STEVE Smith’s career is it a crossroads as the Australian cricket captain finds himself at the centre of the team’s ball-tampering scandal in South Africa.

Smith told a press conference that he and the leadership group were aware of Cameron Bancroft’s plan to manipulate the ball with sandpaper during the third Test in Cape Town, which Australia lost.

But while Smith appeared to take responsibility for being one of the co-conspirators of the plot, doubts have begun to emerge about the true level of his involvement and the authenticity of his version of events.

LISTEN: ‘This has been happening for a long time’ - Brett Geeves on The Splash

Australian cricketer Moises Henriques, a long-time teammate of Smith, first floated the theory that Smith decided to take the heat for Bancroft during “10 minutes of panic” between the end of play and the press conference.

Henriques “highly doubts” there was a senior players’ meeting to discuss the cheating plot and instead Smith’s version of events was the result of a “captain attempting to protect a young player”.

In my uneducated opinion, I dare say there was never a senior players meeting to discuss cheating - Smith made that up to take the heat of a young Cameron Bancroft not realising the outrage that would follow. — Moises Henriques (@Mozzie21) March 26, 2018

Ps. Not saying no one was aware of Cameron doing it, just highly doubt there was a ‘senior players meeting’ to decide to cheat. I think it was the captain attempting to protect a young player. They had 10 mins of panic between end of play & press conference. — Moises Henriques (@Mozzie21) March 26, 2018

Bancroft, 25, has played eight Tests for Australia.

Looking back at Smith’s press conference through this lens, there are signs that give weight to Henriques’ theory.

While Smith does take responsibility for the scandal, he repeatedly does so “as captain” of the team -- and in the same breath as the leadership group.

He also appears genuinely caught off guard when asked if he’d been in touch with Cricket Australia boss James Sutherland because he’d “literally just come off the field and just been made aware by the match referee”.

Then there are those five telltale words with which Smith begins the press conference: “Do you want to explain?”

The immediate reaction to Smith handing over to Bancroft has been one savaging Smith’s leadership. But if Henriques’ theory is true -- perhaps it’s a case of Smith telling Bancroft that, while he’ll take the wrap for him, he’s got to front up and explain himself first.

Perhaps Smith handed over to Bancroft because he genuinely didn’t know the full details of the plot himself until that point.

Smith has taken the heat for handing over to Bancroft to begin the press conference. But maybe he didn’t know the full extent of what had transpired? Source: AFP

Then there are Smith’s assurances that this wouldn’t happen again “under my leadership I can promise you”.

It comes across as an emphatic statement about his values as the Australian captain and how this incident clearly undermines those values.

Again, while Smith does refer to himself specifically in apportioning the blame for the incident, it almost always comes within context broader leadership group. He refers to “our actions”. That could be interpreted as Smith simply expressing his personal disappointment in what unfolded under his captaincy -- if Henriques’ version of events is to be believed.

At one stage Smith says “I feel for Cam”.

It’s impossible to tell whether Smith feels responsible for personally leading Bancroft astray, or whether he feels it’s a failing of his captaincy to not protect Bancroft -- either from the influences of others or his own misguided plans.

But here might be the crucial line.

When Smith is asked whether he’d consider stepping down he strongly pushes back, and while he accepts that the incident was a “big mistake on my behalf and the leadership group’s behalf”, what he says next is telling.

“I take responsibility as the captain, I need to take control of the ship.”

Smith takes responsibility. As captain. Smith is acknowledging that one way or the other -- whether he was involved, knew about it or was simply protecting his young batsman -- the buck stops with him.

Whether Steve Smith knew or didn’t know about the ball tampering plan, he must still accept responsibility for the actions of his teammates. Source: News Corp Australia

This may be the key takeaway in all of this.

Did Smith know? Did Lehmann know? Who ordered the ball to be tampered with? Who heard about it and said nothing?

Ultimately, any poor action from a player or group or players within the Australian cricket team is a reflection on that team’s leadership.

That is, Steve Smith and Darren Lehmann.

What follows during Cricket Australia’s investigation will surely put much of this uncertainty to rest but what’s certain for now is that Smith and Lehmann’s reputations as leaders of the Australian cricket team are forever tarnished -- whether they knew everything, or nothing at all.