An absolute joke. I'm afraid that is the only way I can describe the ECB's verdict on the Steve Kirby ball tampering case.

He has been found guilty on two counts of attempting to tamper with the condition of the ball, yet as far as I can see there is no punishment.

He has been banned from three days cricket, but it is suspended until the end of the season, so that will not mean anything. If he is caught again - which I will be amazed if he is now -- there will have to be another hearing and I would hope something much more severe would be handed out.

Oh, and there is a fine of £125 to cover the costs of the hearing. By all accounts, the ridiculous money Kirby is on (for a bowler who has not played for England and does not even play one-day cricket) will not be too dented by that.

What annoyed me most about the decision of the panel was they said the leniency of their verdict was down to the fact that the condition of the ball had not changed markedly. But surely the intent was there. John Derrick (and a couple of other people including the car park attendant) saw him scuffing the ball on the concrete. Kirby was trying to alter the condition of the ball, but failed.

He is a bad ball-tamperer, that is all. But it does not mean that he should get off scot-free. In my opinion he should have been banned for at least one championship match, and Gloucestershire should have been docked some championship points.

But this was no surprise. As soon as I heard about it, I suggested that nothing would come of it, and sadly I have been proved right.

If Surrey were only docked eight championship points for that blatant ball-tampering then there was no way that the ECB were going to deliver a suitable punishment on this. Kirby is a very lucky man, and I can't wait to watch the next time he plays against Glamorgan - that should be interesting, given that the match in question at Cardiff earlier in the season was pretty spicy anyway.

At least Glamorgan can be happy they have halted their woeful slide of five successive championship defeats. Playing at Swansea usually brings succour of some kind, and a draw against Sussex must have seemed like a win.

I watched the final day of that and was really pleased for Dan Cherry, who at last made the sort of score he has been promising for some time.

It was a shame he could not go on to a century but hopefully he can build on that and make the opening spot his own now.

He had made a first innings duck and took 25 balls in the second innings to avoid the dreaded pair but thereafter looked composed and well-organised.

Mind you, it was a flat pitch and it made me wonder how on earth Glamorgan had been bowled out so cheaply in the first innings. Once they were made to follow-on on that final morning I feared the worst, but Cherry and Matthew Elliott soon dispelled those fears with an opening partnership of 214.

Elliott batted brilliantly, as he so often does, and will have helped Cherry enormously. I used to love batting with Elliott (the odd run out aside) and I'm sure Cherry is the same.

When your partner is smashing the ball to all parts then that can only be good, because it takes the pressure off.

Sourav Ganguly made a debut duck but at least he lasted three balls, as compared to the first-baller he endured on his Lancashire debut.

But from what I have heard he is keen and is making a real effort to fit into the Glamorgan dressing room .

It was a shame about the rain ruining Sunday's match against Nottinghamshire, because they have lost their first five matches in the totesport League, so Glamorgan would have fancied their chances.

They have now lost three games to the weather, which is a very high figure in any season. But a quick glance at the table shows that all is not yet lost.

To me there is no outstanding side in the competition and certainly no-one whom Glamorgan should fear. Another decent performance in the championship against Kent this week might just mean that things are looking up a bit for the beleaguered Welsh county.