- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
David Warner has withdrawn his bid to have his lifetime captaincy ban lifted, accusing the independent panel conducting the review of wanting to publicly lynch him.
In a bombshell development on the eve of the Adelaide Test, Warner also claimed counsel assisting the review had made offensive and unhelpful comments about him during the initial process. He received strong support from former Test wicketkeeper Ian Healy, who said on SEN Radio on Thursday morning that “he has saved cricket here”.
In a lengthy 793-word statement posted on his Instagram page, Warner revealed he had applied to have his leadership ban lifted a fortnight ago.
Under the belief the review would centre more on his own growth since the 2018 ball-tampering saga, Warner said he was dismayed to be told the review would include a cross-examination on the issue.
The 36-year-old claimed he had the support of Cricket Australia to not have that process go ahead during his application, but was on Wednesday told his push had been rejected.
“In effect, counsel assisting, and, it appears, to some extent the review panel, want to conduct a public trial of me and what occurred during the Third Test at Newlands,” Warner said.
“They want to conduct a public spectacle to, in the panel’s words, have a “cleansing”. I am not prepared for my family to be the washing machine for cricket’s dirty laundry.
“And the review panel appears determined to expose me and my family to further humiliation and harm by conducting a media circus.”
According to a statement released by CA last month after nine months of pushing for change, players and staff could have long-term sanctions reviewed by a three-person review panel, comprising independent code-of-conduct commissioners.
Warner himself also pointed to Article 10.7 of the code, which he claimed stated “that the hearing is not an appeal of the original decision or a new review of the offence”.
In turn, the opener claimed the panel had little regard for his or his teammates’ welfare in wanting to re-open the case.
“It appears that the panel has given no more than passing consideration to issues of player welfare and the interests of Australian cricket and is instead determined to conduct a public lynching,” Warner wrote.
Healy said there was no reason for Warner’s appeal hearing to be done in a public forum.
“He has saved cricket here,” he said. “That panel were going to air cricket’s problems. Why would they do that? Every other aspect of their negotiations, with the Australian Cricketers Association for example, are endeavouring to stay behind closed doors.
“Get the job done, no matter what it takes, behind closed doors.
“I agree with David Warner that it doesn’t need to be in public.
“The independent panel have decided the whole trial needs to be public. It seemed to be a trial of Warner’s crime again. The smallish crime of attempting to scratch a cricket ball, (but) it was supposed to be about the punishment, and they wanted to go through everything again, in public. Come on.”
Warner’s wife was also vocal on Triple M on Thursday.
“The fact that my daughters have to cop abuse because of incidents that have happened in the past is not fair,” she told Triple M.
“It’s still raw, we go to cricket so often watching David play and there’s always people yelling things out at the crowd.
“Our family’s already suffered and endured so much pain. Why do it now? What’s it going to achieve?”
Warner said he felt he had no choice but to drop his application, ending his hopes of ever captaining Australia or a domestic team in the country again.
“Regrettably, I have no practical alternative at this point in time but to withdraw my application,” Warner said.
“I am not prepared to subject my family or my teammates to further trauma and disruption by accepting a departure from the way in which my application should be dealt with pursuant to the Code of Conduct.
“Some things are more important than cricket.”
CLICK HERE for a seven-day free trial to watch cricket on KAYO
In his statement, Warner also claimed the counsel assisting in the matter had since been terminated.
The Sydneysider however remained adamant he had rehabilitated significantly since the ball-tampering saga and he also had deep regret and remorse.
“Since that Test and even though my ban from leadership roles may never be lifted, I have taken it upon myself to reform, to rehabilitate and to transform my approach to the game,” he said.
Cricket Australia responded to express their disappointment.
“We are disappointed with this outcome as our intention was to give David the opportunity to demonstrate why his lifetime leadership ban should be varied at an independent hearing and we amended our Code of Conduct accordingly,” said a spokesman.
“David is a very senior and highly regarded member of the Australian team who has been a great ambassador for the game as a whole since his return from a year-long ban.”
Here is Warner’s complete statement:
“My family is more important to me than cricket.
“Over the course of the past nearly five years since the events that occurred during the Third Test in Cape Town, even with all the humiliation and attacks that they have had to endure, I have enjoyed the unwavering support and love of my wife Candice and my three daughters, Ivy Mae, Indi Rae, and Isla Rose. They are my world.
“Since that Test and even though my ban from leadership roles may never be lifted, I have taken it upon myself to reform, to rehabilitate and to transform my approach to the game.
(Photo by Mark Metcalfe/Getty Images)
“I have served and been subject to a crushing, unprecedented, penalty that has horribly impacted me and my family for the past nearly five years – without the prospect of any relief until now.
“On 21 November 2022, the Cricket Australia Code of Conduct for Players and Player Support Personnel (the Code of Conduct) was amended to permit players to apply for a modification to Long-Term Sanctions.
“With the announcement of the amendment to the Code of Conduct, I held the hope and was encouraged, that I would be given a proper opportunity to demonstrate to the Review Panel that I have demonstrated my deep regret and remorse; and that my rehabilitation and transformation are profound.
“With the encouragement of administrators and colleagues and in accordance with the rules under the Code of Conduct, on 25 November 2022 I submitted an application to Cricket Australia for a modification to my lifetime ban from leadership positions in cricket. I did so in good faith on the understanding that regular established procedures under the Code of Conduct would be followed.
(Photo by Buddhika Weerasinghe/Getty Images)
“I hoped I would be given the opportunity, under the established practice and procedure of the Code of Conduct that is reflected in the amendments, to demonstrate that I have satisfied the necessary requirements for a modification to my ban and that I might be permitted to see out the balance of my career without the yoke hanging around my neck and further anguish for my family.
“However, despite my opposition and that of Cricket Australia, on Tuesday last week Counsel Assisting the Review Panel and the Review Panel took it upon themselves to concoct an irregular procedure (overturning presumptions and previous practice) for the determination of my application and establish a novel approach that would negatively impact the health and welfare of my family and the interests of the Australian cricket team.
“In his submissions, Counsel Assisting made offensive and unhelpful comments about me that had absolutely no substantive purpose under the Code of Conduct.
“Regrettably, the Review Panel acted contrary to the submissions of Cricket Australia and my lawyer and appeared to adopt virtually entirely the position of Counsel Assisting.
“In effect, Counsel Assisting, and, it appears, to some extent the Review Panel, want to conduct a public trial of me and what occurred during the Third Test at Newlands. They want to conduct a public spectacle to, in the Panel’s words, have a “cleansing”. I am not prepared for my family to be the washing machine for cricket’s dirty laundry.
“The Rules of the Code of Conduct in relation to applications such as mine are clear. Article 10.7 states that the hearing is not an appeal of the original decision or a new review of the offence.
“Counsel Assisting the Review Panel appeared to be determined to revisit the events of March 2018 and the Review Panel appears determined to expose me and my family to further humiliation and harm by conducting a media circus.
Stars turn to Adam Zampa for leader role | 00:43
“I note that the engagement of Counsel Assisting was terminated. Nonetheless, following the curiously irregular position adopted by the Review Panel, and in the interests of my family and Australian cricket, last Thursday I submitted a request for the Review Panel to revisit their procedural decision and at least apply a protocol that is consistent with established practice and procedure under the Code of Conduct. That request had the support of Cricket Australia.
“Having had nearly a week to consider that proposal, today the Review Panel has decided to ignore the request in any meaningful way and has provided a dismissive rejection of the substantive matters. It appears that the Panel has given no more than passing consideration to issues of player welfare and the interests of Australian cricket and is instead determined to conduct a public lynching.
“Regrettably, I have no practical alternative at this point in time but to withdraw my application. I am not prepared to subject my family or my teammates to further trauma and disruption by accepting a departure from the way in which my application should be dealt with pursuant to the Code of Conduct.
“Some things are more important than cricket.”
© AAP
Build your own fantasy cricket team and put it to the test with Draftstars daily fantasy competitions. Pick your match, pick your team and watch the points roll in to take out cash prizes on each match. What are you really gambling with? Set a deposit limit.