India in England 2014

BCCI questions lack of video for Anderson case

George Dobell

July 19, 2014

Comments: 24 | Text size: A | A

James Anderson appeals for the wicket of Stuart Binny, England v India, 2nd Investec Test, Lord's, 1st day, July 17, 2014
A preliminary hearing about James Anderson's Level 3 charge will take place on Tuesday © Getty Images
Enlarge

Indian officials have questioned why crucial video footage that could have shed light on the alleged altercation between James Anderson and Ravindra Jadeja is not available.

The Indian team allege that Anderson initiated physical contact with Jadeja during the lunch break on the second day of the first Investec Test at Trent Bridge.

Anderson will attend a preliminary hearing in London on Tuesday morning, after he was charged with a Level 3 offence under the ICC's code of conduct. If the charge is upheld, Anderson could be suspended for anything up to four Tests. The hearing will be held over teleconference with Australian Gordon Lewis presiding.

While players from both teams are set to provide conflicting evidence, India have requested that footage from a video camera situated just outside the dressing rooms where the incident occurred be made available.

A Nottinghamshire spokesman confirmed to ESPNcricinfo that a camera had been installed in the relevant area but insisted that it had not been active at the time.

India have reacted with incredulity to the response that the camera was not switched on at the time. They have also expressed some disappointment that none of the broadcasters appear to have footage of the alleged incident.

But the ECB and Nottinghamshire deny any suggestion that any evidence has been suppressed. Instead, they say that the camera was installed only a few weeks ago in order to provide visitors to the club's website with some insight to life inside the pavilion during major games. It is not currently online and the ECB insists it never has been.

The development is the latest in an episode that has done nothing to improve relations between the teams. While India captain MS Dhoni has said Anderson "crossed the line" during the alleged altercation, England captain Alastair Cook has said India are using the incident as "a tactic" to sideline England's leading bowler and have made "a mountain out of a molehill" by escalating it to a Level 3 offence.

England also hit back by making a complaint about Jadeja leading to the ICC levelling a Level 2 charge.

But a BCCI official confirmed to ESPNcricinfo that their complaint was the result of building frustration at Anderson's behaviour. The official stated that India felt they had a responsibility to bring a case against the player as he had, in their words, earned a reputation with opposition teams around the world as being unusually abusive.

They were also unhappy that Paul Downton, the managing director of England cricket, intervened to try to persuade India coach, Duncan Fletcher, to have the charge withdrawn. However, the ECB has indicated that Fletcher was initially open to a more amicable solution and it was Dhoni who wanted to take the matter further.

Certainly there seems little chance that the issue can be resolved with a handshake. While the ICC chief executive Dave Richardson confirmed to ESPNcricinfo that the complaints could be withdrawn, the India camp is adamant that Anderson's behaviour is a boil that needs lancing and there appears to be very little common ground between the opposing sides.

George Dobell is a senior correspondent at ESPNcricinfo

RSS Feeds: George Dobell

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by inyourbaffles on (July 20, 2014, 11:15 GMT)

DRS in the pavilion but not on the field? Interesting concept. It sounds to me as if the question, "Please may we see the video footage?" was asked in the knowledge that there wasn't any. Gamesmanship!

Posted by Tykeswin on (July 20, 2014, 11:01 GMT)

Seems like India have already confirmed that they are taking this route because they do not like Anderson's verbals. Somewhat childish behaviour on their part I think, best response would be to concentrate on the cricket.

Posted by markatnotts on (July 20, 2014, 10:44 GMT)

@Rishav, were you upstairs outside the dressing rooms and therefore saw what happened? And if Anderson is guilty he can be suspended for between 2 and 4 games not 1 and 2.

Posted by   on (July 20, 2014, 10:26 GMT)

Anderson will be suspended for 1 test or 2

Posted by shot274 on (July 20, 2014, 9:40 GMT)

As a neutral i find some of the comments perplexing. Firstly this isnt a playground ,its an international test match arena. Video evidence of the incident has nothing whatsoever to do with DRS. I dont think India are fabricating either-there may be some garnishing and it is unlikely that Anderson will be suspended.However i hope fans realise that if there is even an iota of truth in it then this sort of behaviour should not be tolerated and universally condemned -not justified due to Indias stance regarding DRS.

Posted by yujilop on (July 20, 2014, 9:36 GMT)

I think both sides are simply trying to make more out of this incident than there really is. By creating an "us vs them" feeling among the fans, they are trying to raise the emotional profile of this series off the field, because it has been off to an underwhelming start on the field.

Both captains would be happy to have their home media focus elsewhere, instead of being critical of their boring on-field tactics.

Posted by BlueJoy on (July 20, 2014, 9:19 GMT)

DRS is there or not is a different matter, this concerns the security of the players which is of paramount importance. How Indian players are supposed to know that the Camera is not working. They have the right to ask for it.

Whatever happens on the pitch we can take it as the spirit of the great game. But not in the pavilion. Dismiss it says the team who made the bar fight between Warner and Root to epic proportions. That being said if India is making wrong allegations they should be punished for that as well.

Even though this should be pushed out as lack of evidence of Digital proof, we can be never sure of whether there is a neutral witness. Now after the Jellybean incident, Nottingham is quite the controversy ground for Test matches as far as India is concerned.

Ishant Sharma is nowhere as aggressive as Broad or Anderson with the ball or attitude.

Posted by milepost on (July 20, 2014, 9:18 GMT)

@newschoolcricket, spot on. Henrik doesn't know what he's on about.

Posted by   on (July 20, 2014, 9:04 GMT)

surely if a broadcaster had captured the incident it would have been all over the news. no video evidence Anderson's word against Jadejas case not proven.

Posted by SpaMaster on (July 20, 2014, 8:31 GMT)

Funny so many ill-informed people with their sentiments against India are trying to equate lack of DRS on the field to approval of physical contact off the field. Open your eyes.

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
George DobellClose
Tour Results
England v India at Birmingham - Sep 7, 2014
England won by 3 runs
England v India at Leeds - Sep 5, 2014
England won by 41 runs
England v India at Birmingham - Sep 2, 2014
India won by 9 wickets (with 117 balls remaining)
England v India at Nottingham - Aug 30, 2014
India won by 6 wickets (with 42 balls remaining)
England v India at Cardiff - Aug 27, 2014
India won by 133 runs (D/L method)
More results »
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days