Bermuda Cricket Board president Reggie Pearman has rejected criticism that his administration has been inconsistent and unjust in its dealings with disciplinary matters.

The issue came to the fore following publication of an anonymous letter in Sports Mailbox on September 4, the writer of which tore into Board officials, highlighting two specific incidents and accusing them of double standards.

The letter, which was signed simply `Richie', referred to an interview published in the Mid-Ocean News with this year's Cup Match MVP Saleem Mukuddem, in which the South African voiced a number of opinions on the state of local cricket.

The author brought up the case of Wendell White, who was suspended by the Board for talking to The Gazette on his return from the international tournament in Argentina last year.

"If Wendell White can be suspended for four matches for speaking to the press about the positive aspects of a concluded tour," the letter read, "then this guy needs to be suspended for eight matches."

The writer went on: "I am utterly amazed at how the cricket fraternity can sit back and allow such injustices to take place. It boggles the mind."

However, Pearman did not accept these sentiments, arguing that although he had not seen the comments made by Mukuddem, the two cases did not warrant the same disciplinary process.

"When players go away on tours representing Bermuda they are required to sign a contract stating that they will not make any comments to the press, positive or negative, unless they have been authorised by the Board," he explained.

Pearman pointed out that players at a club level were not bound by any contract of this kind, but rather by the official Code of Conduct for local cricket which is distributed to clubs at the start of every new season.

Section Eight of this document does not specifically forbid players talking to the press but states that the Board's disciplinary committee reserves the right to review any comments made and punish any player who, in their eyes, has brought the game into disrepute.

"We take each case on its merits," insisted Pearman.

BCB treasurer Neil Speight was keen to back up the president's argument and poured scorn on the accusation that the Board had been inconsistent in the past.

"The two incidents the letter refers to are two entirely different issues and are dealt with in separate ways," he said.

"At a club level there is a code of conduct which all clubs should have access to and it is quite clear what the procedure is. Obviously it is very difficult to set down in black and white what does and what does not constitute `bringing the game into disrepute.'

"But that is why we have a disciplinary committee which in my opinion has been entirely fair."

All this, however, contradicts what The Royal Gazette was told by a Board insider in May of this year, who was present at a meeting in which Pearman, fearful that public criticism of the Board's activities was undermining attempts to secure sponsorship from the corporate sector, reportedly voiced the opinion that all cricketers in Bermuda should be prevented from talking to the press.

"They do not want anyone talking to the press - no matter at what level," the Board insider was quoted as saying.