ICC Finds Dhoni's Comments Inappropriate

The ICC has asked the Indian and England captains to "to respect the process which remains ongoing and remind them of their duties to the integrity of the process and the sport so that we can focus on the game of cricket itself.” after M S Dhoni criticized the ICC Match Referee David Boon's decision to find Ravindra Jadeja guilty of committing a Level 1 under 2.1.8 of the ICC Code of Conduct. Boon gave Jadeja the maximum possible fine for a Level 1 offense. The punishment for Level 1 offenses ranges from a reprimand to a 50% fine.

The neat bow of silence that the ICC has wrapped its disciplinary proceedings in is worth reflecting on. Players participating in an ICC run game are subject to its Code of Conduct for 3 months, according to paragraph 1.2

All Players and Player Support Personnel shall continue to be bound by and required to comply with the Code of Conduct until he/she has not participated (in the case of a Player), or assisted a Player’s participation (in the case of a Player Support Personnel) in an International Match for a period of three (3) months and the ICC shall continue to have jurisdiction over him/her under the Code of Conduct thereafter in respect of matters taking place prior to that point. 

This means that 2.1.7 also applies to all players for this period of three months. The law is probably designed to allow matters to calm down. This is reasonable. 2.1.7 makes "Public criticism" or "inappropriate comment" a Level 1 offense.

Public criticism of, or inappropriate comment in relation to an incident occurring in an International Match or any Player, Player Support Personnel, Match official or team participating in any International Match, irrespective of when such criticism or inappropriate comment is made.

While the ICC has not charged Dhoni or Cook under 2.1.7, the ICC's media officer clarified that CEO Dave Richardson's comments about the players duties draw their authority from this rule. Not only is public criticism of an incident occurring in a match disallowed, so is criticism of a referee's judgment about incidents on the field. Punishments under Level 1 cannot be appealed either.

While the England captain's comments were directed at India (Cook said India's complaint was tactical), Dhoni's comments were directed at the decision made by the referee. These are not equal. If it was the ICC's point to keep a lid on things, then painting Dhoni and Cook with the same brush is perhaps not the best idea. A better idea might be to explain to the cricket watching public why the hearings for Andersen and Jadeja were scheduled at different times, and more importantly, why the result of Jadeja's hearing was announced if protecting the integrity of the process was such a concern. Does the ICC really believe that players are going to think better of their disciplinary process after this?

Instead of silencing players, the ICC might consider making their own processes more transparent and accessible to cricket fans.