• Day two began two hours later than scheduled, starting with Michael Vaughan's lawyer, Christopher Stoner KC, outlining his client's defence and reiterting that Vaughan denies the allegation made against him. Stoner says Rafiq's recollection of events cannot be relied on.
• Adil Rashid appeared via video link from Bangladesh and confirmed he had heard the alleged comment from Vaughan, though believes the former England captain is not a racist and it was a "poor attempt at humour".
• Rashid denied being pressurised into corroborating his "close friend" Rafiq's allegation against Vaughan.
• Rashid also denied deleting WhatsApp messages between him and Rafiq regarding the Vaughan allegation.
• Rafiq was cross-examined and stood by his account of the 2009 "you lot" comment by Vaughan, but accepted there were some mistakes in his evidence.
• Rafiq said he wishes he'd had the courage to speak up earlier, adding he carries the "mental scars".
• Vaughan did not appear in proceedings as expected and looks set to give evidence on Friday.

Stoner has concluded his cross-examination and there ends Rafiq's involvement today.

Day two of the hearing has finished.

Stoner returns to Shahzad's ECB interview and reads part where Shahzad says Rafiq is a "prickly character" and there is "no way in hell" he wouldn't have spoken up if someone said something to him that he was upset or offended by.

Stoner suggests that Shahzad is right and that Rafiq is the sort of person who would've spoken up.

Rafiq: "In a way I wish now that I had had that courage to say it at the time.

"Maybe I wouldn't be here now.

"I carry the mental scars. Anyone who has ever spoken out the way I have will know how that feels.

"It's disappointing to read this from Shahzad. I wish he was here.

"I wish I had the courage to have done it earlier."

Stoner posits that "on matters such as words which were said so many years ago, it is difficult to recall specific details of things that happened".

Rafiq replies: "It depends how much it matters to you. Sat here, it matters and it has mattered." He adds that over the last three years it has been "used to destroy my life - it does matter."

Stoner says that it mattered "but not in the way you raised" until 11 years later.

Rafiq: "Imagine raising it at the time? Where my life would be now?"

Rafiq adds that he raised it "when I had enough courage to raise it and what I feared is exactly what happened".

Stoner reads out the ECB interview with former Yorkshire and England bowler Ajmal Shahzad in which he says there is "every chance" that him or Rash [Adil Rashid] would've said "you lot" about a group of English players.

Stoner asks whether the use of the term "you lot" was so "normalised" at Yorkshire that it was also used by Asian players towards English players.

Rafiq says he doesn't agree but that he "can't talk" for Shahzad, adding "we could've understood it more" if Shahzad was taking part in these proceedings.

Stoner refers Rafiq to a document in which the 'you lot' phrase is discussed.

He asks Rafiq if he accepts the phrase is "totally innocent" unless it is directed at people because of their skin colour, race or other identification.

"If it recognises certain people together, it's definitely not innocent," Rafiq says.

Stoner brings up a hypothetical situation in which in a team meeting, 'you lot' was used towards a group of bowlers.

Rafiq concedes that the use of this phrase in such a scenario would be innocent.

Stoner then asks Rafiq to confirm that his allegation is that the phrase was said towards a group of Asian players, which is the "key differentiator" to the previous "innocent example". Rafiq confirms that is correct.

Rafiq is then asked that given the term was used widely at Yorkshire, is he disappointed more people haven't been held to account.

Rafiq says he can only talk about "what he remembers clearly and that was what Michael Vaughan said".

"The rest is not in my control. All I've tried to do is talk about my experiences."

Stoner says that Rafiq "categorically denies" he has leaked any documents but asks if he was told about any of the charges in this case before they became public.

"I can't remember exactly when I was told," replies Rafiq. He adds he knew there was going to be charges but didn't know when that was.

Stoner: "Were you told detail of the charges before they were made to various people charged?"

Rafiq: "I can't recall exactly what it was or when it was."

Stoner asks if Rafiq is aware that the details of the charge against Vaughan were made public by journalist George Dobell before Vaughan was actually charged.

Rafiq: "I saw the public article just like everyone else did. I was at an event, I came out and I saw it."

Stoner notes Dobell has been a friend and supportive to Rafiq throughout.

Rafiq: "He's been what a true ally should be. Hopefully people can take example from that."

Stoner: "You must've have had many communications with him?"

Rafiq: "We speak a lot."

Stoner asks if they use email or WhatsApp.

Rafiq says they use a "vast range" of communications but "generally" speak on the phone.

Stoner asks if there are any messages in writing between Rafiq and Dobell about the allegation against Vaughan.

Rafiq says he was asked to check his phone, did a search and "nothing was found".

Stoner asks if Rafiq would accept that his recollection of some past events has not been good and has changed over time?

"No I don't agree with that," Rafiq replies.

A very short break, it turns out.

The cross-examination of Rafiq continues.

The hearing is taking a short break before resuming.

Stoner turns to a Guardian article where then Yorkshire chief executive Stewart Regan says "the buck stops with me" over the incident and that Yorkshire failed to correctly register Rafiq.

Rafiq responds by reiterating that there were a lot of articles from Yorkshire where he felt he was being scapegoated and adds that he feels while Regan initally says that Rafiq isn't to blame, he then "blames me anyway".

Rafiq is now shown his corrected statement to Squire Patton Boggs.

It refers to the incident surrounding Rafiq's 2008 debut for Yorkshire and the controversy surrounding his passport. Yorkshire's T20 Cup quarter-final against Durham was called off minutes before the start after it was alleged Rafiq was ineligible to play. Rafiq says the fact he did not have a British passport became the "root cause" for the game being abandoned, and that he was "scapegoated" by Yorkshire even though it was their "administrative error".

Rafiq says: "There were several statements put out, one by Martyn Moxon, rasing doubt as to whether I should be in the country.

"There were a lot of articles at the time, lots of interviews by Yorkshire leadership, trying to make out I was a last minute descision, which was incorrect.

"Again, questions were raised if I should be in the country and whether I was an illegal immigrant.

"The suggestion was that I wasn't clear and honest about my visa status. When you sign on at Yorkshire, one of the first things you provide is ID, that was my Pakistani passport, so to suggest it all came out of the blue was why i felt scapegoated."

Stoner points out that Yorkshire accepted responsiblity for that. Rafiq says he does not agree.

Stoner now moves to evidence Rafiq gave to the DCMS select committee hearing and asks about a phrase "you lot sit over there near the toilets" he alleged was used at Yorkshire.

Stoner posits that "near the toilets" being added makes the statement "much more unpleasant" and is asking about whether that was said or whether it was "you lot sit over there".

Rafiq says he think "you lot sit over there" is the main thing but that whether "near the toilets" was said or someone pointed to the toilets is, in his view, "the same thing".

Stoner points out Rafiq later stating he wished to correct his evidence as it "could be interpreted" as alleging "near the toilets" was said.

Rafiq: "I talked about what was said."

Stoner points out this line was picked up by the media after the DCMS select committee hearing.

Rafiq: "I don't recollect much after coming out of that room.

"The next few days were a whirlwind and then the abuse started. I'm not sure what was reported over those few days."

BBC Sport: What we learned from DCMS select committee hearing into racism at Yorkshire

This is the BBC interview being referred to in the entry at 4:29pm - where Michael Vaughan spoke to then-BBC Breakfast presenter Dan Walker.

Read more here

In the interview, Vaughan continued to deny the claim against him and said he never made racist comments while at Yorkshire.

But he admitted his regret at some tweets he had sent in the past.

"It hurts deeply, hurts me that a player has gone through so much be treated so badly at the club that I love," Vaughan said.

"I have to take some responsibility for that because I played for Yorkshire County Cricket Club for 18 years and if in any way shape or form I'm responsible for any of his hurt, I apologise for that."

Asked if he ever made any racist comments during his time at Yorkshire, he said: "No I didn't. No."

Rafiq is referred to evidence he gave to the DCMS. Stoner highlights a discrepancy regarding offensive language used. It is suggested that Rafiq has confused whether the language was used towards him, or another player.

Stoner asks him: "It did turn from someone said he had been called, to an allegation of something you had been called?" Rafiq says it was a mistake within the documents.

"It was not something you have been subjected to?" Stoner asks. Rafiq replies: "Not to the best of my recollection." He says the documents were prepared by one of his wider team, admitting he should have checked.

Stoner is now asking Rafiq about a nickname given to him at Yorkshire, which is an offensive term in South Africa.

"For the first few years of my career, that was nickname," says Rafiq and adds that he first became aware of the meaning of the term in South Africa during the Squire Patton Boggs investigation.

Stoner turns to the SPB investigation when Rafiq is asked whether he heard the term "a couple of times" and Rafiq says yes but that he is unaware of the derogatory connotation.

Stoner asks how does "a couple of times" become a nickname that was used "for years?"

Rafiq responds by saying that what hurt and what stuck out in his memory were terms like "you lot" and a racial slur connected to his Pakistani heritage. He adds that once he became aware of what the other racist term meant he then though that that had been his nickname and that there are admissions of that others.

Rafiq reiterates that it was his nickname "at the start of my career".

Stoner posits that a "suggestion" was made to Rafiq about "certain words" and that Rafiq then "seized upon that to make an allegation of what was said" to him over a number of years.

Rafiq says it is "hard to agree" with that, given former England bowler Matthew Hoggard has admitted calling Rafiq the term that is particularly offensive in South Africa.

Rafiq adds that he was called that "but it didn't mean anything because I didn't know it was racist" but he then "found out what was meant".

Attention turns to a series of WhatsApp messages between Rafiq and Vaughan, referring to a meeting they had on 26 November 2021.

In the messages, Rafiq said he was going to take some fish and chips along for Vaughan.

"I went in with a very positive mindset," Rafiq tells Stoner.

After the meeting, Rafiq messaged Vaughan to ensure Vaughan's agent, Neil Fairbrother, wouldn't use the photo. Vaughan comes back to say Fairbrother won't, before sending another message to Rafiq which said: "Great to meet you yesterday Azeem, hope we can continue talks to work together, by the way cheers for the fish and chips."

Rafiq replied: "You too bud, hope so. All the best in Oz."

Stoner asks Rafiq if he would conclude it was a positive outcome? "It was positive until the actions that happened after."

Questioned on what those actions were, Rafiq points to the interview Vaughan gave to the BBC, and says when Vaughan headed to Australia for the Ashes, he was contacted by some of Vaughan's colleagues who said Vaughan was attempting to discredit him. This, Rafiq says, was relayed to him "several times" but he refuses to say who those colleagues were.

Rafiq says he doesn't recall speaking to George Dobell after the meeting with Vaughan.

After being shown evidence suggesting otherwise, Rafiq says: "My relationship with George is very clear", adding Dobell has been an "incredible support" to him.

"[Vaughan's] apology was something I accepted and I was naive to think it was genuine," Rafiq says. "I wanted to believe things were going to be better."

Stoner turns to Michael Vaughan's autobiography from 2009, which is "broadly contemporaneous" to the date of the alleged comment.

Rafiq is asked if he read the book at the time and he says he didn't.

Rafiq met with Vaughan after the DCMS hearing and Stoner reads from a statement from Rafiq about that meeting in which he talks about taking a photo with Vaughan after the meeting "reluctantly" because he "felt some pressure" to do so.

Rafiq says he "admittedly regretted it" and sought assurances the photo would not be used in public. Rafiq said he hoped to find a way to work with Vaughan in the meeting and that Vaughan would be "part of positive change that cricket needs".

Stoner asks if Rafiq had a negative view of the meeting.

Rafiq says that he has tried to meet anyone willing to meet and discuss and that he went there with an "open heart". He adds he took the "apology non-apology" and hoped it would be a way forward but that was "certainly not the case" and that Vaughan's actions since had made him think about the meeting in a negative light.

Vaughan & Rafiq photo 'being used privately'

Stoner then suggests his view was then positive at the time.

Rafiq says he is "glass half full" and "wanted to be positive". He adds that he "trusted the words spoken" by Vaughan in the meeting but that "less than 24 hours later it became very clear that I was being naive".

Stoner points out the photo has never been used publicly.

Rafiq acknowledges that but adds: "What has been relayed back to us is that it has been used privately."

Stoner says Vaughan and his team do not accept that and says that Vaughan has not actually seen the photograph, which is on his agent Neil Fairbrother's phone. Stoner asks what Rafiq is referring to by 'private'?

Rafiq: "Things don't have to be swapped on phones. That's what has been relayed back to us."

Stoner: "By who?"

Rafiq says it has been relayed to his team through the media.

Stoner asks if Rafiq apologises for things he's not said several times before chair Tim O'Gorman intervenes and suggests this questioning is "rather hypothetical".

Stoner moves on.

Stoner asks Rafiq: "Did you threaten to report Adil Rashid to the ECB?"

Rafiq: "What do you mean?"

Stoner: "Simply that - did you threaten to report Adil Rashid to the ECB at any point over anything?"

Rafiq: "Threaten about what?"

Stoner: "I'm not sure what. Did you threaten to report him to the ECB?"

Rafiq: "I haven't threatened to report anyone."

Stoner further suggests that Rafiq needs Rashid to corroborate the allegation for purposes of the employment tribunal.

Rafiq denies this and says the tribunal was settled in November 2021 and that if this was about money he wouldn't keep putting himself "through the mill" with these investigations.

Stoner suggests Rafiq is only here because of the ECB launching an investigation based on his allegation against Vaughan but Rafiq says he doesn't agree.