- Opinion
- Sport
- Cricket
- Test cricket
ACA's speculative appeal wasn't worthy of review
So, the infamous trio neither challenged nor appealed their suspensions, and Cricket Australia did not overturn or even remit them, which makes you wonder what that was all about. It had all the hallmarks of grandstanding.
The ACA argued that the subsequent Longstaff inquiry finding of a general cultural malaise in Australian cricket made the punishment meted out to the three for their specific failing in Cape Town excessive.
That was always tenuous. It suggests that there was a finite amount of blame and that spreading it should mitigate it for individuals. That's hard to swallow.
Besides, the individuals implicated or ensnared at CA level have all copped bigger whacks than the players: chairman, chief executive, integrity officer, high performance manager, coach, even the marketing man: all are gone for good. The players are gone only for now.
Australian cricketers Steven Smith, David Warner and Cameron Bancroft all copped bans this year. Credit:Fairfax Media
No, all was not well in Australian cricket at the time of Cape Town, but flawed culture cannot be allowed to act as an historical smokescreen. In that moment, experienced adult professional sportsmen conspired in or assented to a wrong. They knew it, as their ham-fisted effort to cover it up and so compound the offence showed. That wasn't culture, that was the blind panic of the bang-to-rights guilty.
This, the players accepted. All three had recourse to challenge their bans at the time, but did not. Since, they have gone about their business stoically, playing what cricket they can without demur about what they cannot. This suggests true remorse, even in a humble way an element of leadership.
As best can be told, none of the three were party to the ACA's appeal, even tacitly. Perhaps Smith should have distanced himself from it publicly, but that would have created another rift in a game trying to heal them. His further silence was statement enough.
So on whose behalf did the ACA take up its cudgels? The Cape Town trio? No. Players generally, as some kind of class action? That does not compute. The Australian cricket public? Evidently, this formed part of their submission.
But there is little apparent softening of public sentiment towards the Australian players, even in the wake of the Longstaff report. Sadness, yes, as the grim reality of our suddenly rather plain cricket team sinks in, but forgiveness, no. My experience is that the least forgiving sector of the cricket community are the players themselves, at all levels, up to and including former teammates. They understand the scale here.
That leaves only one explanation, that ACA was acting on its own behalf only, stamping its territory in the aftermath of the Longstaff review. Despite a statutory exchange of mutual respect after Tuesday's announcement, it bodes poorly for the new era.
CA has no option but to reject this speculative appeal. If Cape Town truly was to be the baseline for the rehabilitation of Australian cricket, then to step back from it even fractionally would have come across as a weakening of that commitment in the eyes of the world.
Shane Watson thinks about a review.Credit:Anthony Johnson
Nor could CA have entertained the idea of an early return to Sheffield Shield cricket for Smith and Warner, for that would have been self-serving, taking with one hand but giving with the other. CA, as the game's ruling body in Australia, is as hurt in its reputation by the suspensions as the players are. But it could not afford to be seen suddenly and expeditiously to grant itself an amnesty, because the summer was starting to look a bit gruelling.
So, after this needless vexatiously exercise - a Watto review not even Watto would ask for - it is as you were.
Most Viewed in Sport
Please explain
Our weekly podcast giving you insight into the stories that drive the nation.
Listen now