David Warner’s lifetime ban from leadership cannot be overturned unless the Cricket Australia board consults the integrity unit that investigated the 2018 Newlands scandal and rewrites its own code of conduct.
Aaron Finch’s resignation as one-day international captain after a prolonged run of low scores has brought matters to a head alongside a request for Warner’s leadership status to be reviewed ahead of his return to the Big Bash League for the Sydney Thunder.
Australian batter David Warner.Credit:Getty Images
CA’s board, chaired by Lachlan Henderson, is expected to discuss Warner’s eligibility and the terms of the conduct code at its next board meeting, to be held in Hobart next to the governing body’s AGM on October 13.
Sources with knowledge of discussions have told The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald that Warner’s captaincy ban was deemed to be a penalty handed out under the CA code of conduct, which denies players any right of appeal once they have accepted sanctions without requesting a hearing – as Warner, Steve Smith and Cameron Bancroft felt compelled to do in 2018.
The code states: “Where a player or player support personnel admits the offence charged and accedes to the proposed sanction specified in the ‘Report & Notice of Charge’ form in accordance with the procedure described in Articles 4.5.5.1, the player or player support personnel waives his/her right to any appeal against the imposition of such a sanction.”
As a consequence, if CA board directors pushed strongly for Warner’s ban to be overturned, they would have to commission a rewrite of the code of conduct to do so. Such a decision would also have to consider any wider implications for the code and those who police it.
At the same time, the mechanism for overturning the ban would have to be considered. Any re-opening of the investigation might require Warner, other players and staff to be re-interviewed about the scandal.
In 2019, then CA chief executive Kevin Roberts had stated: “If anyone does report concerns about any integrity matter prior to ball tampering or whatever it may be, we’re serious about addressing that, and we have a process to address it.”
Warner expressed optimism earlier this month that turnover in board members, leaving only John Harnden among directors who opposed the ban four years ago, might lead to a change.
“My phone’s here [if CA want to call for a talk about leadership],” he said. “What’s done is done in the past. The good thing is there is a new board that has come along. I’m always happy to sit down and have a chat, and talk about anything they need to talk about. I’m just happy, enjoying my cricket and putting my best foot forward for the team.”
The integrity unit is led by Jacqui Partridge, who first joined CA as a media rights lawyer in 2017. Prior to Partridge, the role was held by Sean Carroll, now Victoria’s racing integrity commissioner. Before Carroll, CA’s first head of integrity was Iain Roy, who conducted the investigation of the Newlands scandal.
Established in 2014 following a review by the former AFL executive Adrian Anderson, the integrity unit is meant to stand apart from the day-to-day structure of CA, allowing it to make independent judgments or investigations on issues in the game. CA’s codes and policies are reviewed annually.
CA has also recently appointed Simon Longstaff as its ethics commissioner. Longstaff was the author of the cultural review that apportioned much wider blame for the direction of the team and the governing body than Warner alone.
In parallel, the national selectors have discussed possible leaders of the ODI and Twenty20 teams beyond the end of the home World Cup, widely expected to be Finch’s final assignment as captain.
It had been the national team’s clear first preference for Finch to lead all the way through to next year’s 50-over World Cup in India, but his departure during the series against New Zealand in Cairns has forced consideration of other senior player options.
The panel led by George Bailey and also featuring Andrew McDonald and Tony Dodemaide are awaiting direction from CA’s board as to who is or is not eligible for leadership, and are also conscious of not having the captaincy issue distract the team during the Cup itself.
There is a desire for the leadership roles to be consistent across the ODI and T20 teams, promoting greater cohesion, confidence and shared experience across two formats that have grown closer together in recent years.
