Du Plessis's appeal against ball tampering rejected

Image
IANS Dubai
Last Updated : Dec 21 2016 | 9:28 PM IST

The International Cricket Council's (ICC) Code of Conduct Commission has dismissed South African captain Faf du Plessis's appeal against a decision that found him guilty of ball tampering in the second Test against Australia last month, it was announced on Wednesday.

Du Plessis was fined his entire match fee for the second Test -- played in Hobart between November 12 to 15 -- by ICC Match Referee Andy Pycroft, finding the batsman guilty of a breach of Article 2.2.9 of the ICC Code of Conduct.

Du Plessis was found guilty after TV footage showed him applying saliva to the ball for polishing with a sweet in his mouth. Du Plessis denied the charge.

"The Chair of the ICC's Code of Conduct Commission, The Hon Michael Beloff QC has dismissed's du Plessis' appeal after the was found guilty of changing the condition of the ball in breach of Law 42.3 during the fourth day's play in the second Test against Australia in Hobart," ICC said in a statement.

Accordingly, the original decision of Pycroft will stand, ICC said.

The hearing took place in Dubai on Monday, with du Plessis joining via video link.

"Having carefully considered the legal submissions made by the player and the ICC, Beloff QC confirmed that du Plessis was guilty of breaching Article 2.2.9 and that the original sanction of 100 per cent of his match fee was appropriate," the statement added.

ICC Chief Executive David Richardson said: "It is the duty of the ICC to ensure fair play on the cricket field. Although it was not picked up by the umpires at the time, when the incident came to our attention subsequently, we felt it was our responsibility to lay a charge in this case because the ICC can't let such an obvious breach of this Law pass without taking any action.

"We are pleased that both the Match Referee and Beloff QC have agreed with our interpretation of the Laws and hope that this serves as a deterrent to all players not to engage in this sort of unfair practice in the future.

"It goes without saying that we will be reviewing the outcome to determine if any additional guidelines are needed to provide further clarity to the players and umpires around this type of offence. However we are satisfied that the Law is clear and is implemented consistently."

--IANS

pur/dg

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Dec 21 2016 | 9:22 PM IST

Next Story