SLC opens up on Silva ban

Chairman of the Inquiry panel Attorney-at-law Asela Rekawa (right) addresses the media yesterday. Others from left are Sri Lanka Cricket Chief Executive Officer Ashley de Silva, Vice President in charge of Domestic Cricket K. Mathivanan and Tournament Committee Chairman Bandula Dissanayaka - Pic by Ruwan Walpola

By Madushka Balasuriya

Sri Lanka Cricket yesterday held a press conference seeking to clarify the reasoning behind their decision to impose a two-year ban on former national cricketer Chamara Silva from “all cricket-related activities”. 

SLC had found Silva guilty of “misconduct and not playing to the spirit of the game” after irregular scoring patterns emerged in a domestic first-class match between Panadura Cricket Club and Kalutara Physical Culture Club in January of this year. Kalutara PCC Captain Manoj Deshapriya was also banned for two years alongside Silva, who was captaining Panadura CC, while their respective teammates each received one-year sentences.

Following the ruling, media reports quickly circulated intimating that Silva had refused to take part in the final day’s play - when the unusual scoring had occurred - as he was aware of what was about to take place. Officially, Silva had cited an upset stomach as reason for his unavailability on the third and final day. 

Chairman of the Inquiry panel Attorney-at-law Asela Rekawa confirmed this, stating that Silva had not signed off on the Captain’s match report at the end of the final day’s play, but that this was of “not much concern” as the panel were interested in the events of the match as a whole - one which Silva had captained for the first two days - not just the final day.

“In terms of the documentation provided it was very clear that he was not present on the last day, to sign the Captain’s match report. But there was no suggestion that Mr. Chamara Silva was not there on the premises,” said Rekewa.

“It’s a collective effort, he’s the captain of a team, and it’s a three day match. And we’re talking of the result of a match which had been played for three days.”

Rekewa added that Silva had been given ample time to provide evidence to the panel, and questioned as to why he didn’t come out sooner if he had evidence to help in the case.

“The players had time to provide statements. They had six months to give evidence. After concluding the inquiry we sent a letter to each of the accused, stating that although you have not come forward and testified before the inquiry we will give you another opportunity to submit written submissions,” said Inquiry Panel Chairman Attorney Asela Rekawa.

“We gave them about two months to send in their written submissions. After that with our findings we reported back to the SLC Executive Committee, which then handed out the appropriate punishment. As a panel we can only hold an inquiry against people who were charged, and in terms of this inquiry the people who were charged were the 24 team members.”

SLC Vice President in charge of Domestic Cricket K. Mathivanan added: “Chamara is the Captain. We can’t assume as to the reason he didn’t come.”

Mathivanan was also keen to clarify that this was not a traditional case of match-fixing as no money had exchanged hands.

“In terms of the two charge sheets, they were charged in terms of violating certain tournament rules. A money transaction never took place. This is unfair play contrary to the spirit of the game.”

Untold story?

The decision to ban Silva, along with the subsequent media reports of his alleged forewarned knowledge of any fixing, has also caused a stir on social media and within the Lankan cricketing fraternity.

“How is this fair..the guy walks away from fixing gets two years. Ones who are involved gets one year?” tweeted Mahela Jayawardene.

“Coaches who was involved should be banned for life. Also if any official from the club who instigated this should also be banned for life. We should set an example,” added the former Lankan captain.

Vouching for Silva’s character as “one of the most honest guys I played cricket with,” Jayawardene had his final say on the matter tweeting: “Hope the truth will come out.”

Silva for his part has remained silent on the issue. However, the idea that there is an untold part to the story is an intriguing one. The inquiry panel conceded that they had only looked into the players involved in the match and no one else. Asked if an official involved with both Panadura CC and SLC had been investigated, Tournament Committee Chairman Bandula Dissanayaka simply stated that only officials whom there were charges against were investigated.

“We had the complaint by the umpires and match referees and subsequently by the Sri Lanka Ports Authority, none of these complaints were against the officials of any clubs. The allegations were against the players, and that the match was not played to the spirit of the game - that was the charge. There was no complaint or evidence against any club officials being involved in this,” he said.

However, Dissanayaka confirmed that if evidence were to come to light implicating other club officials, then the panel would look into it.

“Definitely we will. There is an appeal process for all parties that have been punished and they can appeal to the ExCo if they have any additional information. Certainly SLC is very much interested to know exactly what happened.”

For the time being an inquiry will be conducted into the role of the umpires and match officials, who Rekawa suggested may not have carried out their duties to the fullest extent of law, as MCC regulations allow for match officials to stop a match in case of suspicious conduct by the teams participating.

“During the matches we got reports against the two teams of match-fixing. When the inquiry was being held there was no evidence to say there was a third party involvement. The umpires should have stopped the match at that point, but that did not happen. This is something that MCC regulations allow for,” said Rekawa.

What next?

The match which had taken place from 23-25 January 2017, had seen the first two days produce 570 runs between the two sides. However, on an extraordinary final day, Panadura added 223 runs in 22.3 overs at a run rate of 10.34 having begun the day on 180/2 in response to Kalutara’s first innings score of 390. The best was yet to come though as Kalutara were subsequently bowled out for 197 in 22.5 overs in the second innings, before Panadura hit 167 for 7 in 13.4 to win the game. The final day saw 587 runs scored in total.

The result saw Panadura beat second-placed Sri Lanka Ports Authority - who first brought the suspicious nature of the game to SLC - to the top of the standings, while the high-scoring nature of the match meant Kalutara managed to stave of relegation.

SLC as part of their ruling have declared the result void and adjusted the points table for 2016/17 accordingly, while match fees for the match from both clubs will be recovered, as well each club being fined half a million rupees.

The SLC Executive Committee’s decision in the end has succeeded in largely undoing the injustice that was carried out as a result of the collusion between Panadura and Kalutara. However, it will be interesting to see just how far SLC will go when, if ever, Silva’s side of the story is told.