Vaughan, showing on the Cricket Discipline Commission (CDC) listening to in London, stated of the day in query that he had “a very clear mind about back in 2009” and that he knew he didn’t say what were alleged. He added that he would by no means have long gone directly to the sector and stated one thing to team-mates that might “put them in a bad state of mind” sooner than the sport.
“Knowing me in 2009, that’s not the sort of thing I would’ve said.”
Vaughan was once wondered by way of the ECB’s lead suggest Jane Mulcahy KC for almost 90 mins, all over which she argued that some historical tweets of his had been “remarkably similar in tone” to the alleged remarks.
Vaughan stated the tweets had been unacceptable and that he had apologised for them sooner than and would proceed to take action. But he disagreed with the advice that they had been identical in tone. Mulcahy identified that each Rafiq and Rashid claimed Vaughan most probably made the alleged remark as a “bad joke” and stated the tweet was once identical in tone as it was once “lighthearted but offensive”.
Asked if he agreed, Vaughan stated: “No.”
Vaughan stated he was once “disgusted” with the tweets. “I apologised for them. I put myself on an online course, Inclusion. I wanted to lead the game in knowing how to lead in modern times. The tweets are disgusting, awful, and other words you could use. But the most important thing is I have said sorry and I am learning from them. As I say, if I get things wrong in my life, I stick my hands up.”
He went again to his recollection of the day of the sport – which he has written about in his memoir – that he “could not have been more proud [of] four Asian players, three of whom had come through the system.”
Vaughan was once additionally wondered about his assembly with Rafiq in November 2021 announcing he felt the will for it as a result of “the whole situation was escalating out of control”. Vaughan stated he was once apologetic within the assembly with Rafiq as a result of he was once “disgusted” by way of what Rafiq needed to undergo at Yorkshire however didn’t settle for he made the alleged remark.
Vaughan: ‘Team-mates preventing it out horrible for recreation’
Vaughan stated that the CDC listening to was once a “terrible look” for cricket. “It’s not been easy for anybody. This is not the right process to deal with word-against-word comments from 14 years ago. Ex-team-mates fighting it out over hearsay is a terrible look for the game and a really bad look on how cricket has dealt with this situation.”
Earlier within the morning, scrutiny fell at the ECB’s scope within the investigation of the incident in addition to the rigour deployed, with Meena Botros, its director of felony and integrity, going through a three-hour grilling from Christopher Stoner, Vaughan’s legal professional.
The line of wondering took in a up to date interview with Lord Kamlesh Patel, the outgoing Yorkshire chair, in Eastern Eye. In it the declare was once made that the ECB had “urged” Lord Patel to “get rid of people” on the county when he took over. Talking about his function, Patel stated: “I was asked by the ECB to meet a set of criteria that most people would have winced at, would have thought there’s no way we can deliver this, and I delivered it.
“I used to be requested by way of the ECB to paintings with them to create a framework and an atmosphere the place we might end up to the sector that we would like a non-racist establishment, and I did all that. I used to be requested by way of the ECB to verify some individuals who had been there from the former regime didn’t participate in that governance procedure, very transparent about that.”
Stoner suggested those comments showed that the ECB was “actively concerned” in the Yorkshire investigation, in breach of the process as described in Botros’ witness statement, that the ECB remained independent of action being taken by one of its counties in such matters.
Botros said he couldn’t talk about what Lord Patel had said but insisted that Stoner was “mistaking” the ECB’s regulatory function in getting involved, from its other roles in such cases. Stoner pointed to Botros’s witness statement which read: “In its capability as a regulator, the ECB should stay unbiased of motion being taken by way of considered one of its member first class county golf equipment.”
“That’s simply no longer what came about, is it?” Stoner requested.
Botros responded: “It is what came about.”
Stoner then zeroed in on the day Vaughan is alleged to have made the remark, questioning whether the ECB could and should have gone further in its investigations of events. He confirmed with Botros that the only players the ECB had spoken to about the incident were Adil Rashid and Ajmal Shahzad.
Stoner asked why all Yorkshire players that day weren’t spoken to. Botros said the ECB “did talk to the folks the place we had been ready to” but that “sure folks both did not wish to participate or interact”, or that the ECB “were not ready” to get contact details for others.
Stoner also asked Botros why the on-field umpires that day had not been contacted by the ECB for their version of events.
“There isn’t any advice that the umpires had been shut sufficient to listen to it,” Botros replied. Botros added that if it was such an important point, Vaughan’s team could have taken it on themselves.
The listening to is scheduled to finish subsequent Tuesday.
Osman Samiuddin is a senior editor at ESPNcricinfo