Skipper Mahendra Singh Dhoni, who was hyper-critical of the ICC imposing a penalty of 50 per cent of his match fee for a Level 1 breach (in the James Anderson row), may have felt he’s too big a figure in international cricket to be reprimanded for his public comments criticising the ICC, openly defying the ICC’s gag on players. It is the contention of Dhoni and Team India that Jadeja is the aggrieved party. Dhoni may have forgotten the ICC is now virtually driven by India, along with England and Australia. Had it not been for procedural complications, the Jadeja-Anderson spat should ideally have been resolved in one hearing. But since India preferred the more serious Level 3 charge on Anderson, that inquiry (due August 1) has to be done by a judicial commissioner, rather than an ICC match referee like David Boon, who conducted the Jadeja hearing.
In a sense, India and England have tied themselves up in knots. India’s view that Anderson is a serial offender who went beyond a mere verbal spat and pushed/jostled Jadeja in a threatening manner may have its votaries, but this may be hard to prove without video evidence. The larger viewpoint, that Indian and Asian players are at the receiving end of various pronouncements by match referees, has greater merit. The Anderson affair is a test case in this regard, rather than a mere one-off incident of player rage sullying the game’s image. India’s leadership of the cricket world is possibly on test too.
