Misbah-ul-Haq's slow over-rate suspension vs Faf du Plessis' fine for ball tampering

[SL_Fan]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Strange that a player gets banned for a slow over-rate but doesn't get banned after being caught ball tampering for the second time <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Cricket?src=hash">#Cricket</a></p>— Saj Sadiq (@Saj_PakPassion) <a href="https://twitter.com/Saj_PakPassion/status/801005365018103816">November 22, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


ICC Reply

Saj,

I have just seen your tweet below. Just for your knowledge and information, Misbah has been suspended for one Test because it was his second slow over-rate offence within 12 months. In contrast, Faf was previously fined for the same offence (changing the condition of the ball, Article 2.2.9) in October 2013 i.e. more than three years ago. Furthermore, the range of sanction for a level 2 offence is from 50-100% of a player’s match fee and/or one Test suspension, and this is at the discretion of the match referee.

 

[last_knight]

Both are punishable acts.

In an era of Capitalism, Ethics are outweighed by Capital any day every day. Misbah's act was predominantly Capital related and Du Plesis' was predominantly Ethical. Punishment would have been same if we swap the place of both players involved.

 

[Amjid Javed]

Misbah was 2nd offense in 12 months so rightly to get a ban, but i think any sort of ball tampering offence should also have a ban for it as well.

 

[Navdeep Srivastava]

How come cook got away with slow over rate, he clearly bowled 3or 4 overs less in 1st test match 2nd day, he was atrocious on 4th day on 2nd test match ,test match could have easily lost 6-7 overs on fourth day if not for Indian spinners , who bowled and covered the quota of English bowler also.

 

[Smbhayi]

^guess indian spinners saved him. After all we've big hearts

 

[soso_killer]

The ICC have no case nor the balls.
Let's be clear Faf used his saliva, the contents of that saliva is immaterial, saliva is still saliva. Putting lipstick on a pig doesn't change the fact that it's still a pig.

The ICC are afraid of the consequences of applying any of their meek and inconsistent laws. What's going to happen when the English and/or Australians get caught doing it? Better yet the Indian's?
Would they have the balls to ban/suspended one of their key players for a match over this non issue?
We all know the answer to that. We only have to look at how they dealt with Sachin Tendulkar.

If Faf is so guilty then surely a fine of an entire match fee is not good enough. Be my guest and ban him for 10 games if you will. At least have the balls to be consistent.

 

[Hasan123]

If icc think Faf is guilty on this current offence of course he should get a longer ban as its his 2nd offence. Ball tampering is much worse crime than slow over rate. Before South Africa fans have a got at me for Faf not ball tampering, for the icc they believe he has ball tampered. IMO they need to be more clear on what exactly ball tampering is as it seems faf may not be the only one tampering the ball in the rules of icc.

 

[Major]

I think we should appreciate ICC for replying to the tweet.

I think fair decision at the end as Faf's last charge for ball tempering was three years ago and Misbah was charged for slow over rate twice in a single year.

 

[Major]

The ICC have no case nor the balls.
Let's be clear Faf used his saliva, the contents of that saliva is immaterial, saliva is still saliva. Putting lipstick on a pig doesn't change the fact that it's still a pig.

The ICC are afraid of the consequences of applying any of their meek and inconsistent laws. What's going to happen when the English and/or Australians get caught doing it? Better yet the Indian's?
Would they have the balls to ban/suspended one of their key players for a match over this non issue?
We all know the answer to that. We only have to look at how they dealt with Sachin Tendulkar.

If Faf is so guilty then surely a fine of an entire match fee is not good enough. Be my guest and ban him for 10 games if you will. At least have the balls to be consistent.

to be honest, ICC acted according to the rules. Rules clearly states
"the range of sanction for a level 2 offence is from 50-100% of a player’s match fee and/or one Test suspension, "