There can be no argument against the penalty imposed on Harbhajan Singh for slapping S Sreesanth. If anything, you could argue that Sreesanth had not heeded the Mumbai Indians’ captain’s warning not to sledge any of his team-mates and so should have been hauled up as well. But that does not mean he could take the law into his own hands and slap the Kings XI Punjab bowler at the end of the game when handshakes were being exchanged.

Indeed, no matter how grave the provocation and no matter what their stature, cricketers must remember that this is a non-contact sport. And that cricketers are, whether they like it or not, role models and expected never to cross the line of acceptable behaviour.

When they do, they become worthy of being given exemplary punishment. The BCCI had a precedent to fall back upon, having banned West Zone and Baroda fast bowler Rashid Patel for 13 months and North Zone and Delhi opener Raman Lamba for 10 months in 1991-92 for being part of an unseemly incident in the Duleep Trophy final in Jamshedpur.

Lest you should believe that this is a personal attack on Harbhajan, my approach is not based on an individual but on a fundamental issue. He deserved all the backing when he was involved in his run-in with Andrew Symonds and Matthew Hayden as well as match referee Mike Procter during and after the Sydney Test earlier this year. I respect Harbhajan’s gifts with the cricket ball –– and the willow, for good measure –– and his aggressive temperament as well, but he must ensure that the focus stays on his skills.

There are some things to be considered here. At no time before, during or after the hearing did the Mumbai Indians choose to file an appeal against the suspension that match referee Farokh Engineer ordered on watching the video footage.

And, after Engineer announced the suspension of the off-spinner from the rest of the IPL season, a remorseful Harbhajan came through with a confession before the media that he had committed a big mistake.

I am hoping that the BCCI does not toe the line of some who are suggesting that it cannot penalise Harabhajan –– or, for that matter, Sreesanth –– since the case has been dealt with by IPL. He has flouted the contract that he signed with BCCI and the Board will be within its right to enforce disciplinary action of its own. We have had instances of BCCI panels being nothing more than cover up operations and my mind goes back to the Chandrachud Commission that concluded that match-fixing was only a figment of fertile imagination.

Punjab Cricket Association President I S Bindra has been talking about how he had been counselling or warning Harbhajan Singh even in the wake of the incidents in Australia, but what the champion off-spinner perhaps needs is professional counselling in anger management.

If the Board had recognised this early in his career, things may not have come to such a pass. Back in the year 2000, National Cricket Academy Director Hanumant Singh expelled the young off-spinner from the academy for indiscipline and then was involved in a scuffle with a Guwahati policeman in 2002.

I believe that the BCCI is bound in its duty to provide Harbhajan expert help when he cools his heels during the rest of the IPL. And if it can achieve that, it will have ensured that the off-spinner will be able to channelise all his energies into his craft of causing confusion in the minds of the opposition batsmen. It will thus ensure that his career as an international cricketer runs its full course.

(The writer is the Sports Editor, Samay, Sahara India TV network)