What should SLC's sentence be for Chandimal, Gurusinha and Hathurusingha?

Comments

HumbleBee's picture
Member since:
9 March 2011
Last activity:
2 weeks 1 day

Cric-Excrete @cricexp:

As I said before, Keep your soothsaying confined to your own hallucinated globe sans grey-matter. From where did you drag tharanga in to this issue? Didn't you know he was discarded from tests long ago?

I became a member of IC many moons before you joined & who are you to restrict me from expressing my independent views? Don't accuse others on your daydreams.

You can do a favor for IC readers with a head over their shoulders, by restraining your baseless idiotic view doggies to your empty globe, without straying them to poop in these forums!

I have no time to waste on such excrete.!!!!

(Last edited by HumbleBee on June 29, 2018 - 13:09)
Anonymous's picture

Cricexp I have a question for u, who is the real guy going out of the way with worthless arguments, desperately trying to save his favorite crony's a*s here? ha ha haa.!

He is trying hard to whitewash his favorite buddy Chandimal here, without having any real ammunition to defend his case or counter against solid arguments.

When unable to come up with a solid argument to save the culprits a*s (dead-caught and punished), all this desperate guy could do here is crying foul & trying to insult the opponent (with a load of fabricated nonsense irreverent to the crime). If his favorite Bindumal is a saint, why can't he defend his mate, challenging the opponent's view, with other means ...? isn't this a shameful cowardly act (similar to his Crony's case), reserved only for losers & cheaters . LoL

delan82's picture
Member since:
18 October 2009
Last activity:
15 hours 5 min

@cricexp Yes Arnold did say that and has made numerous comments during this saga. His tweets post the appeal hearing was unsuccessful shed a bit more light on what he thinks even seeming to suggest teams/players that appeal initial sentences and lose should get a more severe penalty that the initial one handed out didn't he?

I keep asking the same question or making the same statement but have not seen anyone come up with a valid reasoning yet so will say again...WHY DID THE CONTENTS WITHIN HIS POCKETS ON THE FIELD INCLUDE ITEMS THAT ARE PROHIBITING ON THE FIELD IN TERMS OF SHINING/MAINTAINING THE BALL.

Even if it was not his intention to tamper with the ball why has he crossed the boundary line onto the field with these items in his possession...surely you know questions will be asked if spotted. Surely he knows what is and isn't allowed. Surely he has seen similar incidents like the Faf one you mention or Dravid or whomever so why get yourself into that situation! Maybe he just shoved a few things to his pocked accidentally without thinking i'm not sure but needed to be answered.
SO if didn't know what he put exactly into his mouth he should be able to at least say why he took it on the field with him....and their is no one here that can say he is not guilty of taking these kind of products onto the field as he has said himself...to em that's where some sort of fine would have come into play at sentencing at the very least...now they could have been lenient and made a suspended sentence for a time period providing he has a clean record in that period.

If it was a doctors, physio, coach or whomever else that told him to take these then the board should be asking them this question if not ask him!
Why get yourself in a situation that you may cause you trouble...bit like going to nightclub day before game and being in your own room. Avoidable things and there would be no controversy!

I agree with you that it would have been better if officials notified the teams the day before instead of the morning of the that controversial day. However nothing in laws that say them doing so 10 mins before is wrong.

It was obvious the umpires suspected something the day before with the pacemen bowling. They kept looking at the ball. You have seen the footage of Ian Gould questions Dhanjanya DeSilva so you can't say next day was an utter shock.
They are within the rules to act on suspicion and follow it up as they did and take it further if wanted. Just go look at wordings of fair play laws plus playing conditions in sequence.

It is up to their discretion and if they decide next step is to notify batting teams captain. I'm not sure why they couldn't that evening perhaps review of footage made it late and two playing team unreachable I do not know.
There is nothing that says they must give xx amount of time warning to fielding team listed is there?

5 runs if you work your way down those laws you will see that 5 runs has to be added if ball changed for suspicion of tampering.

Now before you or others say but they didn't do this in Cape Town or to Faf or whatever yes I know. I think those officials in those incidents erred in not following laws as set out and something Dave Richardson spoke out against.

As for Srinath or these umpires not following protocols etc..for that official complaints can be lodged by SLC to ICC stating all reasons/facts. It does not need a protest delaying the Test for 2 hours, or a threat to fly home (as often the case with India) or any of that nonsense.

ICC should then conduct their own investigation and discipline their employees if necessary. And Yes I know the ICC is corrupt too...something I kept telling their Media Comms account on twitter so they blocked me hahaha. But i is corrupt individual boards or rather certain board members that keep such system going.

The people that keep using the lines "but so-and so did it" and "everyone does it" is just utter nonsense. Just because one flaunts a law and gets away with it doesn't mean it should be the case for all.
People speed on roads, some get caught..if lucky and 1st time with decent letter admission they might get away with warning depending on extent of speed. But to start saying but that on didn't get caught or everyone does it will get you nowhere.
Now before someone knocks this an analogy, someone has already tried to compare sports people to Mahatma Gandhi and and another has compared ICC decisions to that of governments acting against terrorism.

As for dancing to tune of ICC...yes no need to listen to the sports governing body make your own rules and say don't agree to play in what is written in laws until it suits...No excuse for delayed protest...very lucky the match referee didn't deem the game as a forfeit!
SLC doing their own great job of dancing of late in addressing corruption and the like with politicians involved or bookies or alleged match fixers involved...they are lucky ICC were strong on those developing bodies that wanted to be associate nations but turned a blind eye to Test boards probably after bribes and strings pulled!

Confused's picture
Member since:
20 June 2018
Last activity:
2 days 2 hours

Delan, you've covered this accurately and exhaustively. No surprise that some folks just don't get it, as defending the indefensible is an art form in SL. As you said at the start, the tampering has been dealt with so the only matter left is the level 3 charge for the two-hour no show.

After going straight to gung-ho mode on the 3rd day morning, we are now in grovel mode begging the ICC to be lenient. While I'm happy to see that Gurusinghe has at this late stage apologised and "regrets" the boycott, there are somethings that are too late for apologies. He and Hathuru are experienced guys with broad world-views so their appalling lack of judgment cannot be excused and should not be excused.

Not showing up is not just a sportsmanship or ethical issue, it borders on fraud. It does not matter that there might have been only two paying spectators, but they were dudded out of two hours for what they paid for. Most significantly however, the broadcaster has paid a tidy some for TV rights but lost out on couple of hours during which time 50 or more commercials could have been aired I'd presume.

Quite frankly, I'd be surprised if the ICC shows any leniency, which we certainly do not deserve.

cricexp's picture
Member since:
14 March 2015
Last activity:
12 min 14 sec

Delan- There is no point dragging this conversation, I personally believe Chandimal had a sweet (chewing gum/bubble gum/etc) which is totally against the law, But that is a mistake almost every cricketer do these days. My point is ICC do not have clear evidence whether Chandimal had sweets or almond(almond is not a ban substance), if Chandi cannot remember what he had during that particular video fram how could ICC come to a conclusion that it was illegal substance that he had during that video?

Changing the ball is not a new thing, it happened due to natural causes even in ODIs, During that particular match even after Chandimal's incident umpires were not satisfy what was happening to ball, that's why they asked Kusal Mendis and Roshen to change the bats, it is a duke ball and it was a wet condition during the whole 5 days so ball can be altered due to natural reasons.

I am quoting Faf Du Plessis's statement on Chandimal ball tampering saga,

"I have probably said it too much but there are too many grey areas when it comes to the ICC and the rules. One, you want clarity and, two, you want consistency and that's definitely something that's not been part of that body of laws for a while now," du Plessis said. "There's a lot of captains that have been speaking about it for a lot of years so, hopefully, when they do bring in all these new things there will be a lot of clarity and, most importantly, consistency for all teams."

(Last edited by cricexp on July 2, 2018 - 03:15)
delan82's picture
Member since:
18 October 2009
Last activity:
15 hours 5 min

cricexp - who is dragging this or you?

You are repeating the same lines of desperation that has been already answered over and over again including trying to point fingers and past cases for justification.

To recap if he can not remember what was in his pocket that is his problem...he needs to remember why he has taken these substances/items onto the field in the first instance? Go ask him. That bit has already been established has it not?

So now it's the bat, wetness and dukes ball...why didn't you go present the defence case then with all this at the time.

Yes balls get changed if natural damage...we all know that. And I think Perth 95 that is what happened. And I base that on abrasive conditions causing the same controversy with Pakistan in a tour game on same ground in same summer weeks before.

Umpires examine the ball and decide if natural causes has damaged it and it warrants change they change the ball to something of similar age.
There is difference to a natural cause like taking a battering or hitting concrete or gutter or being wet and water logged.
A wet ball fielding side would usually complain and ask to change. What happens to seam when wet? or ball is heavily waterlogged? Are fielding side going to only dry one side of wet ball?

The bats? Are you sure people asked to change bats don't have bats within specifications or is that going open up another can of worms?

And ODIs? The white ball gets "dirty" quite quickly and becomes harder for players and spectators to view. That's why they tried going back to 2 white balls isn't it...and now currently being debated by some if this is unfair advantage to batsmen. The white ball has always had this issue compared to red ball hence need to change it frequently.

What exactly do you expect Faf to say given he has been found guilty twice and got away quite leniently. He can not suddenly come out with strong stance against tampering cos he looks would look like a hypocrite wouldn't he. Next you might as well quote Afridi or repeat Waqar on twitter someone like that!

Did they not have advisory panel committee meeting recently when lots of these issues by could have been submitted and raised by captains, players, boards, officials etc...what was the outcome of that...that is to be implemented soon?

Clutching at straws here...take the quotes and excuses to high courts and see what they say!

Of course SL would not do anything untoward...haven't had any players guilty of ball tampering in last 12 months have they?

Look forward to seeing similar excuses from you defending other nations when Sri Lanka on receiving end saying all teams do it!
Not just ball tampering but all other rules too.

Whilst you are giving these excuses...looks like from reports SL going to name Lakmal as captain for next series and all but conceding Chandimal is going to be further suspended for what followed afterwards.

Oh and an further addition on a topic which i'm attributing to you but raising as it is doing the rounds is that Srinath has set this up because he was "bashed" by SL batsmen in his playing days is utter garbage too.
heard Srinath live praising certain Sri Lankan batsmen like Aravinda as amongst his toughest and most admired opponents.
And his bowling averages against SL in both Test and ODIs is not that different to his overall career one...so that blows that conspiracy theory which keeps circulating on social media! He was equally "bashed" by everyone!

Anyway we will have difference of opinions on this matter that is fine with me. Hope these defences along with the pleading for leniency works for your sake if though as pointed out by confused not deserved!
It is obvious your a pro-Chandimal person regardless so will look for any excuse. I do not specifically say this cos of this topic but look at the few blogs have posted since 2015 to see what I am talking about! Chandimal can do no wrong so I won't be surprised if you are related or associated with him. Or he is your favourite player! But anyway so be it.
Take all these new defences to the High courts...interested which documented laws in the rules that you are going to challenge

But all these kinds of excuses are really doing is actually bringing further shame and embarrassment to the nation! This kind of attitude is not that surprising.

Remember when certain officials tried to clamp down on illegal actions or corruption in domestic cricket before it reached the international level...what happened? Officials silenced or moved on, issues swept under carpet, accused defended rigorously citing sour grapes and other allegations only for it to resurface later again...that what happens you got officials, fans, media that take this kind of attitude and view. Thinking it is good to be a rebel or under siege or the victim all the time will makes things better...yeah right..End results on and off the field is there for everyone to now see....This is much of the same old stuff and certainly not getting sympathy around the globe but sadly becoming a laughing stock and rabel that is out of control!

I hope this drama is sorted and team focuses on winning some upcoming series and weed out the problems from top of SLC down

cricexp's picture
Member since:
14 March 2015
Last activity:
12 min 14 sec

Delan- Yes I am a Chandimal fan and it is obvious I am being biased here, The whole plot that "I do not remember what I ate" was obviously a fabricated story which probably came up by SLC lawyers, my point here is ICC do not have conclusive evidence against the legal points our lawyers brought in to the table. Chandimal did something intentionally to damage the ball is a different case(Which as a Chandimal fan I do not believe he did this purposely to gain advantage, It's a pure mistake and that's my belief on that matter), my point is how do ICC prove that Chandi had a banned substance and not Almond at that point? do they have video evidence? Yes they have video evidence of Chandimal having something but how do they say it is a banned substance is my point here.

delan82's picture
Member since:
18 October 2009
Last activity:
15 hours 5 min

cricexp - Been answered over and over.
I don't know who came up with the defence him, someone else or a combo.
Bottom line is they admitted to numerous items in his pocket some which may be intentionally used for wrong purposes.
You seem to be evading why that explanation about why these were taken onto the field in the first instance is yet to be satisfactorily given...
Go ask him and come back with that answer bearing in mind the ramifications for getting caught with such items is going have a number of questions raised...and those rules are well and truly known especially in current climate in 2018!

I have already said in one of the earlier responses to you he may have got away with a warning or suspended sentence which affectively is a warning not to do it again!
Same view regardless of whom the player is and what their background/nationality is!

Without that explanation of why he had those in his pocket on the field he can't really be whinging and complaining.

As for the charge..that is normal. Officials suspect something they bring upon a charge. Person pleads guilty or not guilty. Goes to a hearing depending on that answer...then opportunity to explain everything prior to verdict.
Which part of that does not make sense? In this instance keeping in mind it is sport with written rules/laws specified.

cricexp's picture
Member since:
14 March 2015
Last activity:
12 min 14 sec

Delan- You are point is correct when it comes to ethics, yes true ethically he should not have taken anything onto the field, then again is there a law that players should not take anything inside their pockets? Do we know what's inside the pocket of Virat Kohli? In a legal terms carrying anything inside your pocket is not illegal, so when it comes to charging do they have conclusive evidence that Chandimal had a illegal substance? They cant suspect things and charge a player.

Just take the Sachin Tendulkar case,it was clearly visible he was scratching the ball (seam) and that is conclusive evidence to suspend a one match ban then India appealed against it saying Sachin was cleaning the dirty inside the seam area of the ball and ICC overturn the ban based on that logic. It is the same with Rabada vs Smith incident, you do not have clear evidence that Rabada purposely had physical contact with Smith, in our case ICC just dismiss the Chandimal appeal, and Beloff’s written reasoned decision supposed to published on Wednesday 27 June, but I have still not seen his reasons to dismiss the case.

Let's put it simple,
You are allowed to take anything inside your pocket to the ground which is not illegal.
Chandimal had Chewing Gum/Sweets/Almonds/Pills/etc inside his pocket.
But he ate only the almonds throughout the game.
So how can anybody come to a conclusion that Chandimal ate sweets intending to tamper the ball, what evidence they have?

delan82's picture
Member since:
18 October 2009
Last activity:
15 hours 5 min

cricexp - Firstly you are using the same old tactics like you and some other shave been and I was expecting...which is to ask what about this person or this case etc as a means of deflecting blame and justifying what has been done.
So what about all those older cases...they are done and dusted and been judged and/or sentences at that moment in time rightly or wrong.
We are talking about this case/incident is this moment of time with the rules (and let's not forget the publicity and awareness)at the time it took place. That is all that matters!
As we have seen yesterdays things will now change even more with tougher penalties. And each case will be judged on its own.

Times have changed as have technology, awareness, rules etc so stop trying to live in the past!
Usually this is a last desperate act to justify what is done is not wrong but equal with everyone else.

Unless you are Chandimal himself (which is possible because these days younger Sri Lankans following lead of Indians and the like to make parody accounts and fake names to gain popularity for their views) how do you know of all the contents he had in his pocket that day almonds were the only ones consumed...
Why then were those other things in his pocket for good luck or superstitious reasons

I have already answered this but you can't comprehend or accept because it is a fellow countryman and one of your heroes..but I bet if it was someone from another nation or a player you dislike like a Tharanga you would be all over them like a sore rash and highlighting what weak pathetic defence is being put up like you are here.
That's what happens when you view things from biased view and not open mind with neutral view. Emotions taking over!

I'll repeat again for you hopefully loud and clear...he can take what he wants onto the field. He knows what maybe implicated in illegal acts on the field and that if seen in position with something that is questions will be asked whether it be from commentators or other media or opposition or match officials whomever...You put yourself in that position buy choosing such actions like taking them onto the field!
What part of that is not logically to you? What part of that is difficult to understand? Please explain to everyone here!

Whether he intends to do something or not or carries out such ats the above scenario remains! I have nothing against Chandimal. But even if unintentional he has made this stupid mistake of getting in this scenario where the questions are asked and raised. That can not be denied.

The footage shows something put into the mouth prior to polishing ball with saliva. That can also not be denied...as as him claiming to have had all these things in his pocket. So don't try pretend these things are all optical illusions by television cameras. As those have been admitted already!

The rules are not ideal and I never said I liked them. But they are there and have to be applied. I keep telling you to go read them but obviously you have not or brushed over them quickly.

Personally I am not a fan of the 5 run penalty but you follow the sequence and it has to be done. I understand why they put it there as a deterrent. Given in the modern game where players paid better fines often amount to nothing and sometimes teams pool together to pay fine.

Problem with 5 runs is if hearing conducted player latter found not-guilty and game result within 5 runs. But it is is there.

Now they will be hoping tougher penalties for those found guilty will be a deterrent. Maybe but we know from things like fixing some teams and certain idiotic fans think such things are still ok and continue to do so!

Similarly I should be asking you to Please provide your evidence that despite him admitting to having all these things in his pocket he only selected and ate the almonds whilst others stayed in the pocket as you have said!

Each post seems to have new defence material not stating in original! Again are you sure you are not Chandimal or his wife who controls his accounts, manager or relative of his. Are you making these on his behalf and request or just on your own accord. Lets get all the full potential conflicts of interests revealed. Only thing different i see is today you have added a surname perhaps knowing this question was coming right!

Post new comment

Note
All anonymous comments are moderated.
  • Avoid abusive remarks and personal attacks.
  • Avoid posting unrelated links.
  • Avoid vulgar or obscene language.
Already a member? Log-in now. Not a member? Sign up for a new account.
CAPTCHA
This step helps us prevent automated submissions from spammers.
1 + 0 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.