Mitchell Johnson gets sacked by Cricket Australia over controversial statements on David Warner

The Australian cricket team is on a roll with a great Test victory against Pakistan that has given them an early lead in the series. One of the major stars of the game was David Warner, who set the tone with an amazing century in the first innings with a great beginning to his final test series. However, there is still some controversy in the air by which Cricket Australia(CA) has taken direct action. Ex- Ex-Australia pacer Mitchell Johnson released one of the most controversial articles which led to him being sacked by CA from speaking at public functions.

The column released from the former cricketer had scathing remarks on David Warner who has given great performances for his team for a long time. These remarks are the reason why he was banned from speaking at the functions at Perth. This way Johnson has ruined his reputation which was big due to his phenomenal career as one of the best fast bowlers in the world for Australia. This has put him in a bad light already in the cricketing world.

What were the remarks and why was he sacked?

The statement that has caused a lot of problems is Johnson not agreeing with a hero send-off for Warner due to the Sandpaper scandal. This was one topic which no Australian would want to remember since it brought shame to the Australian cricketers for years. Johnson was straight away sacked by CA since the statements brought a negative insight on the Australia team and he will not be speaking at any of the special functions at Perth. One of the spokesman of CA gave a brief explanation on sacking him saying “Mitchell is one of Australia’s most celebrated bowlers, but we felt on this occasion it was in everyone’s best interests that he was not the guest speaker at the CA functions”.

Johnson was also supposed to speak on a radio platform as well but seemed to be replaced after the following column and statements as well. The Cricketer went on the podcast and gave his view on why his statements were valid saying “There is one thing I wasn’t that happy with. “I didn’t notice it at the time. I was reading the article and just sort of went with it. The “Bunnings” and the “sandpaper” part of it. Probably distasteful. That was probably something that didn’t need to be said. The reason that (the sandpaper scandal) came up is that I just don’t look at statistics. I look at the whole picture. And I’m not trying to bring up those old things. But someone to get a farewell and to be in that position that he was and what they did back then, that didn’t quite sit right with me, that’s why I brought it up.”