Australia news May 9, 2013

South Australia fined over Muirhead talks

ESPNcricinfo staff

South Australia's interest in the Victorian legspinner James Muirhead has cost them a $15,000 fine after they were found to have breached Cricket Australia's rules on player movements. Muirhead, 19, was given a rookie contract by Cricket Victoria in July last year and made his Sheffield Shield debut against the Redbacks in Adelaide in January.

But a Cricket Australia grievance tribunal has found that during the 2012-13 season, the South Australian Cricket Association held discussions with Muirhead before informing Cricket Victoria, thus breaking the rules regarding to contracted players. The tribunal made its ruling on April 3 but delayed a decision on its penalty until reconvening this week.

Rule 4 of Cricket Australia's Rules for Interstate Competitions states that a "state association must not (and must ensure that its constituent clubs do not) hold discussions with a CA contracted player or a state contracted player who is bound to another state association concerning the possible transfer of that player without first informing the player's home state association".

Keith Bradshaw, the SACA chief executive, said: "SACA has always maintained that it has not breached Rule 4 of the Rules for Interstate Competitions but accepts that the Cricket Australia grievance tribunal process is now complete and a $15,000 penalty issued".

Muirhead had made his BBL debut for the Adelaide Strikers in the 2011-12 summer before he was given his rookie deal with Victoria. However, he switched to the Melbourne Renegades for the 2012-13 season.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Andrew on May 9, 2013, 0:41 GMT

    With the franchise system for the BBL, I think this will be a very grey area, when you get a player who's Shield team is from another state to where your franchise is based. I think it should depend a bit on to what extent the discussion was. IF it was at a BBL training session & someone like Berry says "You should play Shield for SA, I thik there maybe some opportunities coming up", then I think that is all well & good, but if the SA CEO holds a meeting with him, that is another matter. The first scenario is off the cuff & opportunistic, whereas the 2nd is calculated. Don't really care either way, but I think they are making a rod for their back by sticking to those rules, which I think were pre-franchise in origin!

  • No featured comments at the moment.