Was anyone remotely surprised by any of the ‘revelations’ that came out in Fox Sports’ interviews with Steve Smith and Cameron Bancroft?
The pair spoke individually to Adam Gilchrist as part of the broadcaster’s Boxing Day Test coverage, giving their versions of the ball-tampering fiasco that unfolded in Cape Town.
Smith revealed that he’d been privy to David Warner having a word to Bancroft, and simply said: “I don’t want to know anything about it.”
As for Bancroft, he confirmed that it was indeed Warner who had asked him to tamper with the ball, then he used the word “values” about 57 times, and that was about it.
I guess it was a bit of a ‘huh’ moment when Smith revealed a 2016 incident in Hobart, which saw “James Sutherland and Pat Howard coming in the rooms there and actually saying ‘we don’t pay you to play, we pay you to win’”.
But, apart from that, we really didn’t receive anything new from these interviews (and, really, learning that a couple of suits acted like knobs after their team copped a pantsing isn’t exactly a shock).
Now, while I don’t doubt that Smith and Bancroft told the truth, I am highly dubious that their chats with Gilly revealed what actually went down in South Africa.
Because all they did was regurgitate the story we’ve all been told for the past nine months.
Warner was the instigator. Bancroft was the misguided rookie. Smith was the leader who didn’t have the courage to stand up for what was right. It’s basically the exact same songsheet everyone’s been singing from since that day in March.
But what if it’s not what really happened? Sadly, it seems we’ll never know.
I’ve been listening to a fair bit of Revisionist History, a podcast presented by Malcolm Gladwell.
In the third season, Gladwell examined the concept of memory and how “Everyone assumes memory is a kind of time-stamped video of what happened in your life and that if you contradict the evidence of the video, you’re up to no good”.
The episode in question is called ‘Free Brian Williams’. Central to his examination is how Williams, an American journalist, was eviscerated in 2013 for saying that he had been on a helicopter in Iraq that was shot down ten years prior.
It turned out, Williams had not been on said helicopter – he had been on a chopper in convoy with the bird that went to ground.
Predictably, America’s rampant, pundit-heavy media tore Williams a new one, calling him “reprehensible”, “disgusting” and “a lying coward”.
But Gladwell argued that Williams was simply doing what all humans do – taking his memory of an event, then adding to it based on new information that has come to light in the intervening period.
“Every time we retrieve a memory, in other words, there’s a chance it can get contaminated. We hear some new detail somewhere about the event and without realising it, we just add it in,” Gladwell said.
Steve Smith reacts during a press conference. (AAP Image/Brendan Esposito)
Now, before you suggest that such a life-changing incident as what happened in Cape Town couldn’t be forgotten – it would be forever seared into the memories of those who were involved – turns out, “flashbulb memories” are just as susceptible to change.
Gladwell spoke to psychologist Bill Hurst, who has been studying flashbulb memories for years – including a famous study based around the September 11 attacks, wherein participants were asked these five, simple, personal questions:
1. How did you first learn about what happened on 9/11?
2. Where were you? What were you doing?
3. How did you feel when you first became aware of the attack?
4. Who was the first person you talked to about the attack?
5. What were you doing immediately before you became aware of it?
The results? “60 per cent of the answers changed over time” – and these shifts occurred as soon as within a single year.
Perhaps most surprisingly, when the participants were presented with irrefutable proof that their answers had changed, they went into complete denial.
Hurst said, when shown copies of their original answers, participants would often respond: “I agree it’s my handwriting. I agree I must have written that. But I don’t know why I lied, because I clearly remember I was in the dorm even though this piece of paper says I was in the cafeteria.”
People are more willing to believe they lied than that their memory of the event has simply shifted over time, as more information has come to light.
So, to bring it back to Smith and Bancroft, are we really willing to believe that the narrative we’ve been treated to in the media from the outset is actually what happened?
Long before any of them had broken down in front of a camera, Warner had been painted as the bad guy, Bancroft the victim and Smith the guilty bystander.
Cameron Bancroft of Australia talks to the umpire. (AP Photo/Halden Krog)
We were told a convenient story and swallowed it. And, based on what we saw on Fox Sports this week, so too have two of people who were central to it.
It’s why I doubt Gilly asking ‘tough’ follow-up questions would have added to our understanding, because the public have no original reference point by which to compare how dramatically Smith and Bancroft’s memories have altered.
But the fact they’re toeing the line on the original narrative so well is an issue. It doesn’t suggest, as is the common logic, they are definitely telling the truth. It suggests their memories have been contaminated to ensure they, too, believe the convenient story with Warner as its villain.
It’s their truth, I don’t doubt it. But I am highly dubious that it’s what actually happened on that fateful day in March.
Tom
Guest
March 2018 “We spoke about it and thought it was a possible way to get an advantage.” — Australian captain Steve Smith makes a stunning ball-tampering admission in South Africa. December 2018 Smith revealed that he’d been privy to David Warner having a word to Bancroft, and simply said: “I don’t want to know anything about it.”
Richard Islip
Roar Rookie
The more I relook at Smith's tearful face, the more it looks like the naughty boy who is very sorry he got caught. With all that's been said since that incident, the more it has become obvious that Smith is the very guy you do NOT want as captain. Too weak to have a strong hand on the reigns of the team, and then happy to throw a mate under the bus to look better. Like all of these decisions by Smith, he comes out looking worse. May be if he had said...."I took the decision to have the ball tampered with, and gave the instruction." And then just shut his mouth from then on. So if this was not the truth, at least he would have taken the fall for his mates, which is what a captain should do in those circumstances, because he knew about it, and it happened on his watch. But no way. You have a long way to go, Smith. Stick to batting.
Basil
Guest
amazing the amount of rubbish and conspiracies people come up with. The simplest explanation is usually the correct one. In this case a rattled and angry Warner came up with a plan. A servile Bancroft agreed to implement the plan. A flustered and distracted Smith failed to stop it. I suspect Smith was not actually aware of much of the detail beforehand as he had a lot on his plate at the time. He was going through a bad patch with the bat and the team was in bad shape, such was their reliance on Smith. It also appears that the team's supposed coach was not able to offer much support for Smith. Every other thing mentioned as proof of conspiracy is easily explained in simple terms. Smith's talk of the leadership group was clearly an effort to avoid mentioning any specific names. He could of course had told the truth and said it was a scheme hatched between Warner and Bancroft and he did not really know much more, but at the time he was clearly a little delusional about the magnitude of the events, and thought he could take the heat for it as captain and save Warner, and Bancroft in particular from punishment. No doubt he felt some guilt that he had allowed Bancroft, new to the team, to get involved in such a predicament. Also the idea that they were only caught because of extra vigilance from the South African broadcasters is laughable. Teams are always heavily scrutinized, and the Ozzies in particular, no doubt. The only reason they were caught is because their effort to cheat were so laughably poor in its implementation. Also laughable is the idea that before all this happened the Ozzies were world renowned for their reverse swing bowling, an that their supposed lack of success since the incident is proof that the cheating was more widespread than the one occasion. I also think it is understandable that the players are speaking about it now. Bancroft's ban is up so why not? In Bancroft's mind he probably thinks there has been more than enough time for Warner to do the right thing and confess his leading role in the affair. No doubt Bancroft also feels a little guilt that his actions have resulted in Smith copping punishment. Anyway, similar cheating has gone on before from many other teams, it just has not been so blatantly caught as it was this time!
James
Guest
The bowlers had to say something at the time though after Smith threw 'the leadership group' comment out and they probably would have been pretty confident that no one would have ratted, if there was anything to be ratted about ofcourse. Look at how the team, CA and even the three involved said nothing for 9 months, no one has been really blamed by anyone until now. Warner, whilst he think he is a dumb little ass and im almost certain i wouldnt want to be friends with him or he with me seems to be the type of guy who doesnt throw other people under the bus, except as a last resort.
The real idiot was the bloke who ruined Smithy's press conference by bringing up married at first sight and talking s**t when smithy was crying. Utter disrespect....
Tim
Guest
Re Brian Williams it wasn’t one event there was proven to be numerous events. In a situation where news is meant to be trustworthy he destroyed in vestige of trust his audience has built up over years of watch. he was the fake news before Fake News... as for the cricketers well they cheated. As for lying who knows who cares... but Warner is Def on the outs. It must really grate watching it the PR Machine that worked for you so long now work against you. It’s tough but so is life. They should shut up take no press and let their bats do the talking.
Ravi
Roar Rookie
Crawl away Ken. Your English lesson is just the opium of the inadequate. Try coming up with an original thought instead.
Akkara
Roar Rookie
South Africa setup a number of cameras specifically at Cape town, because they suspected cheating at the previous matches when reverse swing was achieved at 30 overs. In my mind clearly cheating was systemic and not an isolated incident in which the whole leadership was involved, particularly the bowling leadership. The approach taken has been to, hit hard at those publicly known to have cheated with immediate effect, gradually fire the admin staff involved, Peavers, Sutherland, Howard and Lehman. No action has been taken on the bowlers who are now looking a pretty mediocre attack with little skill other than to bounce. It's probably for the best, or we might have lost our test playing status!!
Charlie Turner
Guest
Bancroft should've been treated differently simply due the fact he didn't cry like a baby during his press conference. Smiths pitiful, undignified performance sobbing with his dad behind him followed by Warners one upmanship is enough to exclude them from further representative honours for life. The Barmey Army have enlisted John Cleese and Michael Palin to help sort through the reems of material and Sir Paul McCartney and Tom Jones to write the new songs.
Bangers N Mash
Guest
It is AUSTRALIA B
badmanners
Roar Rookie
I disagree James. Warner like the others I ("The leadership group" comment) would have spread blame if they could. Smith with the leadership group comment tried to do exactly that. If the bowlers had been involved then surely they wouldn't be as stupid (?) as to make a public comment of "No Knowledge" when investigations were continuing. Then again 3 of the 4 are fast bowlers, :-)
Hari
Guest
LOL
Jackpott
Guest
The truth is they got the maximum penalty as per the players code of conduct.
Realist
Guest
None of them should have to apologise to the South Africans - the Proteas have historically been the most blatant cheaters (after Pakistan) in world cricket. Their captain has been caught twice and his own cricket board has either turned a blind eye or leapt to his defence. Typical of the basket-case nation it has become.
JonD
Guest
To Ken Hayes: How wonderful that we now have an English language expert who will, patronisingly, advise us on acceptable use of the language. You up your own bottom much, eh?
Dutski
Roar Guru
Yeah, no place for personal abuse. Take it elsewhere mate.
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
But wasn’t the problem that they weren’t getting reverse in the first two Tests , except Starc in Durban, so they got desperate? At least that was one version going around. They were certainly out bowled by Rabada and co.
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
Interesting- in which paper is Chappell’s column?
dan in devon
Guest
It is as much about collective memory and narratives as it is about individual memory. The players are telling a story that they think the public wants to hear; narratives are edited and reimagined to appease a potentially censorious and hypercritical audience. Cricket (and sporting )teams have always cheated but somehow we have to pretend that this is an aberration and has violated the sanctity of the 'baggy green.'
JoM
Roar Rookie
Yet another case of him dragging others into it. He has done it his whole career. He drops a catch it's spider cam's fault, he has a brain fade looking to the changerooms for advice on reviewing which the Indians were on to in the first place, he drags Handscomb into it who sounded like a total idiot in his interview on that. After their very very lame interviews I have gone right off Smith and Bancroft. I don't believe one word that comes out of their mouths because they have lied so many times.