Chandimal Appeals Against Match Referee's Findings in Ball Tampering Controversy

Cricketnext Staff | Updated: June 21, 2018, 2:34 PM IST

Umpires take a look at the ball in the second Test between West Indies and Sri Lanka. (AFP)

New Delhi: Dinesh Chandimal has appealed against match referee Javagal Srinath’s findings that saw him suspended for one Test after being found guilty of changing the condition of the ball in the second Test between West Indies and Sri Lanka at Gros Islet.

On-field umpires Aleem Dar and Ian Gould, and third umpire Richard Kettleborough had charged Chandimal after play on Saturday for changing the condition of the ball in breach of clause 41.3 of the ICC Standard Test Match, ODI and T20I Playing Conditions.

The officials laid the charge after television footage from the final session’s play on Friday appeared to show the Sri Lanka captain taking something out from his left pocket and putting it in his mouth and then rubbing the surface of the ball with his saliva which the umpires viewed as an attempt to change its condition.

View image on Twitter

ICC

✔@ICC

BREAKING: Dinesh Chandimal has appealed against the match referee’s findings that saw him suspended for one Test after being found guilty of changing the condition of the ball.

12:20 AM - Jun 21, 2018

• 479
• 52 people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacy

Besides being found guilty of changing the condition of the ball, Chandimal, coach Chandika Hathurusinghe and manager Asanka Gurusinha were also charged with a breach of Article 2.3.1, a Level 3 offence, which relates to “conduct that is contrary to the spirit of the game”. While Chandimal has appealed, he could stand to miss both Tests against South Africa in July and further ODIs if found guilty.

Chandimal had pleaded not guilty to breaching Article 2.2.9 of the ICC Code of Conduct after which ICC match referee Srinath held a hearing following the conclusion of the St Lucia Test.

"After reviewing the footage of the incident, it is clear that Dinesh applied an artificial substance to the ball, namely saliva containing the residue of something he had in his mouth, an action which is prohibited under the ICC Code of Conduct," Srinath said in the release.

"The footage shows that upon receiving the ball, Dinesh took something from his pocket and put it into his mouth. After sucking or chewing whatever he put in his mouth for a few seconds, Dinesh then proceeded to spit on his finger and polish the ball with his saliva which would have contained the residue of the artificial substance that he had in his mouth, on two separate occasions.

"During the hearing, Dinesh admitted to putting something in his mouth but couldn't remember what it was, which I found unconvincing as a defence and the fact remains it was an artificial substance.