An appeal against a four-month suspension imposed by Bermuda Cricket Board (BCB) upon Warwick batsman Dion Stovell has been rejected, has learned.

When contacted yesterday BCB president Reggie Pearman confirmed the initial ban would remain in force, claiming the player?s appeal had exceeded the BCB statute of limitations for players seeking to appeal against punishments.

Stovell landed himself in hot water with the Board for an incident that occurred while he was representing Bermuda in Jamaica over the summer.

After being given out for a catch behind, Stovell gestured to the umpire with his finger claiming the ball had come off his helmet, and momentarily stood his ground.

The player immediately received a one-match ban on tour, which was served, but was then given an additional four-month suspension from the BCB for an offence which, according to the International Cricket Council?s (ICC) official Code of Conduct, only demands a reprimand or in the case of professionals a fine of up to 50 percent of the match fee.

West Indies skipper Brian Lara was fined half of his match fee after committing the same offence as Stovell during this summer?s Test series against England in the Caribbean.

There are also those within the local cricket fraternity who claim Warwick Workmen?s Club chief Gary Fray, who is head of the BCB disciplinary committee, should not have presided over Stovell?s case as his involvement constituted a direct conflict of interests.

Stovell was in the process of transferring to nearby Southampton Rangers when the case was heard.

Contacted yesterday, an angry Fray said: ?Don?t call me for nothing because I am not going to tell you anything, so get your information from somebody else ? and you can print that!

?And I?m serious . . . don?t you guys ever call me for anything because I?m not going to give you nothing!?

BCB chief Pearman was slightly more forthcoming.

?His (Stovell) appeal was late initially and he had one week to appeal and he appealed late,? said Pearman. ?So we consider the matter closed.?

However, the latest revelation drew heavy criticism from Stovell?s lawyer, Charles Richardson, who lashed out over the Board?s handling of the matter.

And Richardson implied that Stovell?s case could possibly go before the Supreme Court.

?Because of the legal relationship between the clubs (affiliates) and the BCB and at the centre of that relationship is the BCB constitution, there is the potential that this matter could be adjudicated in the Supreme Court on an application for a judicial review. And Dion has taken up the matter under advisement,? said Richardson, himself a well-known cricketer speaking in a professional capacity.

?Is this (Stovell?s ban) really in the best interests of the sport or the country? The stakes are way too high and I think every cricketer in this country has to stand up and say, ?I?ve damn well had enough!?

?I can see if Dion had thrown a stump at the umpire or smacked somebody but he only pointed to his helmet and then walked off.

?He is an amateur cricketer who plays the game for the love of the game and for no other reason. Local cricketers have children, families and other responsibilities to be held to such a high and rigid standard. And if anything is going to be held accountable for the death of the game in Bermuda . . . then it will be attitudes like this.?

Richardson contended Stovell had received a summons from the BCB to appear before the disciplinary committee late.

He said: ?My instructions were the letter did not arrive expeditiously and that upon receiving it Dion immediately took steps to consult ? as any teenager with limited experience would ? with first his parents and then he sought to take legal advice from us.

?Once he did he was then advised that perhaps he should go ahead and lodge an appeal. The first thing he wanted to determine was whether the punishment he was awarded was in line with similar punishments for similar infractions as far as ICC standards are concerned and it was determined that they were in fact not.

?The next move was to write to the BCB and explain to them Dion had not received the correspondence expeditiously and also that he wanted to take legal advice prior to embarking upon an ordeal. And once he decided to, I then contacted Gary Fray and he very rudely explained to me that I had to write a letter asking for an extension of time in which to appeal ? which was done.

?ICC records that are kept of punishments that are handed out demonstrate that professional players, who are held to a far higher standard, had never received anything even approaching being prevented from engaging in the sport they love so much for such a long period of time.

?And the thing that flabbergasts me is that the BCB have considered the matter closed when so much is now at stake and so much time is left in which to review this decision.

?It sounds like administration inflexibility that provides fertile ground for a revolution of those players who have become increasingly dissatisfied with the manner in which the BCB discharge their functions.?

Richardson also implied that Fray?s involvement in Stovell?s case fell along the lines of a personal vendetta.

?All of these questions lead me to conclude that there is another motive at work here,? he charged. ?If you took an objective man and told him about the connection with Gary Fray and Dion and the club (Warwick) and then revealed to him the nature of the punishment and also showed that same objective man punishments that have been handed out in the past . . . inevitably he would probably say something like ?surely this can?t be right?. Surely somebody has something against this young man.

?So those who say that there is no bias at work here and that the BCB are being even handed and fair. . . show me the even handiness and fairness in this situation.?