15 Comments

It has always amused me that Warner came up with a plan to rough up the ball using sandpaper, a substance men have used for hundreds of years to make things smooth. More pertinently, given the twin preoccupations of Cricket et al (the et al being largely Australian 80s music), where is the analysis showing how David Warner’s career is best understood by reference to the songs of Dave Warner (from the suburbs). Is he just a suburban boy? Is it a mug’s game? Inquiring minds need to know.

Expand full comment

He knows what it's like to be rejected every night and sure that it must be easier for boys from the city

Expand full comment

About time. He may not be everyone’s favourite, but certainly did not deserve a lifetime ban.

If he did, then so too did the board of directors for the appalling way they managed the entire SA tour and scapegoated Warner, Smith and Bancroft.

Expand full comment

Not sure I fully agree with this. Warner did not deserve a lifetime ban and the timing for lifting it is about right, but I don’t think the board scapegoated these three. They were the principal players in the whole sorry saga and deserved sanctioning. I believe the bowlers would have been aware of sandpaper being used on the ball but it can’t be proved that they knew.

Expand full comment

Of course they knew. Unfathomable to think otherwise.

Expand full comment

The irony in all of this is that, while it's ostensibly about Warner's behaviour, it's actually about CA's stuff-up in imposing a lifetime ban in the first place. I think it's also true to say that, to a certain extent, the severity of the sentences reflected the extraordinary volume of the righteous outrage expressed at the time by those of us who have naver made a mistake in our lives. It was interesting to see how supporters in other countries were bewildered by the severity of the original sentences, and their failure to appreciate the extent to which Australian cricket supporters felt betrayed by the whole thing. It's taken a long time to get there, but this is, eventually, a sensible decision.

Expand full comment

Only Warner's sentence was overly severe and that has now been corrected. Smith deserved to lose the captaincy because he was (supposedly) a leader. Bancroft was the patsy and he's the only one I feel sorry for.

Expand full comment

Commissioners insisted the findings be made [what??] - filed with the used sandpaper?

Expand full comment

To go pubic is, according to the urban dictionary, to emerge from the bushes.

At least I will be lobbying for it to be included to save my blushes.

Expand full comment

The word ‘generous’ wins the hardest working adjective award in this piece.

Expand full comment

From that sandpaper gate saga, the only one who continues to suffer is poor Bancroft. Even after performing he has. Een nowhere close to team selection. May be the ghosts of Sandpaper gate continues to haunt him.

To err is human, to forgive is divine.

Expand full comment

Surely, we distill the story to: Warner bullies Bancroft and is appropriately punished.

Expand full comment

Ta Pete ... nice use of the word "generous" here. It's def time.

Expand full comment

😂 I couldn’t care less if he captained some hit and giggle. Whatever. The era of governance, leadership, administration and operations was poor. I’m not a fan but to some extent, while he has to continue to accept responsibility, I think his brother was probably right that he was an “escape goat”. 😂

Expand full comment

Hahahahaha !!!!

Expand full comment