Kagiso Rabada verdict shows the Proteas paceman can swing just about anything

Smith's disgraceful whinging after the appeal decision would tend to confirm your analysis of his act. He wanted to be called to give evidence. That could have been interesting. Cross examined by one of South Africa's leading lawyers. Smith would have been like Daniel going back into the lions den to get his hat.

So a former Solicitor General knows nothing about interpreting sporting rules and condones bad behaviour including possibly on-field violence? Big allegation there. Are you Steve Smith's speech writer. The rule was applied correctly.

Once again. The definition of an assault is NOT confined to physical contact. It is putting the victim in fear of an imminent physical contact. Warner did that in the stair well.. So he has had two assaults. Warner is a professional cricketer and his assaults happened within the field of his employment as a professional cricketer. Look up the definition of bringing the game into disrepute. His assaults occurred on fellow professional cricketers. You keep referring to a "track record". If you mean his points accumulation then you are right. He is a moderately misbehaved cricketer. Which is a travesty and a clear indication that the structure and the application of the rules is defective. If you are referring to what he actually did he is the worst abuser and bully in cricket. Perhaps the view of Crowe's late brother is closer to the mark. He called out his "thuggish" behaviour. Jeff Crowe has no legal training or understanding of the rule. He clearly didn't understand the level of evidence required to find against Rabada. The whole purpose of the appeal process is to bring legal experience and judgement to the rules. Something the Australian captain either doesn't understand or wilfully chose to ignore.

You have just destroyed Jeff Crowe's reputation with your praise. You agreed with his decision. Says it all really. He is incompetent.

#Sheek There are a number of angles and you need to review them all to work out exactly where Rabada is at any given time. The big 'scream' supposedly at Smith immediately after the shoulder brush occurred with Rabada behind Smith and was directed straight at his team mate to whom he was tracking and about to do a high 5. But - from front on it looks worse. It shows just how deceptive TV angles can be. Your suggestion that Rabada focussed screams at Smith is a moot point - this is where I again assert that from some angles it looks so - but - that's because on a couple of angles it looks like they are tracking toward each other - but they were not. What looked to be 'in ya face' was not directed at Smith at all. I really don't think Rabada was paying Smith sufficient attention at all - and therein was the issue.

P.S. That's a good video Perry, ta

It’s always interested me how you can play a non contact sport “hard!”

I don't know about that. I think it's a standard part of democratic society to question judgements handed down. It's done all the time, and laws often get changed because of it. It's not unusual to see judges hand down sentences that seem really weak for pretty serious offenses that cause lots of public backlash which either results in those verdicts being appealed by prosecutors, or governments changing laws to increase the minimum sentences the judges can give in those cases. In SA, the Oscar Pretorius case is a great example of that. Lots of people were outraged at the judgement handed down and the pretty light sentence he received that resulted in it being appealed and him getting a harsher sentence.

In just about all systems, be them legal or sports related, there is an attempt to give harsher penalties for repeat offenders. So two people could commit the same offense, but the person who does it for the first time gets a lesser penalty than the person who's committed the offense multiple times. That's just standard and normal. Go to any court of law and for all sorts of offenses someone who's got a completely clean record prior to this offense will get a reasonably light offense, while someone who's a repeat offender gets harsher penalties each time they come up. I don't see how this could remotely be seen as an issue. What you are suggesting is that even if someone committed one of these 1 point offenses every match they played in, then after four matches they'd get suspended one match, then play four more then suspended one more match then play four more then suspended one more match, and no matter how much they just constantly keep doing it, they never get more than a one match ban. While most people would say that it's reasonable that to stamp out this sort of thing, that people constantly re-offending will get more severe penalties. If a one match ban wasn't enough of a wake up call, maybe a 2 match ban will be, and if that isn't, then maybe 3 or 4 next time will start to get to them.

Thanks Matt. Clear now

Because Australian race relationships are tickety boo, aren’t they. Strangely, my Aboriginal mates don’t agree with you

Jack ole son, relax. You’re gonna bust an artery soon mate. There is good medication available for those suffering from conspiracy theories

I do question, when people suggest his change of direction towards Smith was just about his team mates, if they are only going off the footage from behind Rabada. That's the most commonly shown angle, but when it came out you could see replays that included several different angles, and from the other side you could clearly see Rabada focussing screams on Smith and angling more towards him, including a very last second change of direction and scream right in his ear as he went past which resulted in the bump. Obviously, without mind-reading technology you can't fully know intent, but from all the angles available, it seems the much more likely option that his direction changes which all took him closer to Smith, not further away, were intended for that purpose, not just accidentally.

Sanctimonious claptrap from both sides of the "debate". Stick to the facts.During an acrimonious send-off, there was a light shoulder contact by the bowler,who was moving, with the batsman who was almost stationary. The bowler,who is a habitual ,egregious, offender,should have realised that he was about to contact the batsman,said"excuse me" and used his natural agility to avoid said contact. The batsman,who is also agile,should have turned his shoulder,said"watch out,cobber" and nothing would have happened.. Instead ,in the devious way of all Australian sportsmen,he made sure of contact,because he knew that the bowler was close to suspension and Crowe would fall for the trick A QC,no SCs in NZ?would not have been needed,the bowler would again teeter on the edge of suspension and the rightful state of affairs,involving almost the best fast bowlers in the world would move smoothly along

Hey, Warner got a 3-pointer from someone leaking CCTV footage a day or two later. The shoulder bump was pretty clear, I don't think it took Steve Smith to bring it up for it to be highlighted!

But I think the point is, that it does set a precedent, that "comfortable satisfaction" of intent is probably always going to be a difficult thing to ascertain, and players just need to make sure they look away from the opposition player just before giving them a shoulder bump and will be able to argue they didn't have intent and now have this precedent to point to in their arguments. So it makes future sanctions much more likely to be overturned on appeal.

Actually, you can. You can say that you would find it disappointing that he wouldn't be playing because of suspension but still think the suspension is the right thing, and you can say you find him exciting to watch play, and are sure his presence will add something to the contest, but still be of the belief that overturning the decision was wrong.

Yeah, I didn't see that either. No sure what this "trying to assault an SA cricketer" situation is you speak of. Must be something from years ago we haven't heard of. He certainly hasn't attempted to assault anyone on this tour. Must be confusing him with Ben Stokes... Have to love how Rabada apologists like to try and explain away what he actually did do be comparing it with what their imaginations like to think David Warner might have wanted to do despite no evidence that he was trying to do anything more than get in QDK's face and have a few words with him about what QDK mumbled behind his back.

Ouch is the Sydney Morning Herald conservative ? Abs BS .It is far to the left and against all conservatives stand for in this country .A once balanced broadsheet has become a trashy leftwing tabloid . As for the majority of Australian public not agreeing with the visa proposal , of which majority do you speak ?

Jacko, there is footage from lots of different angles. If you look at replays of the indicent, most go beyond just the angle from behind Rabada. From the angle behind Rabada you could almost think he was just wandering down the pitch towards his teammates and accidentally bumped Smith. The moment you view it from some other angles that's clearly not the case. From the other side you can see him clearly focussing his screams at Smith and clearly changing direction to come closer to Smith in his walk to keep screaming more in his face.