Not fair to fine Warne USD 50,000 for speaking his mind

So what level of punishment does the BCCI envision for a serious cricketing crime? For instance, what would the use of performance enhancing drugs or physical violence on the field bring in the way of punishment?

A mere life imprisonment perhaps? Or maybe a leisurely month long inquisition at Abu Ghraib? Or if really drastic measures are called for, would they consider dusting off the guillotine?u00a0

Seriously, a USD 50,000 fine for Shane Warne speaking his mind, does seem a bit on the high side. When I heard the severity of the sentence I thought; "Here's a Monty Python sketch in the making."

There's no doubt Warne can pay the fine, so the problem is not with him having to part with fifty grand; although he'd probably prefer to drop it at the nearest casino where he'd at least have a chance of a win. The dilemma for the officials will occur when a serious offence is committed in the future by a young player who is not highly paid.

Because the IPL is a lot like India itself - there are the have lots and the have nots - it's difficult to mete out even-handed fines. When player contracts vary between USD 2 million and twenty thousand a year, it's difficult for the commissioners to treat each offence equally. I guess this is where a stiff suspension rather than a fine becomes the ally of the officials.

Nevertheless, USD 50,000 for Warne speaking his mind does seem a bit rich. Especially when, except in rare cases, in any animated discussion on the game between a cricketer and an administrator, the player will be the closest to reality.

Sure, Warne could have kept his conversation with Mr Dixit private. That way it should have remained a matter for the two people concerned to resolve. However, my experience tells me that in these cases - a high profile player and a backroom boy - the latter likes to flex his muscles and have his fifteen minutes of fame.

There's also the not-so-minor matter of Warne playing his last ever, competitive match. The public were not going to be thrilled, never mind the Mumbai Indians, if Warne wasn't available to match wits with Sachin Tendulkar one last time. It could have ruined a potential monster gate.

So the officials knew it would be a mistake to suspend Warne for his transgression; that left them with only one option, a fine.

They probably felt they had to be seen to be hard on Warne; sporting officials have this distinct distaste for personal criticism from players never mind a public haranguing.

The problem the BCCI has created is one of precedence. The next time a serious offence is committed and trust me it'll happen, Warne's is the fine on which the punishment for the new violation will be judged.

A devil's advocate might say Warne's fine being so steep will deter potential future offenders.

That's not the way it works. In the heat of the moment something is said or done and in the aftermath, no matter how much the offender wishes he could do it differently, the act has been committed.

If the death penalty doesn't deter potential murderers then I don't like the chances of a steep fine making a highly competitive cricketer think twice before he speaks or acts.

Therein may lie the saving grace for the officials. It's usually only highly competitive players who get themselves into such a state that something offensive is said in the heat of the moment. And it's usually only those same highly competitive players who attain the lofty salary status.

Take Gautam Gambhir as an example. He's shown himself to be vulnerable to the odd bout of anger but as the highest paid player in this year's IPL he'll be able to afford a steep fine if he transgresses.

Heaven knows there are a number of players in the IPL who are not worth the lucrative contracts they signed and they should have to return some of their "earnings" at the end of the season. However, Warne is not one of those players and in his case the punishment didn't fit the crime.