Cricket Australia’s reviews will bury the dirty linen

The three wise men. No one saw that coming. Not even their hardworking image practitioners. Steve Smith, David Warner and Cameron Bancroft are the only sportsmen in memory to have left a sandpaper trail to their unprincipled activities.

Normally it is a document or two that has the sniffer dogs Hoovering the environs for more clues. But the Australian Test team was rubbed raw by the combination of sandpaper and an uncommonly stupid and clumsy plan to manicure the cricket ball during the third Test against South Africa.

But given none of the men — Smith and Warner banned for 12 months, Bancroft nine — have opted to appeal against the decisions of Cricket Australia, it is clear some prudence has seeped into their thinking. All three have said they played some part in the ball-tampering caper whether it was doing it, thinking about it or allowing it to happen. And all have cried publicly to underline their guilt as well as the sincerity of their apologies, so there was no way an appeal could possibly have changed their immediate playing futures. We done it, squire.

Two major worries remain. The CA review of playing culture confirmed yesterday by CA chairman David Peever cannot begin until the game’s bosses tell us exactly what happened in the changerooms at Cape Town. CA sent two investigators over immediately Smith made that almost casual admission that Australia had deliberately and clownishly fiddled with the ball on the third day of the third Test. What did the investigators find? Whatever it was exactly, we have lost a captain, vice-captain and opening batsman. We need a full explanation rather than the offerings of three whimpering cricketers.

The investigation will be led by former Test opener Rick McCosker, who will add two past and two current players to his little player-culture posse. Players would appear to have much to protect. It will be hard to trust McCosker’s findings because he and his team appear fatally conflicted. Culture is passed on to one generation, then another.

The second review — of Cricket Australia itself — is equally unsound. Already chief executive James Sutherland has been ruled untouchable by Peever, and Peever has also said he will not stand down. The kitchen hands are in for a grilling. Is anybody responsible for the wreck that is Australian cricket?

Certainly not the president of the Australian Cricketers’ Association, Greg Dyer, who wanted a reduction in the severity of the bans. This week he appeared to allow just a smattering of brain cells to shape his logic.

He said: “We need a far-reaching and comprehensive review of the culture of the game. Let’s identify causes of the tipping point that occurred in Cape Town. An independent review of the culture in the game of cricket with the power to assess every contributing element and suggest the necessary changes.”

Surely Dyer is just a prop, a distraction. A silly point. No organisation has had more power and influence than the ACA to mould the culture of the country’s cricketers. If they can stuff their pockets full of money, they can program their grey matter to play within the spirit of sport. As Tim Paine has shown at the tail of the South African tour, a captain who wants and demands change in his team’s attitude and behaviour can achieve it.

The thrashing in the final Test cannot be ascribed to a less fierce or confronting team attitude but rather a change in personnel. Smith, Warner and Bancroft sent home. Unsuspecting and underprepared replacements were never going to provide effective cover.

Dyer was successful in bringing his players together as one when the pay dispute was wounding cricket last year.

They effectively went on strike until CA was forced to yield. He could have done that at any time about player behaviour. He can do it right now if he is serious.

More likely his call for a report on Australian cricket, specifically the players’ culture, is an embarrassingly transparent attempt at misdirection. Dyer suggests that CA rushed its implementation of bans on Smith, Warner and Bancroft. Rushed? After Smith, Warner and Bancroft publicly wept their guilt? After Bancroft lied about “yellow sticky tape”. After Smith told media they attempted to tamper with the ball following a discussion among the leadership group? And all this televised around the world?

This mess showed Dyer should stand down immediately if he is not prepared to accept his responsibility in allowing the Australian players to behave in such a crass but arrogant manner that the nation screamed out in anger on the ball-tampering news. Dyer has also been troubled that the penalties given to the Australian three crush those handed out by the International Cricket Council.

Following an ICC ruling, Smith was banned for one Test and fined his match fee; Bancroft was fined 75 per cent of his match payment and must carry three demerit points.

Given the leniency of the ICC punishments, Dyer — as well as many others following Smith’s broken-man performance at his news conference in Australia — feels the skipper is being all but persecuted. Well, he isn’t. Nor are Bancroft or wobbly Warner.

If your state’s police minister was found guilty of not wearing his seat belt and making a phone call while driving there is little doubt he would lose his job. An obvious lack of judgment would see him demoted. The higher the position, the lower the tolerance for ­stupidity.

Thus if the Australian captain and vice-captain are implicated in ball-tampering they will receive a much heavier penalty than a first-change bowler with no team responsibilities. That it was the captain and vice-captain who put Australia’s reputation at such risk demanded they get a lengthy suspension.

Bancroft was stupid enough to actually take sandpaper on to the field and initially lie about it. Nine months is appropriate. It has been a fascinating two weeks, a clear window into a nation without leadership of any form, anywhere.

The Australian trio of drongos were ripped apart by their countrymen and women when news broke of the cheating embarrassment. When they cried at their news conferences sympathy exploded for Smith and Bancroft. Warner’s cry me a river seemed to go unnoticed. Or at least seemed more contrived than Smith’s sobbing at the blow he had dealt his father’s ambitions for his son and Bancroft because of the lost chance to glue himself in at the top of the order. No one is less guilty because they have leaky tear valves. That they appeared contrite was presumably packaged into their penalties.

Up until yesterday Cricket Australia had handled the mess well. As soon as possible the three cheats were returned home. Penalties were stiff. Rightly Smith could not get near the captaincy for 12 months after he returned to the team. But yesterday’s announcements are effectively a funeral. The matters embarrassing to Australian cricket are in the process of being buried.

No one in this country, in public office at least, can think with clarity and vision or hold the strength of their convictions. They just fight each other for extra little pockets of power and cheat for a few extra dollars.

Well, except the women’s teams. They are the ones who play with granite authority but with respect and dignity, too. They are the ones with tickers. They are the leaders.