[PICS/VIDS] What did he give him? Debate erupts over ‘interesting’ Jadeja moment during first Test

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

We don't need to tamper the ball to win against Australia at home. People are reading too much into it.

 

[Zaz]

There is a reason why there are courts around the world to decide disputes and issues and things are not decided in court of public opinion.

Inherent bias is a bigger problem than any outside pressure.

The opposition team has not raised any issue when they were very eager to talk about the slightest of issues.

The ICC has not raised any issue.

I guess the ICC knows its rules.

Convincing evidence? Well if its part of the ICC Playing conditions its fair.

The aussies obviously dont want to upset the hosts and the big money makers of the game

You need to take your tinted glasses off and see at the very least jadeja and co brought a foreign substance on to the pitch and shouldve got the umpires permission before he applied it to his hands

If you cant even see that then you are the one with the inherent bias

 

[HitWicket]

What blatant violation?

Shouting childish accusations into the stump mic, blatantly bringing the game into disrepute.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Shouting childish accusations into the stump mic, blatantly bringing the game into disrepute.

Talking about a vendor isn't bringing the game to disrepute. It was specifically mentioned by various writers including on Cricinfo that there is nothing in the rule book to punish a cricketer who talks or accuses a vendor.

 

[cricketjoshila]

The aussies obviously dont want to upset the hosts and the big money makers of the game

You need to take your tinted glasses off and see at the very least jadeja and co brought a foreign substance on to the pitch and shouldve got the umpires permission before he applied it to his hands

If you cant even see that then you are the one with the inherent bias

Aussies Were quick to talk about the pitches? No?

Wasn't India the host and big money makers then?

The use of the cream is allowed by ICC playing conditions rulebook. The Aussies and the ICC match referee know that hence no issues were raised.

I doubt that rules are going to be changed and applied as per your convenience.

 

[HitWicket]

Talking about a vendor isn't bringing the game to disrepute. It was specifically mentioned by various writers including on Cricinfo that there is nothing in the rule book to punish a cricketer who talks or accuses a vendor.

Throwing a tantrum and suggesting a game is being corruptly influenced by the broadcaster blatantly meets the definition of bringing the game into disrepute.

 

[HitWicket]

The use of the cream is allowed by ICC playing conditions rulebook.

With the umpires permission, the fact he got summoned by the match referee to explain what he was doing makes it pretty clear the umpires permission was not sought.

The code of conduct makes it clear that the application of an artificial substance to the ball is an offence, with no specified exceptions. Rubbing a cream all over your fingers whilst holding the ball is inevitably going to result in some of that cream being applied to the ball.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Throwing a tantrum and suggesting a game is being corruptly influenced by the broadcaster blatantly meets the definition of bringing the game into disrepute.

ICC or cricket isnt run by your or my definition of what is what. As pointed out by various experts there was nothing about disrepute to the game.

A vendor can be biased and there is nothing wrong in calling that out.

 

[cricketjoshila]

With the umpires permission, the fact he got summoned by the match referee to explain what he was doing makes it pretty clear the umpires permission was not sought.

The code of conduct makes it clear that the application of an artificial substance to the ball is an offence, with no specified exceptions. Rubbing a cream all over your fingers whilst holding the ball is inevitably going to result in some of that cream being applied to the ball.

He didn't get summoned by match referee. They went to the referee of their own accord after some social media comments. The umpires didn't report them. The Aussies didn't report them either.

The playing conditions as specified by ICC and as stated by various media reports allow application of a pain relieving cream on fingers.

 

[HitWicket]

ICC or cricket isnt run by your or my definition of what is what. As pointed out by various experts there was nothing about disrepute to the game.

A vendor can be biased and there is nothing wrong in calling that out.

There is no way in which suggesting the course of a game is being influenced by the criminal corruption of the broadcaster can be twisted to not comfortably fit the definition of bringing the game into disrepute.

He didn't get summoned by match referee. They went to the referee of their own accord after some social media comments. The umpires didn't report them. The Aussies didn't report them either.

No source indicates they went to the referee of their own accord.

The playing conditions as specified by ICC and as stated by various media reports allow application of a pain relieving cream on fingers.

Why would you even bother trying to make this up when the playing conditions are a publicly available document. This is not stated anywhere in them.

 

[cricketjoshila]

There is no way in which suggesting the course of a game is being influenced by the criminal corruption of the broadcaster can be twisted to not comfortably fit the definition of bringing the game into disrepute.



No source indicates they went to the referee of their own accord.



Why would you even bother trying to make this up when the playing conditions are a publicly available document. This is not stated anywhere in them.

The Indian team management has informed ICC match referee Andy Pycroft that star spinner Ravindra Jadeja was using pain-relieving cream on the finger of his bowling hand in the video recordings that were widely shared on social media on the first day of the Nagpur Test against Australia, as ESPNcricinfo reported. After visuals of spinner Jadeja was seen taking a substance off the back of Mohammed Siraj's palm and rubbing it on his bowling finger which went viral on social media after day one of the first Test between India and Australia in the Border-Gavaskar Trophy.


https://m.economictimes.com/news/sp...-cream-on-finger/amp_articleshow/97787799.cms

As you see. Indian informed the match refree and no charges were laid.

A broadcaster is not a member of the ICC or its employees or any official or a player. They are a vendor and accusing a vendor of bias is not bringing the game into disrepute. If they had accused the CSA or umpires or players or officials it would be different.


Make this up? Lol.

Read any article on this and it says that this is part of the playing conditions. The only one making an issue is you. I am sorry to say but ICC or its match referee are not going to go by your or my definition.

You can have your opinion on all this but its your opinion. Not the official version.

 

[HitWicket]

The Indian team management has informed ICC match referee Andy Pycroft that star spinner Ravindra Jadeja was using pain-relieving cream on the finger of his bowling hand in the video recordings that were widely shared on social media on the first day of the Nagpur Test against Australia, as ESPNcricinfo reported. After visuals of spinner Jadeja was seen taking a substance off the back of Mohammed Siraj's palm and rubbing it on his bowling finger which went viral on social media after day one of the first Test between India and Australia in the Border-Gavaskar Trophy.


https://m.economictimes.com/news/sp...-cream-on-finger/amp_articleshow/97787799.cms

As you see. Indian informed the match refree and no charges were laid.

Again, that gives absolutely no indication they did it of their own accord. Any source that references how the meeting was initiated suggests Pycroft summoned Ashwin and Rohit immediately after the end of play.

A broadcaster is not a member of the ICC or its employees or any official or a player. They are a vendor and accusing a vendor of bias is not bringing the game into disrepute. If they had accused the CSA or umpires or players or officials it would be different.

Whether they're a vendor, official or player makes no difference. Implying that the course of the game is being influenced by corruption clearly brings the game into disrepute.

Make this up? Lol.

Read any article on this and it says that this is part of the playing conditions. The only one making an issue is you. I am sorry to say but ICC or its match referee are not going to go by your or my definition.

Feel free to quote the playing condition that says what you've claimed it does. We both know you're going to completely ignore/dodge this request though because it doesn't exist.

 

[ex-q-zit]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">If you look closely, there is a cream on Siraj's hand which stood out clear as day on the TV. Jadeja applied it to his finger, at no stage did he put it on the ball. No need for further discussion. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/AUSvIND?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#AUSvIND</a> <a href="https://t.co/to3xCMMm2a">pic.twitter.com/to3xCMMm2a</a></p>— Brad Hogg (@Brad_Hogg) <a href="https://twitter.com/Brad_Hogg/status/1623955679504392193?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 10, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Smbhayi]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">If you look closely, there is a cream on Siraj's hand which stood out clear as day on the TV. Jadeja applied it to his finger, at no stage did he put it on the ball. No need for further discussion. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/AUSvIND?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#AUSvIND</a> <a href="https://t.co/to3xCMMm2a">pic.twitter.com/to3xCMMm2a</a></p>— Brad Hogg (@Brad_Hogg) <a href="https://twitter.com/Brad_Hogg/status/1623955679504392193?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 10, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Brad Hogg brought by BCCICC [MENTION=135038]Major[/MENTION]..

 

[Devadwal]

Ravindra Jadeja has been given one demerit point and fined 25% of his match fee for applying the soothing cream without the on-field umpires' permission, but ICC match officiating team is satisfied this was not used as an artificial substance to alter the condition of the ball. They were satisfied the condition wasn't altered.

 

[Saj]

India spin bowler Ravindra Jadeja has been fined 25 per cent of his match fee for breaching Level 1 of the ICC Code of Conduct during the first Test against Australia in Nagpur on Thursday.

Jadeja was found to have breached Article 2.20 of the ICC Code of Conduct for Players and Player Support Personnel, which relates to displaying conduct that is contrary to the spirit of the game.

In addition to this, one demerit point has been added to Jadeja’s disciplinary record, for whom it was the first offence in a 24-month period.

The incident occurred in the 46th over of Australia’s first innings, when Jadeja applied a soothing cream to a swelling on the index finger of his bowling hand without asking for permission to do so from the on-field umpires.

Jadeja admitted the offence and accepted the sanction proposed by Andy Pycroft of the Emirates ICC Elite Panel of Match Referees, so there was no need for a formal hearing.

In reaching his decision to sanction the player along with the Level 1 sanction he imposed, the Match Referee was satisfied that the cream was applied to the finger purely for medical purposes. The cream was not applied as an artificial substance to the ball and consequently it did not change the condition of the ball, which would have been in breach of clause 41.3 of the ICC playing conditions – Unfair Play – The Match Ball – Changing its Condition.

On-field umpires Nitin Menon and Richard Illingworth, third umpire Michael Gough and fourth umpire KN Ananthapadmanabhan levelled the charge.

Level 1 breaches carry a minimum penalty of an official reprimand, a maximum penalty of 50 per cent of a player’s match fee, and one or two demerit points.

 

[Front Foot Pull]

punished for applying substance on finger without informing umpires.

no evidence of applying substance on ball & trying to alter its condition.

all fine, no problem. should inform the umps for any body treatment from the next time.

 

[MenInG]

punished for applying substance on finger without informing umpires.

no evidence of applying substance on ball & trying to alter its condition.

all fine, no problem. should inform the umps for any body treatment from the next time.

The fact that he has a substance which is an ointment on his hands which can be transferred on to the ball tells me that there is something wrong.

Is there evidence of him applying that substance specifically to the ball after taking it on? NO
Is there evidence of him wiping his hand clean so that no substance on his hand comes into contact with the substance? NO
Is there evidence of him applying that substance specifically to the ball later on when he would normally be handling the ball? Not clear.

 

[MenInG]

Fox not letting it go ...

 

[Zaz]

India spin bowler Ravindra Jadeja has been fined 25 per cent of his match fee for breaching Level 1 of the ICC Code of Conduct during the first Test against Australia in Nagpur on Thursday.

Jadeja was found to have breached Article 2.20 of the ICC Code of Conduct for Players and Player Support Personnel, which relates to displaying conduct that is contrary to the spirit of the game.

In addition to this, one demerit point has been added to Jadeja’s disciplinary record, for whom it was the first offence in a 24-month period.

The incident occurred in the 46th over of Australia’s first innings, when Jadeja applied a soothing cream to a swelling on the index finger of his bowling hand without asking for permission to do so from the on-field umpires.

Jadeja admitted the offence and accepted the sanction proposed by Andy Pycroft of the Emirates ICC Elite Panel of Match Referees, so there was no need for a formal hearing.

In reaching his decision to sanction the player along with the Level 1 sanction he imposed, the Match Referee was satisfied that the cream was applied to the finger purely for medical purposes. The cream was not applied as an artificial substance to the ball and consequently it did not change the condition of the ball, which would have been in breach of clause 41.3 of the ICC playing conditions – Unfair Play – The Match Ball – Changing its Condition.

On-field umpires Nitin Menon and Richard Illingworth, third umpire Michael Gough and fourth umpire KN Ananthapadmanabhan levelled the charge.

Level 1 breaches carry a minimum penalty of an official reprimand, a maximum penalty of 50 per cent of a player’s match fee, and one or two demerit points.

So what has cricket joshila got to say about this then?

Is he gonna continue the blind defence of his team no matter

Just accept jadeja and co messed up and move on
You dont look clever defending the indefensible

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Ok. So Jadeja was found guilty. He didn't need to do that.

 

[MenInG]

https://www.aninews.in/news/sports/...ed-pain-relief-cream-on-finger20230210075911/

Nagpur (Maharashtra) [India], February 10 (ANI): The Indian team management has informed ICC match referee Andy Pycroft that star spinner Ravindra Jadeja was using pain-relieving cream on the finger of his bowling hand in the video recordings that were widely shared on social media on the first day of the Nagpur Test against Australia.

==

ICC release

The incident occurred during the 46th over of Australia’s first innings on Thursday, 9 February, when Jadeja was seen applying a soothing cream to his index finger. In the video footage, the left-arm spinner took a substance from Mohammed Siraj's palm and appeared to rub this onto the index finger of his left hand.

The India team management had explained that the finger spinner was applying the cream to a swelling on the index finger of his bowling hand. This was done without asking for permission from the on-field umpires.

==

So they did not inform the ICC umpires?

 

[WengerOut]

Ok. So Jadeja was found guilty. He didn't need to do that.

He was found guilty of not informing the umpires. ICC is satisfied nothing malicious was intented. More of a stupid mistake.

 

[Major]

so where are the Indian posters who laid claim match referee did not find him guilty. Well he has been found guilty

So Jadeja cheated his way in the first test

 

[MenInG]

He was found guilty of not informing the umpires. ICC is satisfied nothing malicious was intented. More of a stupid mistake.

But Indian Management told us that they had told the ICC reps?

 

[WengerOut]

But Indian Management told us that they had told the ICC reps?

Jadeja did not inform the onfield umpires when it was being applied. After the day's play, i believe they informed after the controversy broke out.

 

[MenInG]

Jadeja did not inform the onfield umpires when it was being applied. After the day's play, i believe they informed after the controversy broke out.

If the whole thing had been cleared with the match officials, why was any action necessary on Jadeja?

 

[WengerOut]

If the whole thing had been cleared with the match officials, why was any action necessary on Jadeja?

Who said he was cleared of "Not informing " part?

 

[pillionrider]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">If you look closely, there is a cream on Siraj's hand which stood out clear as day on the TV. Jadeja applied it to his finger, at no stage did he put it on the ball. No need for further discussion. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/AUSvIND?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#AUSvIND</a> <a href="https://t.co/to3xCMMm2a">pic.twitter.com/to3xCMMm2a</a></p>— Brad Hogg (@Brad_Hogg) <a href="https://twitter.com/Brad_Hogg/status/1623955679504392193?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 10, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Indian all-rounder Ravindra Jadeja has been fined 25 per cent of his match fee after sparking controversy when he applied something to his finger.

The ICC said the incident would be settled by match officials, with match referee Andy Pycroft clearing Jadeja of any wrongdoing.

But cricket’s governing body has intervened, finding Jadeja guilty of breaching “Article 2.20 of the ICC Code of Conduct for Players and Player Support Personnel, which relates to displaying conduct that is contrary to the spirit of the game.”

Jadeja reportedly admitted the offence and “accepted the sanction proposed by Andy Pycroft of the Emirates ICC Elite Panel of Match Referees, so there was no need for a formal hearing.”

However, the cream was not deemed to have been an artificial substance applied to the ball and purely for medical purposes.

https://www.news.com.au/sport/crick...y/news-story/115b46f4b831241bf13f469e6425c8f6

 

[JattMaula]

Looks like some PP posters need Siraj to give them the ointment. Burns look serious.

 

[Saurav]

so where are the Indian posters who laid claim match referee did not find him guilty. Well he has been found guilty

So Jadeja cheated his way in the first test

Comprehension problems?

He's been cleared of ball tampering as the condition of the ball wasn't altered.

Just found guilty of not informing umps which no one is contesting

 

[Zaz]

Comprehension problems?

He's been cleared of ball tampering as the condition of the ball wasn't altered.

Just found guilty of not informing umps which no one is contesting

You need to go through this thread again then

Some indian posters were contesting the fact that he had not breached any rules

Not informing the umpire before applying whatever he was to his hands is clearly a breach and hence hes been sanctioned

 

[WengerOut]

You need to go through this thread again then

Some indian posters were contesting the fact that he had not breached any rules

Not informing the umpire before applying whatever he was to his hands is clearly a breach and hence hes been sanctioned

You may find one or two ( not sure ). But you are conveniently forgetting the fact that the reason why this thread has got this long is because some of the Pakistan fans alleged Jadeja was applying the ointment to gain unfair advantage. ICC rule is a slap on their face.

 

[Front Foot Pull]

so where are the Indian posters who laid claim match referee did not find him guilty. Well he has been found guilty

So Jadeja cheated his way in the first test

here he comes.

found guilty for doing what and for what were the accusations made by few idiots..is the key difference here.

danced in pitch accusation thread before the match, was found nowhere for the last 2 days when the pitch actually played well, comes back to the ointment thread.

considering the posts in the past (bribing umpires, schedules etc) and now, evident that you are much more interested in controversies & conspiracies than the game itself. no wonder.

 

[ex-q-zit]

You need to go through this thread again then

Some indian posters were contesting the fact that he had not breached any rules

Not informing the umpire before applying whatever he was to his hands is clearly a breach and hence hes been sanctioned

If I am right most of us were saying he hasn't breached any rules related to ball tampering and also using ointmnet on his bowling finger. No one said he can apply it without informing the umpire.

Ball tampering means altering the cricket ball to gain any kind of benefits like reverse swing. He was not found altering the ball. So was not cheating. Not informing the umpire may come as breaching a rule but not cheating.

 

[charlie007]

He’s been found guilty of applying a substance on his fingers without informing the umpires- he should have been more careful there. Next time, go to the dressing room and apply any ointment not in the camera view! Just like you would a sunscreen