Photo via The Sydney Morning Herald

Sandpapergate: The tough questions about who knew what that never got asked

Read the original at The Sydney Morning Herald ↗
Cite

Kane, D. (2026, October 8). Sandpapergate: The tough questions about who knew what that never got asked. The Sydney Morning Herald. https://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/sandpapergate-the-tough-questions-about-who-knew-what-that-never-got-asked-20261009-p613t1.html?ref=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_source=rss_feed

Dated when The Aporia collected the article, usually within hours of publication. Check the original for its exact date and byline.

The Sydney Morning Herald · collected 2026-10-08 · by Darren Kane

Quick Summary

This article reflects on the Sandpapergate scandal from 2018 involving Australian cricket players in South Africa, where Cameron Bancroft used sandpaper to tamper with a ball during a Test match. The author revisits how Cricket Australia (CA) responded by banning players Steve Smith and David Warner for one year and imposing additional penalties such as a lifetime ban on Warner from leadership roles. The piece critiques CA's handling of the situation, noting that the bans were not based on formal charges under cricket laws but rather on CA’s own code of conduct, implying it was more about managing public relations damage than addressing a breach of rules.
Written by AI on 2026-10-08, from this article's own text only (the story summary below draws on all the coverage).

AI analysis

Story summary

Over the last fortnight, many have revisited memories of 2018 Sandpaper-gate, where Australian cricket players used sandpaper to damage a new ball during a Test match against South Africa in Cape Town. On March 5, 2018, Cameron Bancroft was caught on camera hiding sandpaper in his pants. The next day, Cricket Australia's CEO James Sutherland announced the incident without consulting captain Steve Smith. By March 7, CA dispatched a two-man team to investigate; the investigation concluded within 100 hours. Critics argue that the players were denied fair hearings and overly penalized for their actions. Darren Kane, in previous articles, has maintained that the punishments handed out by Cricket Australia were excessive and unjust, lacking proper due process.

Written for “Sandpaper Scandal Inquiry” on 2026-11-04, grounded in this article and the 0 other(s) covering the same event.

Story

📰 Sandpaper Scandal Inquiry
Sports · 1 article(s) covering the same event.

Compared with similar articles

This article reads leans strongly left and hedges 1% of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
ABC News (AU)
Hedges 0 of 9 claims Outlet record 67/100
“Article A discusses historical events and reflections on Sandpapergate from 2018, while Article B lists match scores of a more recent cricket tour.”
The Sydney Morning Herald
Hedges 4 of 75 claims Outlet record 61/100
“Article A describes a specific incident involving the delivery of a USB stick during the second Test in Port Elizabeth, while Article B discusses broader reflections on the Sandpaper-gate events from 2018 and their aftermath.”
The Sydney Morning Herald
Hedges 1 of 24 claims Outlet record 61/100
“The articles discuss different aspects of the ball-tampering scandal and its aftermath rather than describing a single specific incident occurring at the same time.”
BBC News
Hedges 4 of 79 claims Outlet record 66/100
“The articles discuss different aspects of the sandpapergate scandal and its aftermath rather than describing the same specific incident.”
The Sydney Morning Herald
Hedges 0 of 2 claims Outlet record 61/100
“While both articles discuss the Sandpaper-gate scandal from 2018, they are reporting on different aspects: Article A is a retrospective commentary on the events and their aftermath, while Article B covers the current situation of Australian cricketers returning to South Africa for a Test series with ongoing references to the past scandal.”
Al Jazeera
Hedges 2 of 55 claims Outlet record 60/100
“While both articles discuss the Sandpapergate scandal from 2018 and its impact on current events, they are not reporting on a single specific incident occurring at the same time and place.”
How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
67
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
1%
1 of 67 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
Leans strongly left
of the writing, not the subject · beta estimate
Publisher signals
61/100
The Sydney Morning Herald's corrections and hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.
Outlets on this story
1
Sports
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Analyzed 2026-10-08 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

The Sydney Morning Herald · 6052 article(s) · 15 correction(s) detected
Running correction rate · 15 correction(s)

Who wrote this

Darren Kane
2 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 And the exemption for a role’s inherent requirements wouldn’t assist, because singing isn’t an inherent requirement of playing rugby league.
🔮 They could’ve copped the sanction; admitted the charge but contested the severity before an independent Code of Conduct commissioner; or denied it and appealed. The sanctions were announced as settled fact before any commissioner had been appointed, let alone sitting in judgment.
Also by Darren Kane
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.

Topics

Australia Australian ICC Sandpaper-gate South Africa

Subjects

Smith PERSON · 5× Warner PERSON · 4× ICC ORG · 3× South Africa GPE · 3× Bancroft PERSON · 2× Australia GPE · 1× Australian NORP · 1× Cameron Bancroft PERSON · 1× Cricket Australia ORG · 1× David Warner’s PERSON · 1×

Narrative

The 34 Essendon players who sat out the 2016 AFL season after being found guilty of anti-doping rule violations copped a comparable penalty, but they got there via a full hearing before the code’s Anti-Doping Tribunal.
framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-10-08
🔮 They could’ve copped the sanction; admitted the charge but contested the severity before an independent Code of Conduct commissioner; or denied it and appealed. The sanctions were announced as settled fact before any commissioner had been appointed, let alone sitting in judgment.
2026-10-08 · The Sydney Morning Herald
Sandpapergate: The tough questions about who knew what that never got asked · assertive framing

Claims (67 extracted, 1 hedged)

Over the last fortnight, so many of us have been enthralled in a game of “Remember When” regarding a blizzard of rude recollections about the Sandpaper-gate events of 2018 in South Africa. asserted
many → enthral → Africa
Remember when, indeed … Australia’s Test team is back in South Africa this week, where that imbroglio kicked off eight years and seven months ago. asserted
imbroglio → remember → Africa
Back then, I wrote that the Australian players needed to lawyer-up and demand a fair hearing; such was the schemozzle of their head-spiking. asserted
schemozzle → write → spiking
A year later I opined that they’d been bashed up too hard. asserted
they → opine → ?
In 2022, I dared to write that David Warner’s lifetime leadership ban constituted moral policing ham-fistedly disguised as the metering-out of discipline. asserted
ban → dare → discipline
Nothing Cricket Australia (CA) has done since gives me the slightest inclination to deviate from these views. asserted
Australia → do → views
On the Saturday of the Cape Town Test, Cameron Bancroft was filmed comically shoving sandpaper into his underpants. asserted
Bancroft → film → underpants
The next day, CA’s then chief executive James Sutherland fronted the media, without consulting the captain, Steve Smith. asserted
executive → front → captain
By Tuesday, CA scrambled a two-man squad to arrive in South Africa, to investigate. asserted
CA → scramble → Africa
The probe was completed inside 100 hours. asserted
probe → complete → hours
Only selected witnesses had their chains rattled. asserted
chains → select → ?
By the following day, Smith and Warner had been handed 12-month bans from all cricket, Bancroft nine months. asserted
Bancroft → follow → cricket
Smith was barred from leadership roles for a further year. asserted
Smith → bar → year
Warner was banned from leading for life. asserted
Warner → ban → life
Within days, each had cried on camera, blubbering their scripted “messaging”. asserted
each → cry → messaging
Within a fortnight, they had accepted everything. asserted
they → accept → everything
Nobody appealed. asserted
Nobody → appeal → ?
Smith’s admissions were that he’d been party to a premeditated, orchestrated and juvenile plan to cheat. asserted
he → orchestrate → plan
You can’t remain captain after that. asserted
You → remain → that
Nobody has sensibly prosecuted the alternate case. asserted
Nobody → prosecute → case
None of the players were charged by CA with wilfully or unfairly changing the condition of the ball under law 41.3 of the Laws of Cricket. asserted
None → charge → Cricket
That’s the on-field offence, and the only body competent to prosecute it is the International Cricket Council. asserted
body → ’ → it
The ICC dealt with Bancroft under 41.3; he copped a small fine and some demerit points but no suspension. asserted
he → deal → fine
The ICC dealt with Smith for conduct contrary to the spirit of the game; he copped one Test match and his match fee. asserted
he → deal → match
That’s it. asserted
That → ’ → ?
Warner, supposedly the evil puppet master; the ICC didn’t touch him. asserted
ICC → touch → him
And the umpires didn’t even change the ball. asserted
umpires → change → ball
The sandpaper failed. asserted
sandpaper → fail → ?
CA instead reached for article 2.3.5 of its Code of Conduct for Players and Player Support Personnel. asserted
CA → reach → Players
That’s the archetypal catch-all: conduct contrary to the spirit of the game, unbecoming, harmful to the interests of cricket, blah blah asserted
That → ’ → cricket
Disrepute is of course an elastic concept; it stretches to fit whatever the outrage demands. asserted
outrage → stretch → whatever
The players weren’t banned for sandpapering a ball. asserted
players → ban → ball
They were banned for the embarrassment CA suffered when the calamitous scheme was detected, and for the fibbing that followed. asserted
that → ban → fibbing
They could’ve copped the sanction; admitted the charge but contested the severity before an independent Code of Conduct commissioner; or denied it and appealed. The sanctions were announced as settled fact before any commissioner had been appointed, let alone sitting in judgment. uncertain
commissioner → cop → judgment
Each player was frogmarched to a microphone by CA to make admissions, in harrowing circumstances, before any of them had so much as a phone call from a lawyer. asserted
any → frogmarch → lawyer
I’ve advised plenty of clients to run dead on questions from journalists for this reason; honest answers given under duress become legal potholes. asserted
answers → advise → duress
And then there’s the thing nobody at CA will utter aloud: selection of a national cricket team is discretionary. asserted
selection → ’ → team
A player who takes his employer to an independent hearing and succeeds in getting a reduced penalty must then present himself to that same employer for selection. asserted
who → take → selection
Warner and Smith didn’t appeal because they did the calculus: winning the battle meant being banished. asserted
winning → appeal → battle
A right you’re too frightened to exercise isn’t a right. asserted
you → ’re → ?
…and 27 more, not listed.
💬Give feedback · no sign-in needed

No sign-in needed for now. Your note is sent without a name, so it cannot be answered.

🕘History 🎫Support