Be careful, gentlemen, of JCA, WICB

MARLON SAMUELS has been banned from cricket for the next two years and, despite his failure to deliver consistently, to all those who enjoy watching a talented batsman in action, to all those who do not enjoy seeing, for whatever reason, a young man's career destroyed, it will be a disappointment.

That is especially so as not even the members of the disciplinary committee which found him guilty seem to believe that he is really guilty - at least enough to warrant the International Cricket Council's (ICC) minimum ban.

Not enough proof

According to the committee, corruption has not been proven and, if it was left to the committee members, they would have bound him over for good behaviour for a period not exceeding two years.

According to the ICC's anti-corruption and security unit (ACU), Samuels indulged in "inappropriate activity". He behaved in a manner that was "prejudicial to the interests of the game of cricket".

And, after receiving a report from ACU, the ICC asked the West Indies Cricket Board (WICB) to investigate the matter. The investigation showed that Samuels had something to answer to.

This was passed to the board and the board asked its disciplinary committee to deal with the matter.

Two Fridays ago, the committee found Samuels guilty of breaching the ICC's Code of Conduct: for "receiving money, or benefit, or other reward that could bring him or the game of cricket into disrepute".

"In terms of the punishment handed down, minimum penalties were agreed by the ICC board, including all full members, and they reflect the seriousness of the issues at hand," said Dave Richardson, acting CEO of the ICC. "Corruption is a serious matter, dealing with it effectively is fundamental to the integrity of our sport, and this matter is a demon-stration that its threat has not gone away."

Richardson went on to say that "It is never pleasant when a player is banned, but the process in arriving at this point has been an extremely thorough one, and we hope the case serves as a reminder to players and officials to remain vigilant."

Say what he did wrong

In the interest of cricket, Richardson, obviously, is right. The question, however, is this: Has anyone, in the interest of Samuels, proved beyond a doubt that he did anything wrong - that he benefited financially from any dealings with any bookmaker?

If Samuels, who has been around for some time, is guilty of breaking the ICC's Code of Conduct, then he should pay the price.

If, however, he is not guilty, then instead of producing nice-sounding phrases in press releases, somebody in the ICC, or even in the WICB, should say what he did that was so wrong that he has been banished for two years.

That would be fair to the game, to the public and, most important, to the man himself.

People have always condemned others while attempting to protect their own. Right now, West Indians, definitely and more so Jamaicans, including those who had no sympathy for people like the Australians, South Africans, Indians and Pakistanis when they were similarly charged, believe that Samuels is being sacrificed and, naturally if not morally, nothing is wrong with that.

Action from JCA

What is wrong, however, what could be construed as supporting wrong, is if the Jamaica Cricket Association (JCA) - the governing body for cricket in Jamaica, a member of the WICB - without knowing that Samuels was wrongfully accused, without knowing, therefore, that he is definitely not guilty, should do anything that would suggest that it does not believe that he is guilty.

"I find it very disappointing and unfortunate, but that's the ruling of the committee and there's nothing much we can do about it," said Jackie Hendriks, president of the JCA and member of the WICB.

That sounds as if Hendriks would have done something about it if he could have done anything about it. And, unless he believed and had some proof that Samuels was not guilty as charged, he should neither say nor do anything about it.

According to Hendriks, as has been reported, the JCA is thinking of assisting Samuels during the ban. While under normal circum-stances that would be a good move by the JCA, it is something the national association should think seriously about.

It could be misinterpreted by some, if not all, the territorial boards as the JCA saying to them, 'You all can go to hell, this is my man, and regardless of what, I am defending him.'

What could be even worse, however, is the WICB doing anything to let Samuels believe that he is innocent and to offend its own disciplinary committee - to appear to be condoning a wrong.

According to Dr Donald Peters, the CEO of the board, the board is looking at providing all the help it can for Samuels to get his life in order, and that sounds good.

Price to pay

Like the JCA, however, Peters and the board should be careful what they do lest they send the wrong signal.

They should remember, as Peters himself has said, that the players knew what they could talk about and what they could not. That the players knew what the penalties were and, most important, they should also remember that the WICB is a part of the ICC, and that it had given its word to uphold the Code of Ethics.

Samuels may not be guilty of any kind of corruption, and it does seem that he is not guilty.

There is no question, however, that he broke that section of the code of ethics for which he was found guilty and, according to the ICC and its members, there is a price to pay.