Sports
Vaughan regrets ‘disgusting’ tweets but denies making ‘you lot’ comment
Historic tweets from Michael Vaughan took centre stage on the third day of the ECB’s racism hearings, as the former England captain denied having made the statement that forms the core of the ECB’s charge of bringing the game into disrepute.
As he has done publicly before, Vaughan emphatically denied ever having said, “There’s too many of you lot, we need to have a word about that” to Azeem Rafiq, Adil Rashid, Rana Naved-ul-Hasan and Ajmal Shahzad at a T20 game in June 2009. The ECB’s charge stems from Rafiq’s recollection of the remark which was, on Thursday, supported by the testimony of Rashid.
Vaughan, appearing at the Cricket Discipline Commission (CDC) hearing in London, said of the day in question that he had “a very clear mind about back in 2009” and that he knew he did not say what had been alleged. He added that he would never have gone on to the field and said something to team-mates that could “put them in a bad state of mind” before the game.
“Knowing me in 2009, that’s not the sort of thing I would’ve said.”
Vaughan was questioned by the ECB’s lead counsel Jane Mulcahy KC for nearly 90 minutes, during which she argued that some historical tweets of his were “remarkably similar in tone” to the alleged remarks.
Vaughan said the tweets were unacceptable and that he had apologised for them before and would continue to do so. But he disagreed with the suggestion that they were similar in tone. Mulcahy pointed out that both Rafiq and Rashid claimed Vaughan likely made the alleged comment as a “bad joke” and said the tweet was similar in tone because it was “lighthearted but offensive”.
Asked if he agreed, Vaughan said: “No.”
Vaughan said he was “disgusted” with the tweets. “I apologised for them. I put myself on an online course, Inclusion. I wanted to lead the game in knowing how to lead in modern times. The tweets are disgusting, awful, and other words you could use. But the most important thing is I have said sorry and I am learning from them. As I say, if I get things wrong in my life, I stick my hands up.”
He went back to his recollection of the day of the game – which he has written about in his memoir – that he “could not have been more proud [of] four Asian players, three of whom had come through the system.”
Vaughan was also questioned about his meeting with Rafiq in November 2021 saying he felt the need for it because “the whole situation was escalating out of control”. Vaughan said he was apologetic in the meeting with Rafiq because he was “disgusted” by what Rafiq had to go through at Yorkshire but did not accept he made the alleged comment.
Vaughan: ‘Team-mates fighting it out terrible for game’
Vaughan said that the CDC hearing was a “terrible look” for cricket. “It’s not been easy for anybody. This is not the right process to deal with word-against-word comments from 14 years ago. Ex-team-mates fighting it out over hearsay is a terrible look for the game and a really bad look on how cricket has dealt with this situation.”
Earlier in the morning, scrutiny fell on the ECB’s scope in the investigation of the incident as well as the rigour deployed, with Meena Botros, its director of legal and integrity, facing a three-hour grilling from Christopher Stoner, Vaughan’s lawyer.
The line of questioning took in a recent interview with Lord Kamlesh Patel, the outgoing Yorkshire chair, in Eastern Eye. In it the claim was made that the ECB had “urged” Lord Patel to “get rid of people” at the county when he took over. Talking about his role, Patel said: “I was asked by the ECB to meet a set of criteria that most people would have winced at, would have thought there’s no way we can deliver this, and I delivered it.
“I was asked by the ECB to work with them to create a framework and an environment where we would prove to the world that we want a non-racist institution, and I did all that. I was asked by the ECB to ensure some people who were there from the previous regime did not take part in that governance process, very clear about that.”
Stoner suggested those comments showed that the ECB was “actively involved” in the Yorkshire investigation, in breach of the process as described in Botros’ witness statement, that the ECB remained independent of action being taken by one of its counties in such matters.
Botros said he couldn’t talk about what Lord Patel had said but insisted that Stoner was “mistaking” the ECB’s regulatory function in getting involved, from its other roles in such cases. Stoner pointed to Botros’s witness statement which read: “In its capacity as a regulator, the ECB must remain independent of action being taken by one of its member first-class county clubs.”
“That’s just not what happened, is it?” Stoner asked.
Botros replied: “It is what happened.”
Stoner then zeroed in on the day Vaughan is alleged to have made the remark, questioning whether the ECB could and should have gone further in its investigations of events. He confirmed with Botros that the only players the ECB had spoken to about the incident were Adil Rashid and Ajmal Shahzad.
Stoner asked why all Yorkshire players that day weren’t spoken to. Botros said the ECB “did speak to the individuals where we were able to” but that “certain individuals either didn’t want to take part or engage”, or that the ECB “weren’t able” to get contact details for others.
Stoner also asked Botros why the on-field umpires that day had not been contacted by the ECB for their version of events.
“There is no suggestion that the umpires were close enough to hear it,” Botros replied. Botros added that if it was such an important point, Vaughan’s team could have taken it on themselves.
The hearing is scheduled to end next Tuesday. (cricinfo)
The first truly heavyweight clash of this expanded T20 World Cup format comes freighted with both history and subplots. A rematch of the 2010 World T20 final at Kensington Oval, the match pits Jos Buttler’s defending champions – who are aiming to become the first team to retain the trophy – against the Australian winning machine, victors at the 2021 edition and current world title-holders in Test and ODI cricket. And that’s before you throw in the Ashes for afters.
Already there is added pressure on England, after the rain in Bridgetown led to a share of the points in their opener against Scotland (and that having conceded 90 runs from 10 overs without taking a wicket in a tepid bowling display). Lose to their oldest rivals and it will leave their Super 8 prospects open to being waylaid by the perils of net run-rate calculations, or worse.
The Scotland match was the third abandonment in five suffered by England, after a rain-affected home series against Pakistan, which has clearly hampered their readiness for this campaign after almost six months without playing T20 together. It does not take much for a side to click in this format – and England looked in decent shape when they did get on the field against Pakistan – but Buttler will be anxious for things to go their way on Saturday, if only to avoid further questions referencing the team’s disastrous ODI World Cup defence last year.
Australia, under the laidback leadership of Mitchell Marsh would love nothing more than to add to the English sense of jeopardy – having helped bundle them out of the tournament in India on the way to taking the crown. Their head to head record is less impressive in T20 however, with England having won six of the last seven completed encounters, as well as that 2010 final.
Despite a wobble with the bat, Australia avoided mishap against Oman earlier in the week, the experience of David Warner and Marcus Stoinis shining through in difficult batting conditions. Surfaces in the Caribbean – not to mention those games staged in the USA – have already had teams scratching their heads; rather than the “slug-fest” England had prepared for, following a high-scoring tour of the Caribbean in December, it looks as if boxing smart may be the way to go.
Speaking of Warner, this could be the last time he faces up against England in national colours – and another match-winning contribution would likely reduce the chances of them meeting again in the knockouts. On the other side of the card is Jofra Archer, fresh from an emotional maiden outing at Kensington Oval and ready to take on Australia for the first time in any format since 2020. Can Mark Wood fire up England’s campaign, as he did during last summer’s Ashes? Will Pat Cummins be back to harass the old enemy once again? Seconds out, it’s almost time to rumble.
Cummins is set to return after being rested for the Oman game, which saw Mitchell Starc leave the field with cramp. Starc is understood to be fine and could keep his place – which would likely see Nathan Ellis miss out. Marsh is still not fit to bowl, with Australia likely to continue with the allrounder combination of Stoinis and Maxwell to give them cover.
Australia (probable XI): David Warner, Travis Head, Mitchell Marsh (capt), Glenn Maxwell, Marcus Stoinis, Josh Inglis (wk), Tim David, Pat Cummins, Nathan Ellis/Mitchell Starc, Adam Zampa, Josh Hazlewood
The one change England may consider is Reece Topley coming in for Wood, with the expectation that there will be some rotation among the seamers through the course of the tournament.
England (probable XI): Phil Salt, Jos Buttler (capt & wk), Will Jacks, Jonny Bairstow, Harry Brook, Liam Livingstone, Moeen Ali, Chris Jordan, Jofra Archer, Adil Rashid, Reece Topley/Mark Wood
[Cricinfo]
Once is coincidence, twice is a clue, and three times is proof.
To paraphrase Agatha Christie, that is the narrative around South Africa’s meeting with Netherlands at this T20 World Cup.
The Dutch beat South Africa at the 2022 tournament and ended their semi-final hopes in a match where South Africa appeared to be sleep walking, and then beat them again at the 2023 ODI World Cup, where they exposed South Africa’s vulnerability in the chase. If they to do the treble, not only will Netherlands take the lead in Group D, but they will offer conclusive evidence of the threat they pose to Full Members, especially South Africa.
Of course, it will take some doing after South Africa’s opening performance against Sri Lanka, where they reduced their opposition to their lowest T20I total and chased it down in fairly straightforward fashion thanks to the most stable middle-order of their white-ball era. In Aiden Markram, Tristan Stubbs, Heinrich Klaasen and David Miller, South Africa have bankers and big-hitters and, for this match, they also have the advantage of experience. They’ve already played at Eisenhower Park, and have first-hand knowledge that run-scoring doesn’t come easily;Klassen said they are prepared to use their “cricket brains” and play “smarter cricket”.
But the conditions could be good news for Netherlands, who are not naturally a line-up of big hitters and build their innings on a foundation of turning ones into twos. In other words, they tend to take a slightly more conservative approach to batting, which may work well here, but they’ll be wary of the uneven bounce of the surface and will have to come up with plans to counterattack especially against South Africa’s seamers. Their own bowlers were exemplary in Dallas and will look to build on that performance against a line-up that will likely be more proactive than Nepal’s, but who they have managed to keep quiet not once, but twice in the past. Third time’s the charm, they say.
Anrich Nortje’s stunning return to form against Sri Lanka means South Africa may not have to tinker with the bowling combination, and Gerald Coetzee and Tabraiz Shamsi may have to wait their turns to get a game. The batting line-up should be unchanged, with no space for Ryan Rickelton yet.
South Africa: Quinton de Kock (wk), Reeza Hendricks, Aiden Markam, Tristan Stubbs, Heinrich Klaasen (wk), David Miller, Marco Jansen, Keshav Maharaj, Kagiso Rabada, Ottneil Baartman, Anrich Nortje
Conditions in New York may tempt Netherlands to include an extra seamer and they have Kyle Klein in their squad. But it could come at the expense of a shortened batting line-up and they may not want to risk that.
Netherlands: Michael Levitt, Max O’Dowd, Vikramjit Singh, Sybrand Engelbrecht, Scott Edwards (capt, wk), Bas de Leede, Teja Nidamanuru, Logan van Beek, Tim Pringle, Paul van Meekeren, Vivian Kingma
[Cricinfo]
Nuwan Thushara’s last over brought Sri Lanka screaming back into the match,as he first bowled Rishad Hossain, and then nailed Taskin Ahmed in front of the stumps with a pinpoint swinging yorker. This left Bangladesh eight wickets down, with 12 runs still to get.
However, the experienced Mahmudullah was at the crease for Bangladesh, and despite some further nervy moments, pushed Bangladesh across the line off the last ball of the 19th over.
But this was a match chiefly decided by Bangladesh’s own outstanding bowling. Mustafizur Rahman was the best among them, using shorter lengths and his cutters efficiently, to claim figures of 3 for 17. Rishad Hossain’s three-for through the middle overs also kept Sri Lanka quiet.
Mustafizur was instrumental in Sri Lanka’s downward spiral through the middle overs, which culminated in a crash-and-burn end. Ultimately, their inability to find boundaries, or even rotate strike against good Bangladesh bowling resulted in their downfall. A score of 125 for 9 always seemed poor on a decent pitch, even if their bowlers made a match of it in the end.
Brief scores:
Bangladesh 125 for 8 in 19 overs (Towhid Hridoy 40, Litton Das 36; Dhanajaya de Silva 1-11, Nuwan Thushara 4-18, Wanidu Hasaranga 2-32, Matheesha Pathirana 1-27) beat Sri Lanka124 for 9 in 20 overs (Pathum Nissanka 47, Dhananjaya de Silva 21; Tanzim Hasan Sakib 1-24, Taskin Ahmed 2-25, Mustafizur Rahman 3-17, Rishad Hossain 3-22) by two wickets
[Cricinfo]
US sports envoys to Lanka to champion youth development
Rahuman questions sudden cancellation of leave of CEB employees
