Should the bans be lifted?

ACA leads latest calls for bans to be ended early - but do they have a point?

Smith and Warner planning their next naughty deed

Every country seems to have their own problem to complain about at the moment. The UK has Brexit, the US has Trump, and Australia have the bans of Cameron Bancroft, David Warner and Steve Smith to moan about.

The Australian Cricketers Association (ACA) have led the most recent charge to lift the bans on the 3 players, citing the culture of Cricket Australia as a key contributor to the ball-tampering scandal. This view fails to acknowledge the fact that it was the actions of 3 individuals, and not the officials, that brought sandpaper onto the pitch at Newlands.

The one-year bans for Smith and Warner do seem very lengthy at first glance, but in actual fact have been of limited significance so far. Since the bans were introduced, all 3 players have only missed 3 tests alongside some pretty insignificant ODI series. The new laws for ball tampering state a player can be banned for up to 6 tests, and for an offence as severe as sandpaper that should be the bare minimum.

Having received a 9-month ban, Bancroft will be eligible to play again during the India series, but Smith and Warner look set to miss that series as well as further ones against Sri Lanka and Pakistan. This is clearly a lot of cricket to be missed and I can sympathise will those calling for a shortening of the ban, but to lift them completely now would be a grave injustice.

Tampering with the ball in this nature with two leaders of the team conspiring together deserved a strong ban, and it would send out the wrong message if they were suddenly ended in the realisation that Australia are short of batsmen. Perhaps after the India series will be a time to review, but now is not the time.

In reality, these bans were administered in the knowledge that Australia had a limited schedule and catered perfectly for all three to return in time for the World Cup and Ashes next summer. In the immediate aftermath of the scandal, people scoffed at the mandatory ICC 1 match suspension handed out, how much worse is the 3-match ban that they’ve effectively served so far? Yes, they have also missed ODIs during the period, but for offences committed within the test arena a ban from the longest format is a necessary measure.

It looks very convenient that these issues have suddenly arisen as a strong Indian team is about to tour the country, with Australia drastically lacking batsmen. Lifting the bans now would look weak and give off a bad impression that if you are a key player punishment for such offences will be more lenient.

Their actions in South Africa crossed the line by a long way, and the bans should continue to reflect that. They were perfectly aware of what their actions constituted regardless of the ‘culture’ of Cricket Australia, and their bans have had limited impact on their test careers so far anyway.

Proposing to end the ban now looks almost comical, but perhaps after the India series the issue can be revisited again. Missing one two test series in the UAE does not do justice to the crime, missing a big series against India perhaps does.