Boys profile

The hidden adjustment following the sandpaper-gate scandal that spared Virat Kohli from suspension.

The hidden adjustment following the sandpaper-gate scandal that spared Virat Kohli from suspension.


The option became available to Kohli only because the code had undergone significant changes in the months following the Newlands controversy. While the most publicized updates included harsher penalties for ball tampering, a lesser-known adjustment introduced a downgraded charge for physical contact, implemented quietly without much fanfare. Previously, any physical contact automatically resulted in a level-two offence, which carried the risk of suspension.

Kohli, whose earnings were estimated by Forbes at $41.8 million in 2020, faced a relatively minor penalty: 20% of his match fee (approximately $5671) and one demerit point. This was similar to the penalty imposed on his teammate Mohammed Siraj during the Adelaide Test, where Siraj received the same punishment for verbally confronting Travis Head.

The maximum penalty for a level-one offence—under which Kohli's infraction fell—is a warning and a fine of up to 50% of a player’s match fee, positioning Kohli's punishment within the lower to mid-range of the scale.

Two sources familiar with the discussions, speaking anonymously to preserve their freedom to speak, revealed that Kagiso Rabada's clash with Steve Smith during the Port Elizabeth Test shortly before Newlands served as a turning point. Rabada had initially been banned for two Tests because the incident added to his three prior infractions over a two-year span. However, several cricket boards voiced concerns that incidental contact in such situations did not merit suspensions.

There was also unease over the potential "weaponization" of the code, where teams could provoke players into earning suspensions by exploiting how certain offences were graded. While cricket maintains strict rules against physical contact, incidents are now evaluated more closely, considering the degree of force used and the broader context of the altercation.


Comments