CricInfo reports http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci-icc/content/current/story/499614.html
"Salman Butt gets ten years of ineligibility, five years of suspended sentence. Mohammad Asif gets a sanction of 7 years, two years of which are suspended. Mohammad Amir gets a sanction of five years' ineligibility."
So it appears as if each of the players got 5 years ineligibility, with varying length of suspension that would kick in if the player violated any conditions. Butt's career is over. Asif's effectively so. Amir will be only 23-24 when his eligibility is restored, so he could in theory still have a long career ahead of him. The question is whether he will be able to remain cricket fit, especially if the ban prevents him from playing cricket at any reasonable level. Also, he may be able to appeal and get his sentence reduced to something like "five years ineligibility, two years of which are suspended" which is effectively 3 years. Still a very said tale about a resplendent talent, and the only good one can hope for is that this will serve as a salutary warning to other youth who might otherwise be tempted.
Going into a bit more detail from the ICC website http://icc-cricket.yahoo.net/newsdetails.php?newsId=13055_1296910620
The Tribunal found that the charge under Article 2.1.1 of the Code that Mr Butt agreed to bat out a maiden over in the Oval Test match played between Pakistan and England from 18 to 21 August 2010 was dismissed, whereas the charge under Article 2.4.2 that Mr Butt failed to disclose to the ICC's ACSU the approach by Mr Majeed that Mr Butt should bat a maiden over in the Oval Test was proved.
The Tribunal found that the charges under Article 2.1.1 of the Code that (respectively) Mr Asif agreed to bowl and did bowl a deliberate no ball in the Lord's Test match played between Pakistan and England from 26 to 29 August 2010, Mr Amir agreed to bowl and did bowl two deliberate no balls in the same Test, and Mr Butt was party to the bowling of those deliberate no balls, were proved.
I'm sure the Crown prosecutors would want the transcripts of the proceedings and the various depositions from the defendants -- but I'm not sure those are admissible. After all, they would violate the right against self-incrimination.
There is one ray of hope. The Tribunal notes that "The Tribunal has recommended to the ICC certain changes to the Code with a view to providing flexibility in relation to minimum sentences in exceptional circumstances."
Clearly, this implies that they would have strongly considered a sentence less than the mandatory minimum (presumably 5 years ineligibility) for at least one of the defendants due to "exceptional circumstances." Hopefully, this means Amir may get some support from the Tribunal upon appeal to get his ban reduced to less than 5 years...
Bharat
"Salman Butt gets ten years of ineligibility, five years of suspended sentence. Mohammad Asif gets a sanction of 7 years, two years of which are suspended. Mohammad Amir gets a sanction of five years' ineligibility."
So it appears as if each of the players got 5 years ineligibility, with varying length of suspension that would kick in if the player violated any conditions. Butt's career is over. Asif's effectively so. Amir will be only 23-24 when his eligibility is restored, so he could in theory still have a long career ahead of him. The question is whether he will be able to remain cricket fit, especially if the ban prevents him from playing cricket at any reasonable level. Also, he may be able to appeal and get his sentence reduced to something like "five years ineligibility, two years of which are suspended" which is effectively 3 years. Still a very said tale about a resplendent talent, and the only good one can hope for is that this will serve as a salutary warning to other youth who might otherwise be tempted.
Going into a bit more detail from the ICC website http://icc-cricket.yahoo.net/newsdetails.php?newsId=13055_1296910620
The Tribunal found that the charge under Article 2.1.1 of the Code that Mr Butt agreed to bat out a maiden over in the Oval Test match played between Pakistan and England from 18 to 21 August 2010 was dismissed, whereas the charge under Article 2.4.2 that Mr Butt failed to disclose to the ICC's ACSU the approach by Mr Majeed that Mr Butt should bat a maiden over in the Oval Test was proved.
The Tribunal found that the charges under Article 2.1.1 of the Code that (respectively) Mr Asif agreed to bowl and did bowl a deliberate no ball in the Lord's Test match played between Pakistan and England from 26 to 29 August 2010, Mr Amir agreed to bowl and did bowl two deliberate no balls in the same Test, and Mr Butt was party to the bowling of those deliberate no balls, were proved.
I'm sure the Crown prosecutors would want the transcripts of the proceedings and the various depositions from the defendants -- but I'm not sure those are admissible. After all, they would violate the right against self-incrimination.
There is one ray of hope. The Tribunal notes that "The Tribunal has recommended to the ICC certain changes to the Code with a view to providing flexibility in relation to minimum sentences in exceptional circumstances."
Clearly, this implies that they would have strongly considered a sentence less than the mandatory minimum (presumably 5 years ineligibility) for at least one of the defendants due to "exceptional circumstances." Hopefully, this means Amir may get some support from the Tribunal upon appeal to get his ban reduced to less than 5 years...
Bharat
