Breaking/Brief news
December 04, 2006
Lee let off lightly
The ICC Code of Conduct is explicit (in clause I2)
For the purposes of determining the penalty to be imposed, the Adjudicator must regard a repeat of any offence within 12 months of such offence as an offence at the next level above that particular offence. For instance, any repeat of a Level 1 offence within 12 months of such offence would be regarded as a Level 2 offence for the purposes of calculating the penalty to be imposed.While I question the relevance of a player's past record in being hauled up, I find that the 25% fine that Brett Lee has copped for 'not appealing', i.e. he celebrated the dismissal before the umpire made up his mind (Sehwag was found guilty in the Caribbean), is contrary to what the code of conduct says.
This is the second time that Brett Lee has been pulled up for a Level-1 offence, after being reprimanded in January. So why on earth hasn't Jeff Crowe gone by the rule book and upgraded Lee to a Level-2 offender?
Labels: ashes, ashes 2006, australia, england
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed -
| I too am confused at the outcome. Except I think it should have been 0% of his match fee. There was nothing in this! It was a beat up! Absolutely stupid. If authorities remain this "vigilant" there is going to be hearings after every test!
We'd prefer if you posted comments with your real name to add more credibility to your opinions. However, the moderators reserve the right to delete comments, especially those containing offensive or unsuitable language. The opinions in the comments are your own views. You are welcome to provide a URL to your own cricket blog, but the moderators reserve the right to delete comments which only reference sites for viewing live streams.
Links within entries open in a new window. Some of the links may now be broken/not take you to the expected report since the original content providers may have archived/removed the contents. Some of the sites linked may require registration/subscription.
All opinions expressed are those of the authors alone. The authors' respective employers (past, present or future) are in no way connected to the opinions expressed here.
All pictures, photographs used are copyrights of the original owners. We do not intend to infringe on any copyright. Pictures and photographs are used here to merely accentuate and enhance the content value to our readers.
|
|
|
|
Post a Comment