The independent review called by Cricket Australia after the ball-tampering fiasco in South Africa saw captain Steve Smith and vice-captain David Warner banned for 12 months, and Cameron Bancroft for nine.
It would be a fair comment to say that Cricket Australia had no idea what the review would turn up.
In short, the review accused Cricket Australia of being arrogant and controlling by not living up to the organisation’s values, not handling situations that go against them, and reverting to bullying tactics, or worse – ostracising their critics.
That was a self-inflicted uppercut on many fronts.
The drawn-out pay dispute was a perfect example of bullying by Cricket Australia, but it was the players who copped the public criticism for being money-hungry.
Not so.
In the end the net result was good for both parties, but there was a lot of pain inflicted before both sides signed on the dotted line.
Since Cape Town, three senior Cricket Australia appointments have either gone or are going.
James Sutherland ended 17 years as Cricket Australia CEO last week, of his own volition.
Throughout that lengthy tenure, I found Sutherland to be one of the very best administrators in any sport – he will be sorely missed.
James Sutherland. (Photo by Michael Dodge/Getty Images)
He’s been replaced by Kevin Roberts, who was involved in the pay dispute.
Australian coach Darren Lehmann also signed off on his own volition, being replaced by Justin Langer.
Pat Howard, the high-performance director, ends his tenure next month, and if Cricket Australia has anything left, he won’t be replaced.
It was a pointless appointment following the flawed Angus Review in 2011, that included both the captain and coach as national selectors.
So where does Cricket Australia go from here?
There are nine directors on the board, but only Mark Taylor and Michael Kasprowicz have worn the coveted baggy green.
The other seven – five men and two women – have only an outsider’s knowledge of what happens in the middle.
Chairman David Peever, a former managing director of Rio Tinto, is widely acclaimed as a corporate giant, but his one claim to cricket fame was as a lowly grade player at Brisbane Easts club occasionally facing Craig McDermott, Carl Rackeman and Geoff Dymock in the nets.
Earl Eddings has been North Melbourne cricket club president from 2001 to 2018, a director of Cricket Victoria from 2006 to 2015, and deputy chairman 2008 to 2015.
Paul Green has been deputy chair of the Tasmanian Cricket Association since 2004.
John Harnden is chairman of the Australian Grand Prix Corporation.
Dr Lachlan Henderson was a first grade cricketer in Perth with University, and has been chairman of the WACA since 2015.
Jacqui Hey is a non-executive director of SBS, Qantas and the Bendigo Adelaide Bank.
And Michelle Tredenick has had 30 years of corporate experience, and currently a director of the Bank of Queensland, and Canstar Pty ltd, and chair of IAG NRMA Corporate Superannuation.
I’d like to see this board revert to the good old days when cricket writers had their own interviews with players of both sides. The post stumps all-in ruck of today was never heard of, it’s become so impersonal.
The players, and the writers, trusted each other.
The ruck started in the late 1980s, or early 1990s, after some cricket writers, who didn’t last long, were only looking for muck to grab front and back page headlines.
The trust was gone, and so were the one-on-one interviews.
On another front, Cricket Australia has agreed with the review to take into consideration player character and behaviour in awarding honours such as the Allan Border Medal, along the lines of the AFL’s Brownlow Medal.
Rugby league should follow suit with the Dally M Medal, and especially the Immortal status.
So were does that leave Steve Smith, David Warner, and Cameron Bancroft, and their bans, in the light of the scathing review of Cricket Australia?
Cameron Bancroft of Australia talks to the umpire. (AP Photo/Halden Krog)
Last week I flagged a reduction now all three have served seven months, and was pilloried from all points of the compass.
I still contend they have done their time, far more than any other ball tamperers.
Let’s see how Cricket Australia reacts.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
On the other hand, we don't want to go back to the bad old days when the game was totally run by ex cricketers. We do need the business expertise but this should be as a board member not a Chairman or CEO. Say 5 out of the 9 directors to have played the game at international or Shield level. Only Taylor and Kasprowicz know what it is like as a cricketer to spend extended periods away from home and family. Agree that ther AB Medal should also recognise a player's character and behaviour but this should only be a small part of the criteria. On the Immortals, I thought that a player's character and behaviour was a part of the criteria until a few years back.
Ches
Guest
It is so funny that the inquiry found "THE BOARD OF CA" (take that in, the board, the whole board) inept but yet there are calls to replace for another board member to replace Peever? Sounds a lot like the old saying accredited to Einstein “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results” If people are really that stupid, take this in, The Whole Board has to go. Simple.
David Lord
Expert
Jim, to "family", and "journey", I'd have to add "moving forward" - if I hear, or read. that another time, especially in the current cricket crisis, I'll throw up. On a far more serious note I reckon you, and your twin brother Stuart, were the last wingers to feed lineouts in a Wallaby jumper and with a bowling action, no less. You two were far more accurate than the modern day hookers who would find it difficult to hit an elephant on the backside from five metres.
Jim Boyce
Guest
David - Thanks for the response and I should have added that of the 7 characteristics ,a knowledge and love of the game is paramount. The Annual Reports for many of these national sporting bodies is full of PR speak and pretty photos and decidely lacking in substance. If I hear another of these sporting CEOs talking about their sporting " family" , I will die laughing. As for their personal " Journey", give me a break. I might add that Sutherland was talking of the " family " after the ball tampering fiasco. There are a lot of institutions now talking of the importance of culture in their institutions but little evidence that it is anything more than a comfortable word.The cultural relevance of the " family " seems to be lost on them. You might check on Rio Tinto and their problems in Guinea as to my questioning of the use of " corporate giant ". I note the names of sporting reporters you have supplied,all of whom I agree with and I guess you would have to add Gordon Bray re rugby . Re TV , I have always been a great admirer of Dennis Cometti and Gerard Whately re AFL. I have been interested in pursuing the recognition of this aspect of the game for rugby re sports reporters but the Rugby Australia scene has bigger problems . As for cricket,I really do not know how these reporting figures are celebrated. It would seem , by what you say, except for ex-players, the treatment and recognition is pretty average.
Nick
Roar Guru
Spot on David. You were right not to repeat it - it was a shoddy argument to begin with and showed no demonstrable awareness of a difference between ICC rules and a CA contract. Instead of embarrasing yourself by reiterating it, you chose to show yourself as morally bankrupt by arguing instead for their reinclusion because Australia are losing. Clap. Clap. Clap.
David Lord
Expert
Totally correct Paul, point taken I didn't repeat my six months earlier comment that the bans were manifestly unfair compared to the other ball-tamperers who copped a wet lettuce bashing.
David Lord
Expert
We differ Relum, but I respect your reasoning.
David Lord
Expert
Great post Jim, with plenty of excellent points as I'd expect from you. Sadly the corporate sector has taken over in far too many sports. For example, Geoff Lawson described Cricket Australia as business running cricket instead of playing cricket - brilliant. There are only two international cricketers on the nine-strong CA board, the other seven are all corporate heavies, and I count managing director of Rio Tinto as a corporate giant. And I couldn't agree with you more about the long-standing sporting journos being inducted into the Hall of Fame in their sports like EW Kann, Norm Tasker, and Jim Webster in rugby, Bill Mordey, Ernie Christensen and Alan Clarkson in league - and coaches like Rod Macqueen, Bobby Dwyer, and Alan Jones in rugby, Wayne Bennett, Jack Gibson, and Tim Sheens in league. Jim, it's never too late to correct those wrongs.
Rellum
Roar Guru
Sorry David, but Henry is on the money. James might have been nice to you in your dealings with him but he has left the game in a much worse state than when he inherited it. He can hang his hat on the Woman's game and the money made from the BBL, that's about it.
David Lord
Expert
Henry, I can only judge people as I find them. At all times James Sutherland has been upfront with me over 17 years. I have nothing but respect for him on a one-to-one basis, and he wasn't the bully in pay dispute. We had it out over the Pat Howard appointment, which was disgraceful. Howard was a former Wallaby who not only made a hash of exactly the same job at the ARU, but his cricketing knowledge could fit comfortably on the top of a pin head. And still does. Sutherland said Howard would prove me wrong, but he didn't by a long shot, and I agree Howard needs to go yesterday. Nonetheless, I appreciate your comments Henry as I have over the last 40 years, but in my book James Sutherland has been a CA plus, not a minus.
Geoff Lawson
Expert
David- you obviously do not know James Sutherland well at all. He manipulated the Argus Committee by appointing himself to it so he could keep his job . Then he made horrendous appointments including a rugby person to run a cricket playing operation - the net result is what we have today in playing standards and behaviour . His leaving CA is the best possible way forward. Howard will go but that exit needs to be accelerated otherwise it will just be a wasted year. Add Peever to that exit and Australian cricket has a real chance of rejuvenation sooner rather than much later . Sutherland was the executive leader of the “ controlling , bullying culture ..” as the review underlined in bold . He will not be missed .
Jim Boyce
Guest
David - There seem to be a shortage of starters but I will get in and would be interested in your comments. Firstly there a number of sports that seem to having problems with their national board .eg rugby soccer The boards , in my view should be professional in outlook,which is often not the case . In the professional era , a board should reflect an understanding of quality of play, entertainment, the awareness down to community level , media coverage , finance, culture and administration. A number of boards have directors who have collected their roles to bolster their CV. Some boards of sporting organisations are unbalanced in terms of the 7 characteristics identified above. National sports should see that these characteristics are represented down through, state, city and district. From the top down to district there is a range of involvement from salaried occupants down to volunteers. Cricket Australia would seem to have lost sight of these roles but I would be interested to see both reports minus redactions. There is a real issue of transparency across many sports including cricket. I would question your description of Peever as a "corporate giant " Secondly, you have identified the importance of player character and behaviour , which I have included in the above 7 as Culture. Very hard to itemise the factors in that, other than , you know it when you see it. However,those characteristics of the grinders need to be celebrated and mostly they are not. Lastly, I think a lot of sports underestimate the quality and range of people reporting on their sport . A sport's Hall of Fame and their so called immortals, should recognise those who report on their game in Australia and cater for them accordingly. The US Baseball Hall of Fame has just recognised a spanish broadcaster who plied his trade for the last 30 years or so. I have just reread John Updike's great essay on Ted Williams' last visit to the plate for The Red Sox " Hub Fans bid Kid adieu ". It is harder to assemble in the digital age but those men and women encapsulate the spirit of the game.
Paul D
Roar Guru
David - you made the argument the bans should be lifted so we had a better chance of beating India I daresay if you'd couched your argument on the basis the bans should be lifted because they were manifestly unfair you wouldn't have been pilloried as much, but when you're arguing to remove due process simply for the sake of winning test matches, it comes across as a little grasping, and desperate
Lachs
Guest
Doesn't surprise me personally, definitely some difference in opinion between the relevant bodies.