over the years for cheating and lying : NOTHING.

That would be in line with the precedent your nation has set.

 

Edited March 10, 2017 by Muloghonto

[MCGGG]

2 hours ago, sandeep said:

"Man" when you start using certain phrases "Dude", you tend to give away your origins "bro".  

Don't be like that Son.

[Doctored Wicket]

6 hours ago, kubrickian said:

The evidence of Smith and his team mates cheating was caught on live tv. What more evidence do you want ? Just because racist-in chief Broad didnt punish his fellow white men doesnt mean they are not guilty. Dont get mad because they got exposed in front of the world. That's worse than any punishment from match referee. 

Don't play the race card.

It's not intelligent.