Nuwan Zoysa ’’accepts’’ ICC ban

By Bipin Dani

Unlike Dilhara Lokuhettige, who has challenged the ICC tribunal's verdict on corruption charges and knocked the doors of the CAS (Court of Arbitration for Sports), Nuwan Zoysa will not move the court for his suspension. 

On Tuesday late night, the 42-year-old former left-arm medium pacer Nuwan Zoysa was banned by the ICC for six years on following charges.  

Article 2.1.1 – for being party to an agreement or effort to fix or contrive or otherwise influence improperly the result, progress, conduct or other aspect(s) of an International Match.

Article 2.1.4 – Directly or indirectly soliciting, inducing, enticing, instructing, persuading, encouraging or intentionally facilitating any Participant to breach Code Article 2.1.

Article 2.4.4 - Failing to disclose to the ACU full details of any approaches or invitations received to engage in corrupt conduct under the Code.

Speaking exclusively over the telephone from Colombo, Zoysa said, "no, I am not challenging this ban and respectfully accept the ICC verdict and the ban". 

"It (the ban) is back dated (31 October 2018). Half the (ban) period is over. Will cooperate with the ICC in all possible ways, attend its educational programs and will educate the young generation not to be involved in any corrupt activities".  

"Yes, coaching ambitions are there. Once the ban period is over, I will be able to do all cricket-related stuff. It is the game which I love most and will prepare young fast bowlers for the country", he added. 

Interestingly, one of the Tribunal Members, Simon Copleston had a Dissenting opinion (Michael J Beloff QC and The Honourable Justice Winston Anderson were the other members of the Tribunal) was of the opinion to impose ban for a lesser period, however, the majority survived. 

"In my view, Mr Zoysa’s period of ban should be suspended from either June 2021 or December 2021 and he should be permitted to resume his coaching activities and exercise the means he has available to him to support his family", the Tribunal Member had opined.