A huge controversy got evoked during the first Test match of the Border Gavaskar Trophy (BGT) 2023 between India and Australia at Vidarbha Cricket Association Stadium (VCA) in Nagpur, as an Aussie fan accused India’s star all-rounder Ravindra Jadeja of applying a substance on his spinning finger as well as the ball.
However, Jadeja was given a clean chit by the match referee Andy Pycroft who later found that the former had applied a pain relief ointment onto his finger and nothing else. But now, the International Cricket Council (ICC) has fined the Gujarat cricketer 25% of his match fee for breaching the ICC Code of Conduct.
In their official statement, the ICC confirmed that it was a soothing cream which Jadeja applied on his swelled finger, but at the same time, they also charged him under ‘Article 2.20 of the ICC Code of Conduct for Players and Player Support Personnel’ as he did not seek permission from the on-field umpires before doing so.
“Jadeja was found to have breached Article 2.20 of the ICC Code of Conduct for Players and Player Support Personnel, which relates to displaying conduct that is contrary to the spirit of the game. In addition to this, one demerit point has been added to Jadeja’s disciplinary record, for whom it was the first offence in a 24-month period,” said the official ICC statement.
“The incident occurred in the 46th over of Australia’s first innings, when Jadeja applied a soothing cream to a swelling on the index finger of his bowling hand without asking for permission to do so from the on-field umpires,” it added.
On the other hand, Jadeja did not challenge the decision and admitted the offence proposed by match referee Poycroft. As far as the ball-tampering allegations are concerned, ICC’s statement made it clear that the cream was applied for medical purposes only with no intention of changing the shape of the red leather.
“In reaching his decision to sanction the player along with the Level 1 sanction he imposed, the Match Referee was satisfied that the cream was applied to the finger purely for medical purposes. The cream was not applied as an artificial substance to the ball and consequently it did not change the condition of the ball, which would have been in breach of clause 41.3 of the ICC playing conditions – Unfair Play – The Match Ball – Changing its Condition,” said the ICC official statement further.
