After Ben Stokes was found not guilty of affray, the ECB confirmed that the matter, including Stokes and teammate Alex Hales’ involvement in it, is to be considered in a disciplinary process by the Cricket Discipline Commission (CDC)
Ben Stokes will now face a disciplinary hearing from the CDC
The verdict is in but what happens next?
After Ben Stokes was found not guilty of affray at Bristol Crown Court, the ECB confirmed that both Stokes and England teammate Alex Hales’ involvement in a street altercation in Bristol last year, is to be looked at by the Cricket Discipline Commission (CDC).
So, what is the CDC’s role exactly? And what punishments might they dish out?
Yes. It has already been announced that Stokes is available for selection for the third Test against India that starts on Saturday.
Following the incident last September, Ben Stokes and Alex Hales were both referred to the CDC by Andrew Strauss, Director of England Cricket, for potentially breaching the ECB’s Rules, Regulations and Directives.
Alex Hales is also set to have his case considered
The CDC is an independent body, which works alongside the ECB, responsible for maintaining all aspects of cricket discipline.
Tim O’Gorman, a former Derbyshire cricketer and qualified solicitor, is the current chairman after being appointed in 2016. His role is to appoint panels to hear cases referred by the ECB.
The panel will allow both the ECB and the players’ legal representatives time to prepare their cases and review evidence submitted during the Crown Court hearing.
STOKES FOUND NOT GUILTY OF AFFRAY
The CDC schedules its own hearings and convenes its own disciplinary panels and these are determined after the conclusion of criminal proceedings.
The CDC has several penalties open to it. These include; a caution regarding future conduct, a reprimand, a fine without limit, suspension from playing in any matches or for a fixed period, suspension from playing in any England matches or for a fixed period, suspension (for any period) or termination.
Following CDC rulings there are grounds for an appeal and this is an established part of the CDC process. The Regulations set out the grounds for appeal.
Posted by David Rimmer on 16/08/2018 at 10:42
Irrespective of the judgement in the Ben Stokes case, it is still irritating that the Sun got away with a Contempt of Court. When somebody has committed an alleged offence and it is likely that the case is going to court no media outlet should print or publish anything (in any form) that might prejudice a fair trial. Nothing should, by my understanding of the law, be published until the case is over. Releasing a video [via the Sun’s website], that showed part of the altercation that Stokes was involved in, was a clear breach of that. The Sun will not mind as their readership is not the mot discriminating or educated. I cannot recall if the BBC or any other broadcasting outlet showed it on the news, but if they did, they are also guilty. The general public will be oblivious about this and will judge it on what they saw and their own prejudices (i.e Stokes earns a lot of money, he needs to be brought down to size or it is disgraceful an international sport person behaves like this etc, etc]. They will then say this Contempt does not matter as Stokes was found not guilty _ an “all’s well that ends well, blah, blah, blah” attitude. However, for me and others who are aware of this principle or law, it does matter. This sounds arrogant but our opinion is just as valid if not more so.