Sticky fingers.....

[London Dave]

Who's been a naughty boy then...cough cough....

Find it hard to compare to Tendulkar, he was cleaning the seam, which he should have done in view of umpire. Naivety. Dravid 's actions seem a little murkier, then , it's essentially a race based report, isn't it Mr Dalmiya?



http://uk.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/CRICKET_NEWS/2004/JAN/050207_VBS2003-04_20JAN2004.html

Dravid fined for ball-tampering

Wisden Cricinfo staff

January 20, 2004



Rahul Dravid has been fined 50% of his match fee, after being found guilty of ball-tampering during India's 24-run victory over Zimbabwe at Brisbane.


Dravid was caught by the TV cameras rubbing a cough lozenge on the shiny side of the white ball and is believed to have been reported to Clive Lloyd, the match referee, by the third umpire Peter Parker. He was subsequently charged under clause 2.10 of the ICC's code of conduct.

Dravid had earlier top-scored with 84 in India's total of 255 for 6. His case echoes that of Sachin Tendulkar at Port Elizabeth in 2001-02, who was handed a 75% fine and a one-match suspended sentence by Mike Denness for a similar offence.

It was one of a host of decisions - including the banning of Virender Sehwag for excessive appealing - that so enraged the Indian Cricket Board that they demanded his removal as referee for the subsequent match at Centurion, which was deemed unofficial by the ICC.


© Wisden Cricinfo Ltd

[Donny]

No, wasn't cheating. His Mum gave it to him.

[Blanch]

Classic Donny!! Love it mate!

[Donny]

Hang on. Am I missing something here ?

Warne gets a 12 month ban from all cricket, loses lucrative endorsements, can't even train with his state or club team for what he was found guilty of doing - probably cost him at least $1 mill - and Dravid loses 50% of his game fee for obvious on field cheating !!??

[couragous cloke]

ah give him a break donny, he's a great bloke

[Donny]

Would you still think him a great bloke if you had opened the innings, gutsed it out, seen the shine off the ball, had got to 97 and were about to take your team to an upset win and all of a sudden the ball swings in and bowls you, and your next two batsmen ?

[piedys]

[CQ]

i was thinking more like why did tendulkar get a one game ban and 75% of his match fee and dravid only got 50% and no match ban. wtf!?!

as if u wouldnt notice the lollie comin out ur mouth he should got 100% match fee fine just for comin up with such a gay excuse.

neway how much do the players get paid? does anyone know the rough amount?

[MagpieMad]

cheating is cheating! whether it be by ball tampering, match fixing or performance enhancing drugs, IT IS STILL CHEATING! if it was an Aussie on tour you'd like to think he'd be sent home in disgrace, honestly why bother playing if you're going to cheat.

[Donny]

Incident hard to fathom


Comment by Robert Craddock - Fox


THE people most baffled by the Rahul Dravid ball-tampering affair are those closest to him.

They cannot understand how someone who cares so much for his reputation could be so foolish.

The incident will not destroy him but Dravid's previously spotless reputation will never be the same again.

Dravid has for long carried a reputation for living life the way he bats ... with great precision.

He walks, talks and bats with immaculate neatness and self-control. He combs his hair before leaving for the ground in the morning and generally gives meticulous care to his life.

He is a smart man - formerly one of Bangalore's top students and a commerce graduate - who hates controversy and never drops controversial lines at press conferences.

He is not one for recklessness.

When other members of the Indian team were engulfed by match-fixing scandals a few years ago no one accused Dravid of anything because there was nothing to accuse him of.

He was considered Indian cricket's Mr Sheen which only makes it more baffling why he would take a lolly from his mouth, place it on the ball and rub its lacquer into the shell.

Match referee Clive Lloyd reportedly strongly criticised his actions behind closed doors and so he should have.

It's hard to recall a more blatant breach of the simple law which says you cannot use a foreign substance on the ball.

For several weeks Australian players have been wondering why some of the Indian bowlers have been able to get the old ball to swing so much.

Perhaps we now have the answer. Even if we don't you cannot be blamed for asking the question.

The Indian side fell over themselves to make excuses for Dravid yesterday but none of their claims had much impact.

Ball tampering - much like drug cheating - is one of those offences where no one's ever guilty. Everyone has an excuse. Even if you took the line it was an accident, Dravid was still guilty of the sort of carelessness that would embarrass a 12-year-old cricketer, never mind one of the game's most respected players.

[Donny]

Lawson calls for scrutiny


By Jon Pierik - Fox


FORMER Test paceman Geoff Lawson yesterday labelled the Rahul Dravid ball tampering scandal as a "storm in a tea cup" and has urged cricket officials to focus on more important issues facing the game.

Lawson said the motive behind Dravid's actions could not be proved and the International Cricket Council's ruling needed to be changed to reflect this.

And it emerged yesterday that match referee Clive Lloyd was willing to give Dravid the benefit of the doubt but claimed he couldn't have looked the other way.

The outspoken Lawson felt that if intent could not be proven, then punishment should not be handed out. "Nothing can be proved that it changed the cricket ball," he said.

"Sure, it can be argued. But I didn't see the ball start to move after that."

Lawson said that under the ICC's current ruling, Lloyd had no option but to report and fine Dravid for tampering with the ball.

The act breached clause 2.10 of the ICC's code of conduct.

Lloyd was quoted as saying Dravid's actions "couldn't have been accidental" after he wiped his sucked yellow lolly on to the white ball while fielding during India's win over Zimbabwe at the Gabba on Tuesday.

Former West Indian captain Lloyd charged Dravid after TV cameras caught him in the act.

Lloyd said the video evidence was "conclusive" but remains unsure whether Dravid was trying to change the condition of the ball.

"He could have done it or he might not have - but as a match referee I couldn't have acted any differently," he said.

"If I overlook this, I would have to overlook other similar issues."

One theory is that Dravid was trying to keep one side of the ball shiny to help it to swing - a method traditionally used by bowlers in English county cricket.

Lawson, who claimed 180 wickets at 30.56 in 46 Tests between 1980-90, said the last thing he would have wanted was a sticky surface.

"What you want is to scuff up the white ball, not make it shiny," he said. "It is bizarre."

Lawson called for greater scrutiny to be cast on bowlers with illegal actions.

"There seems to be a lack of attention paid to the fundamentals of the game - those who throw the ball," he said.

[piedys]

[commonwombat]

Big blow-up. Appropriate penalty, end of story.

For once in his undistinguished media career, Lawson has said something intelligent. Guess I'd better check that the sun still rises in the east tomorrow morning.

[Donny]

Lloyd: Dravid's tampering was no accident

Wisden Cricinfo staff

Clive Lloyd has dismissed suggestions that Rahul Dravid "accidentally" tampered with the ball during India's VB Series match against Zimbabwe on Tuesday.

Dravid was fined 50% of his match fee after being found guilty by Lloyd, the match referee, of rubbing a cough lozenge on the shiny side of the white ball. But John Wright, India's coach, claimed that it was "an innocent mistake" on Dravid's part.

But Lloyd has dismissed such suggestions. "It couldn't have been accidental because he's been fined," Lloyd was quoted as saying by several Australian newspapers. "It was shown he was applying a substance to it. I looked at the film and it was conclusive.

"The footage shows that something has been applied to the ball and the rules state you are not allowed to do that. Once the charge is brought you have to show the evidence. Something was being applied to the ball quite obviously and he must have known it. It's quite conclusive on film. The rules are there - you can only apply saliva and sweat to the ball."

Under ICC regulations Dravid is unable to speak about the affair, but when asked whether the incident was accidental, he muttered: "It was . . . [but] I can't make a comment."

[Donny]

Bucknor riles the Indians

Wisden Cricinfo staff

India have formally protested to Clive Lloyd after Steve Bucknor was caught mimicking Rahul Dravid on camera at the Sydney Cricket Ground on Thursday.

The team are said to be furious about the fact that Bucknor greeted Dravid's arrival at the crease by rolling his fingers over the ball, a reference to the ball-tampering allegation that cost Dravid 50% of his match fee in Brisbane, while looking at him suggestively.

According to the team management, the innuendo was blatant. It enraged the Indians so much that they took the unprecedented step of reporting Bucknor to the ICC match referee. Shivlal Yadav, the team manager, told the Times of India that Lloyd had promised to look into the matter.

Bucknor's version of events was predictably different. "I always check the ball between overs," he said. "I feel both sides of the ball with my fingers to see if there's any hanky panky going. At times, I even sniff at it to find out if any foreign substance has been applied on it."