Coroner Clears Everyone In The Death Of Phillip Hughes But Still Lays Boot Into Cricket

It was supposed to be an inquest into the tragic death of Australian batsman Phillip Hughes during a Sheffield Shield state cricket match, but the game of cricket itself ended up on trial. And the findings were damning.

Two years after Hughes died, when a bouncer struck him in the head while batting for South Australia, Coroner Michael Barnes released his findings, declaring it a "tragic accident" before clearing everyone involved.

The inquest sought to find out whether players on the field had strayed outside 'the spirit of the game,' by either viciously sledging Hughes or bowling too many dangerous deliveries at his head. If so it would have meant the laws of cricket had been broken, which in turn promised severe legal ramifications for the players and officials involved.

"Some bereaved families derive comfort from knowing their loved one died doing something he or she particularly enjoyed; that in their last conscious moments they were engaged in an activity that gave them great joy or satisfaction. For the survivors the dead person is still gone and just as unreachable but this altruistic perspective of a fatality focuses on the pleasure of the departed rather than the pain of the grieving. Phillip Hughes' family members were denied that solace because they believed he died unnecessarily as a result of of his colleagues, his cricketing mates, treating him unfairly and the umpires failing to protect him by enforcing the laws of the game," began Coroner Barnes.

Hughes was playing for South Australia in the Sheffield Shield state competition against NSW when a Sean Abbott bouncer struck him in the back of the head and neck. He died two days later in hospital. Hughes knew several of his opponents from national duties and having played at various levels of the game. It was alleged he was the subject of vicious sledging during the day's play, including a threat from NSW fast bowler Doug Bollinger (who did not bowl the fatal delivery) that he was going to "kill" Hughes.

"That was denied by the bowler in question and the batting partner but there was other evidence contradicting those denials and supporting the family's claims," said Coroner Barnes.

After considering evidence from the presiding umpires, Phillip's batting partner, and other players on the field at the relevant times it was concluded, "Phillip appeared comfortable, relaxed and in control in the session of play after lunch when the threats were allegedly made," said Barnes.

"That suggested that even if the threats were made they did not affect Phillip's composure so as to undermine his capacity to defend himself against short pitched high bouncing bowling, and so the threats couldn't not be implicated in his death. On that basis no finding is made as to whether the sledging alleged actually occurred."

Coroner Barnes did not let the game of cricket off the hook, however. In his finding Coroner Barnes explained: "Sledging is a term used to describe humorous, insulting or threatening remarks directed at a batsmen or spoken in his or her hearing with a view to intimidate the batsmen or break his or her concentration.

"It is very common. Indeed one experienced player said it had occurred in every high level game he had played in except for the one he participated in the weekend after Phillp's death."

"The repeated denials of any sledging having occurred in the game in which Phillip Hughes was injured were difficult to accept," he said, in a reference to Australian Test Batsmen, David Warner's testimony during the inquest that Hughes "wasn't sledged at all" during the day he was fatally struck, and that hard-to-take-seriously line that he wasn't aware of any sledging whatsoever in Sheffield Shield cricket.

Coroner Barnes went onto question the role of sledging in cricket and ask those responsible to have a good, hard look at themselves.

"Hopefully the focus on this unsavoury aspect of the incident may cause those who claim to love the game to reflect on whether the practice of sledging is worthy of its participants.

"An outsider is left to wonder why such a beautiful game would need such an ugly underside," he said, also lamenting the role of commercial interests in undermining the integrity of the game.

"Throughout its long history fair play has been paramount in the game so much so that in the vernacular, 'it's just not cricket' is still used to describe something that is unjust or improper."

"With the increased commercialisation and very lucrative contracts dependent on individual performances it is perhaps inevitable that these honourable qualities would fray," he said.

During the course of play Hughes was targeted by 20 of the 23 bouncers bowled on the day (in which a bowler digs the ball in halfway down the pitch in an attempt to lift it in the direction of the batsman's head and neck). But again the Coroner found no evidence to suggest the game's rules had been contravened.

"In view of evidence of the other players, the presiding umpires and (expert umpire) Mr Taufel that Phillip was, because of his very high level of skill and competence, comfortably dealing with his short pitched balls, I conclude no failure to enforce the rules of the game contributed to his death," he said.

Coroner Barnes also found that despite the bungled emergency medical response to Hughes' injury no one was directly at fault and that ultimately nothing could have saved Hughes' life.

"None of those on the field at the time of the incident knew how to summon medical assistance onto the field. Although it was immediately obvious Phillip was seriously injured it was not clear whose responsibility it was to call an ambulance. An ambulance was not called for over six minutes after he was hit, the person who called the ambulance did not have sufficient information to enable an accurate triage to be made by the ambulance dispatcher. As a result the ambulance response was given a lower order of urgency than it would have been given had the relevant information about Phillips condition been relayed," he said.

According to expert medical evidence, however, "Phillip's life could not have been saved by a better response to his being injured, however, in other circumstances a life could unnecessarily be lost if the emergency response was not improved," said Coroner Barnes.