Cricket News

‘Public lynching’ by review panel forces David Warner to withdraw his appeal against captaincy ban

Warner claimed that the independent panel formed to review the sanction intended to subject him to a “public lynching.”

Published on

David Warner (source: Twitter)

David Warner has abandoned his efforts to have his lifetime leadership ban lifted and launched a scathing attack on the process. He claimed that the independent panel formed to review the sanction intended to subject him to a “public lynching.”

Warner claimed in lengthy social media posts on the eve of the Adelaide Test that the counsel assisting the review panel, which is independent of Cricket Australia, made “offensive” comments during the process.

When CA ratified the amendment to their code of conduct that allowed Warner to appeal his leadership ban, they stated that it was not an appeal against the initial decision or a review of the original offence – the role he played during the Newlands ball-tampering saga in 2018.

“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 wrote. “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.
“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.
“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.”
As part of the statement, Warner stated that the role of the counsel assisting had been terminated and that CA had supported him in challenging the review panel’s approach, but that after a week, they had “decided to ignore the request in any meaningful way.”
Related Topics:
106 Comments

Popular Posts

Exit mobile version