The Rafiq case

Karma

Well-known member
Item in yesterday's Times, headed 'Hutton wants Yorkshire case held in private' - this is contrary to Rafiq's view that all the evidence should be made public.

Yorkshire and seven individuals (incl. Vaughan, Ballance, Bresnan, and Hoggard) charged with bringing game into disrepute over claims by Rafiq. Initial procedural hearing will be held on Monday and Tuesday by CDC to determine terms and scope of hearing 'at which Rafiq's representatives will push for the evidence to be heard in public'

We already know Yorkshire (well Patel) supports this, but Roger Hutton does not want the hearings to be in public because he "has a lack of confidence in the process and the system"

" I would like to give my version of events. My difficulty is I'm going to have to do it in an entirely unsatisfactory forum, in which I have no confidence." Hutton told the Telegraph (this bit I couldn't understand unless the Times are just quoting directly from the Tory rag). CDC hearings are normally held in private because they are not formal courts of law and are not covered by any privilege that would prevent a witness being sued.
 

Newby

Well-known member
Another long rambling diatribe by George Dobell in the cricketer magazine on the Rafiq case. It all sounds a bit desperate to me as if he fears the ECB are not prepared to immediately hang anyone who was ever accused of anything by Rafiq and others.

He does widen things out to include cricket as a whole, covering class as well as racism, which is the crusade he is fighting. The Rafiq affair though is front and centre the whole way through.

He is eager to concede that Rafiq is a less than perfect individual, but equally quick to jump on anybody making allegations against AR and tries to rubbish claims made against his 'client'.

I wonder if they can have a mix of open and closed sessions for the hearings. Giving those who have had their lives shattered by the allegations the chance to give their side of the story in open session, while those with something to hide, or a reputation that they don't want scrutinised too closely, can be interviewed in closed session.
 

Hawke

Administrator
Staff member
What organisations, except for courts and Parliamentary sub committees, holds 'open sessions'?
 

Newby

Well-known member
What organisations, except for courts and Parliamentary sub committees, holds 'open sessions'?
I think quite a number of public enquiries have a mix of open and closed sessions. Some people giving evidence in delicate matters, such as sexual abuse enquiries, may be willing to waive their right to anonymity while others would only give evidence if they knew their identity was protected.

It may of course be beyond the wit of the ECB to manage such complexity.
 

Hawke

Administrator
Staff member
Chris Waters suggested previously that some of the 'accused' would welcome an open session but that others were reluctant as 'mud sticks'.
 

Karma

Well-known member
I've come to the conclusion that the whole fiasco is going to fall apart and there will be difficulty proceeding with charges because:

Some want a public investigation, while some want this in private (and will not testify if they don't get their own way)

Some are refusing to take part

Some 'witnesses' have not been questioned or as far as I can tell been asked to attend (Previous Chairs to Patel and Hutton)

At least one 'witness' is not even in the country (Rashid, who jointly owns the fish and chip shop with Rafiq)

Some are questioning the independence of the CDC being basically 'in bed' with the ECB


All the above apart there has been too much media 'leakage' which suggests to me that any semblance of a 'fair trial' is a pipe dream. If this was a proper court of law the speculation and press coverage over the last week would be regarded as contempt of court. and a fair trial would be out of the question. This includes:

Allegations against Rafiq about calling a fellow player 'a f****t' corroborated by the match umpire, together with a charge of bullying. Rafiq has denied this (used Twitter extensively) claiming this is a concerted attempt against him

Claims by Rafiq that he is being threatened both personally and 'on-line'. Claims by Rafiq (via Dobell and others) that someone defecating in his parent's garden was aimed at him and likewise his claims of a 'masked' figure prowling near his home. Saying that he and all his family (including his seriously ill father) are going to live abroad or thinking of going to live abroad. having extra protection provided by ECB and PCA

I'm sure there are a lot more examples, but many are calling for a proper independent enquiry. I may not always be accurate with facts
 
Last edited:

Newby

Well-known member
Still some shilly shallying about whether it will be heard in public or not, but sadly it now seems we will have to wait another 6 weeks or so before this saga reaches some kind of resolution in front of the CDC.

There was a preliminary hearing on Monday which seems to have at least concluded that the CDC do not have the power to strip Yorkshire of International fixtures. It's not explicit in the article I read but I'm not sure they can make a points deduction either, the question of relegation is not now an issue of course.

So, it will all come down to a possible financial sanction against Yorkshire and further reputational damage to the club, the ex-players involved and Gary Ballance.
 

Hawke

Administrator
Staff member
To be honest I have skim read this. It is from a newspaper I used to read....... My skim read tells me the writer does not grasp the idea that a flawed character may have have given flawed evidence... Have a look if you wish and see if you agree with my 'brief assessment'.

 

Hawke

Administrator
Staff member
Still some shilly shallying about whether it will be heard in public or not, but sadly it now seems we will have to wait another 6 weeks or so before this saga reaches some kind of resolution in front of the CDC.

There was a preliminary hearing on Monday which seems to have at least concluded that the CDC do not have the power to strip Yorkshire of International fixtures. It's not explicit in the article I read but I'm not sure they can make a points deduction either, the question of relegation is not now an issue of course.

So, it will all come down to a possible financial sanction against Yorkshire and further reputational damage to the club, the ex-players involved and Gary Ballance.
Is this what you read Newby? By George Dobell. He suggests that now all but one of the 'accused' Yorkshire contingent are happy to have an open enquiry. And note the way he refers to AR as Azeem.....pally pally pally

 

Karma

Well-known member
Mr. Dobell is somewhat negative about Chris Walters in next month's 'the Cricketer - Relegated Yorkshire's Woes continue,' saying, "The club continue to come under extraordinary pressure from the Yorkshire Post newspaper. Their correspondent Chris Waters has called them 'A club relegated, and a club destroyed' and has been relentlessly critical of Patel, in particular."

Later in the same article, Mr. Dobell says, 'Azeem and Patel are expected to appear before the DCMS committee on December 13 to talk about resistance they have encountered.' A bit pally indeed with Mr. Rafiq but slightly disrespectful to Lord Patel, and though he's not my favourite Lord, I at least use his title. Perhaps Dobell's jealous of Lord P.

The trouble with allegations is that they are hard to disprove. Michael Vaughan will find it difficult to prove that he didn't say what was alleged by Azeem in the same way that Patel has found it difficult to disprove he was told to F*** O** by Stokes.

I still think this whole fiasco is going to come to practically nought, but it might keep us going through some of the winter months.
 

Newby

Well-known member
That's the article I read.

I agree when you distil it down it all looks pretty small beer, he said, she said kind of stuff. I hope when it's done the spotlight will move to the wider issue of how to provide opportunities for all races and all social classes to participate in the game.

Cricket is no different to other areas of life in Britain, we can never have equal opportunities, but we can do much better.
 

Karma

Well-known member
That's the article I read.

I agree when you distil it down it all looks pretty small beer, he said, she said kind of stuff. I hope when it's done the spotlight will move to the wider issue of how to provide opportunities for all races and all social classes to participate in the game.

Cricket is no different to other areas of life in Britain, we can never have equal opportunities, but we can do much better.
Absolutely.
 

DaveMorton

Well-known member
Yes, but bullying people, and telling them which opinions are correct, and which are incorrect...this is not the way to achieve harmony.

We should be celebrating our differences, and laughing at the absurdities, not pretending they don't exist. Remember the old sit-com from fifty years ago, which featured a Rabbi and a Catholic priest? One was celibate, the other couldn't eat pork. "On balance," said the Rabbi, "I think I got the better deal."

Yes, of course, we should be sensitive, as for example the England team giving Moeen Ali some space before starting to throw champagne around. A good example, apart from the waste of champagne.
 

byased

Active member
I was driving up the M1 this afternoon, and for a while was behind a van with a company slogan on it. Yorkshire Fabrications Ltd.
Made me smile anyway.
 
Top