Mulcahy says there was another meeting involving Azeem Rafiq; his friend and local businessman Ritchie Fiddes; plus Yorkshire bosses Mark Arthur (then-chief executive) and Martyn Moxon (then-director of cricket) prior to the other meeting, which Wood also attended.

She points to notes made by Rafiq for the meeting in which he included talking points about racism at Yorkshire.

Mulcahy now talks about a meeting between Rafiq and Wood at The Glass House, a pub in Barnsley, the day before the meeting at Yorkshire.

Again she cites Rafiq's notes in which the former spinner says he told Wood that he wanted to bring up allegations of racism at Yorkshire.

Mulcahy: "Do you remember that?"

Wood: "Not specifically."

Mulcahy: "Do you remember it generally?"

Wood: "Yes."

Mulcahy: "Do you have any reason to believe Rafiq is not telling the truth here."

Wood: "In this case, no."

ECB lawyer Jane Mulcahy KC begins her cross-examination of Matthew Wood by confirming he was not present at Trent Bridge on the day in 2009 when Michael Vaughan is alleged to have made the "you lot" comment - and therefore had no knowledge of what Vaughan said or did not say that day.

Wood agrees.

She brings up part of Wood's witness statement where he says he was present at a meeting at Yorkshire in August 2018 in his role as Rafiq's personal development manager.

Here Wood claims Rafiq did not complain about being racially abuse in the meeting.

Mulcahy points out that in a separate witness statement given by Wood for the Tim Bresnan case he says that Rafiq did allege Asian players were treated differently at Yorkshire in a meeting at Yorkshire. Mulcahy says there is a discrepancy in the two statements and asks Wood if this is the same meeting.

Wood: "Yes."

The panel has reconvened after lunch.

The first witness up is former cricketer Matthew Wood, who was a personal development manager with the Professional Cricketers' Association from 2011 to 2021.

The PCA is a charity which supports professional cricketers during and after their careers.

Vaughan's lawyer Christopher Stoner KC asks his client about the photograph and whether he knows anyone other than Fairbrother has seen it.

Vaughan says he does not.

That concludes the session as the panel break for lunch. Proceedings should resume at 14:30.

The cross-examination continues, and Vaughan is asked about his communication with journalists. He is asked if people on his behalf have been in communication with journalists before this disciplinary process.

"I have a paper column with The Telegraph so of course I speak to people at The Telegraph," he replies.

"I speak to them about the column I write about the game of cricket."

Mulcahy asks him if he has spoken to them about the proceedings.

"I've had conversations with people because they ask how I am and if I'm coping.

"It's a situation where mentally for all sides it has been very, very draining, and I have friends in the media so I will have had conversations."

That ends Mulcahy's questions for Vaughan.

Mulcahy brings up the photograph taken of Rafiq and Vaughan after the meeting, which Rafiq said in his evidence yesterday he "regretted".

Vaughan says he saw Rafiq say that he felt he had been "naive" 24 hours after their meeting and that Rafiq claims Vaughan was talking about him while out in Australia.

Vaughan notes he went to Australia three weeks later and insists he has "never seen that photo". He states his agent Neil Fairbrother has it on his phone.

Vaughan says that he did feel on the day that the "best thing" was to put the photo out there with a statement from himself and Rafiq to show they had met and shook hands.

Vaughan says there is a "huge amount of work" to do in society and cricket but that he felt for the "wellbeing" of individuals involved in this case that a photo and release was the best way forward.

Mulcahy: "Best for you."

Vaughan: "Absolutely not."

Vaughan also denies that he was talking about Rafiq while out in Australia and says that he was instead talking about the course he was doing, showing people slides from it and trying to "improve" himself.

Mulcahy puts it to Vaughan that Rafiq was "right" to think Vaughan had "played him" in the meeting.

Vaughan: "Absolutely not."

ECB lawyer Mulcahy now asks Vaughan about his meeting with Rafiq, after the DCMS select committee hearing in 2021 and three weeks after he had named himself., external

She asks whether Vaughan had in mind Matthew Hoggard's apology to Rafiq when he asked for the meeting.

Vaughan: "No."

When asked why it felt it was the time to reach out, Vaughan says he felt "the whole situation was escalating out of control".

He says he saw what is was doing to Rafiq and what it was doing to his family and thought the "best thing" was to meet and work things out, as he says he has always done.

Vaughan says he "felt it was gettting too big and hurting too many people".

"It's not been easy for anybody this. This is not the right process to deal with word against word comments from 14 years ago.

"Ex team-mates fighting it out over hearsay is terrible look on the game and a really bad look on how cricket has dealt with this situation."

He adds he wanted to "be a leader" and that he "listened" to Rafiq, apologised for the hurt he'd experienced and that after the meeting he wanted to "work together". Vaughan said he also met with Adil Rashid in March last year to "do a similar thing".

Vaughan says the process has become "far too public" and "far too media-orientated".

He says "we have to expose discrimination, I've been very clear from day one and we have to make sure people are held accountable."

Vaughan adds he "wanted to be educated and understand more about modern society" and that he thought he and Rafiq were on the "right platform" after their meeting, but "that's obviously not been the case".

Mulcahy suggests this is the right process to hold people to account.

Vaughan: "It is, but it's not the right process to apologise for something that you don't recollect saying."

Mulcahy turns to Vaughan's autobiography from 2009 in which he mentions his pride at the four Asian players. She points out he doesn't mention shaking their hands.

Vaughan: "I don't."

She supposes that is because Vaughan didn't give that detail to ghostwriter Mike Dickson.

Vaughan: "That's correct."

Mulcahy asks why Vaughan named himself as the person Rafiq said made the alleged comment.

Vaughan: "I knew my name was going to get mentioned and I wanted to name myself." He adds after being asked that he came up with doing that himself.

Mulchay runs through comments from Andrew Gale, Adam Lyth, Tim Bresnan and Jacques Rudolph all saying they did not hear Michael Vaughan make the alleged comment.

She points out none of them are giving evidence on behalf of Vaughan.

Vaughan goes on to say he is "disgusted" by Rafiq's experience.

"That's why when I met him in 2021, we had three or four hours of discussions, we had fish and chips - they were nice - and I accepted my experience [at Yorkshire] was not the experience Azeem had and for that I was hugely apologetic."

He continued that when "you have been around the game for so long, when you've been England captain, you "feel like you own part of the game, a statesman for the game", and so said he used the meeting with Rafiq to "say sorry".

"I don't like seeing ex-players having to tell their story where they feel they haven't been given the same treatment."

Mulcahy points out he didn't apologise for the comment he is alleged to have made.

"I can't apologise for something I don't recollect saying."

Mulcahy reminds him that Rafiq, Rashid and ul-Hasad all recollect Vaughan making the comment.

"My recollections are different. My recollection is very, very clear of the person I was."

Vaughan continued to say he doesn't remember any occasion, as a cricket player, captain or broadcaster, in which he has had his conduct questioned.

Mulcahy refers him to Yorkshire admitting to systemic racism going back to 2004. She says because of that, no-one would pull him up for such language because "they didn't have a clue that was the wrong thing to say".

Vaughan replies: "There has always been a hotline for a player to call the PCA, for scenarios like this if a player doesn't feel like they can go to a captain or coach. The PCA has always been there for players"

Mulcahy directs Vaughan to an interview Matthew Hoggard gave to the BBC, published on 3 February 2023.

Hoggard was charged with using a racial slur, which he admitted using. Mulcahy asks Vaughan if he ever used this racial slur being used. "No."

Hoggard is also accused of using the term "you lot" as a pejorative term for Asian players in the Yorkshire dressing room in 2008 and/or 2009.

In the BBC interview, Hoggard said: "I would say 'you lot' to any group. I would have said 'you lot' to the academy lads, 'you lot' to the batters - 'any danger of you lot scoring some runs today, any danger of you lot catching'."

Under questioning from Mulcahy, Vaughan says he does not recollect this.

Hoggard also said of the culture of the dressing room in 2008/09: "Nothing is off limits. If you wrote down everything that is said in a changing room, and read it, you'd cringe."

Vaughan is asked if he would also "cringe" at this.

He replies: "I can't speak on behalf of Matthew Hoggard". He then "makes clear" he apologises to Azeem Rafiq because "clearly there has been issues".

Read more of that Matthew Hoggard interview here

Mulcahy says she is not talking about 2021 - when Vaughan talked about taking an online course - but talking about 2009.

She suggests the Michael Vaughan of 2009 was someone who would've said the racist comment which was alleged.

Vaughan: "No."

Mulcahy brings up Deon Kruis, who also played in the game, and the answers he gave to Vaughan's legal team.

Kruis says that if Vaughan did say it then it would've been "in jest" and that similar jokes were made at the time about having too many South Africans in the team.

Mulcahy asks if Vaughan agrees it was part of team "teasing"?

Vaughan: "I don't agree with that."

Mulcahy suggests Vaughan focused on those four Asian players and Vaughan insists it was to shake their hands because he was proud.

She points out he didn't shake anyone else's hand.

Vaughan says that is because he was a senior player and "something special" was happening.

He says he was two or three games away from retiring and was "so proud" of how far Yorkshire had come since previously needing players who represented them to have been born in the county.

Mulcahy suggests Vaughan was aware the group of four were "different" and that he might easily have said "you lot" because they are a group.

Vaughan: "I don't recollect that." He adds that he "loved" young players coming into any environment he was in, whether Yorkshire or England.

He says one of his "main strengths" as England captain was "creating a culture" and managing people to make sure they are in the "right space or mentality" to go out and deliver. "I make sure people are loved," he adds.

Mulcahy: "But you're also the sort of person to send those tweets."

Vaughan says he can't get away from those tweets but that he is the sort of person "stick my hand up when I've done something wrong".

ECB lawyer Mulcahy - continuing her cross-examination - points out that both Rafiq and Rashid claim Vaughan likely said the alleged comment as a "bad joke".

She suggests it is "very similar" to his tweets because it is "lighthearted but offensive".

Vaughan says he doesn't agree and just has to "keep going back to my recollection" that he "couldn't have been more proud" it was the first match where four Asian players appeared for Yorkshire, including three who came through the club system.

Vaughan says that's why he wrote about it in his autobiography.

Vaughan agrees with Mulcahy that the tweets he's apologised for would be offensive to Rafiq.

He says he holds his hands up and "will continue to do so." He adds he was "disgusted" with the tweets when they came to light and that he took part in an online course, external while away in Australia for the 2021 Ashes because he "wanted to be a leader in the game" and wanted to lead the game into "understanding what modern standards are".

Mulcahy asks if this course was after he knew Rafiq's allegation was against him.

Vaughan: "Yes."

ECB lawyer Mulcahy turns to the cricket match in question on 22 June 2009 and notes Vaughan, albeit not captain that day, was a senior player with responsibility towards the younger players - Rafiq was 18 at the time.

Vaughan agrees with this.

Mulcahy notes that Rafiq and Rashid's evidence against Vaughan is very similar - that the alleged comment took place just after the huddle broke up.

She now refers to Vaughan's witness statement where he makes some observations of what happened after reviewing the Sky footage.

In it he states that the only period in which the comment attributed to him could have been made is in a 19-second period.

She asks if he agrees 19 seconds is long enough to make that comment.

Vaughan: "I would agree with that."

Attentions turn to a number of historical tweets by Vaughan, specifically two dated 10 September 2010 and 15 October 2010.

He confirms that he posted the tweets and says they are both "completely unacceptable".

He says the tweets were brought to his attention in his BBC interview. "I apologised straightaway." He adds: "If I've offended anyone by those tweets I apologise hugely. I stick my hand up when I get something wrong."

Mulcahy points out that the reason she is referencing the tweets is that they are "very similar in time" to when he made the alleged comment to the four Yorkshire players of Asian heritage on 22 June 2009.

Vaughan is also shown an offensive tweet by Piers Morgan in 2017, which he liked and replied "totally agree", and another tweet.

Vaughan again agrees they are "totally unacceptable" and again apologises.

Mulcahy directs him to a Wisden interview published on 27 November 2021, in which he said he regretted his past tweets but continued to deny the "you lot" comment.

In his witness statement, Vaughan stated "the allegation that has been made against me goes squarely against my values, morals and personality and, as a result, I deny that I used the words contained in the allegation.

Mulcahy asks that given some of the tweets he sent as late as 2017, were those not his values at the time?

"Twitter is a platform on which I accept I've made mistakes. There are lots of tweets I look back on with regret," he says, but adds its "not fair" to say they were not his values.

"Those tweets are remarkably similar in tone to the allegation? Do you agree?". "No."

Mulcahy asks Vaughan if he is aware that Yorkshire has admitted the "systemic use of racist language" throughout the period he played for the club.

Vaughan: "Yes."

Mulcahy returns to ask if Vaughan's legal team asked Rana Naved-ul-Hasan could give evidence for him.

Vaughan: "I'm not aware of that."

Mulcahy asks if Vaughan considers a racial slur relating to people of Pakistani heritage is unacceptable and racist.

Vaughan: "Absolutely."

Mulcahy asks Vaughan about how long he played alongside former bowler Matthew Hoggard, both at Yorkshire and England. She asks Vaughan about certain years when they overlapped and he isn't sure of the exact dates.

Vaughan jokes: "It's like Question of Sport, this."

Mulcahy asks if Vaughan and Hoggard would've been in the same dressing rooms and same hotels a lot.

Vaughan: "Absolutely."

Mulcahy contends that Vaughan "must have heard" Hoggard using that racist slur.

Vaughan: "I don't recollect that."

Mulcahy: "Really?"

Vaughan: "Absolutely not."

Mulcahy points out Hoggard has admitted a charge of using that word.

Vaughan: "I can't speak on his behalf."

Mulcahy: "You never heard it?"

Vaughan: "No my experiences are I never heard it."

Mulcahy states that from 2008-09, Vaughan played in 35 matches for Yorkshire across all competitions and asks if that is correct.

Vaughan says he "obviously" doesn't know for sure but that it's "probably true".

Mulcahy asks Vaughan, "you didn't hear [the racial slur] from anybody?"

Vaughan: "No."

Mulcahy: "If you heard it would you have reported it to management?"

Vaughan: "Yes."

ECB lawyer Mulcahy turns to an interview with Will Quinn, who was Azeem Rafiq's agent.

She cites an answer in which Quinn states that Rafiq told him about the "now infamous" alleged comment by Vaughan at "one stage" when Quinn and Rafiq worked together.

Quinn said he "doesn't remember" in what context Rafiq presented the claim but that it was "in a huddle at Scarborough or something" before a match and that there were other Asian players playing.

Mulcahy says that Rafiq said something to Quinn about the allegation before it was made public.

Vaughan: "That's what it seems like. But I don't think Will Quinn is involved in this investigation."

Mulcahy: "I'm just asking about the information."

Vaughan is taken from document to document.

First, he is shown a copy of the Wisden article, external in which Rafiq first made public his claims of racism and the alleged "you lot" comment in August 2020.

It is noted that Rafiq did not name Vaughan as the person who allegedly made the comment in this article.

Vaughan is then shown Adil Rashid's witness statement, in which Rashid said he had a "clear memory" of Vaughan making the comment. Vaughan has just said he knows he did not say it.

Next up is an interview Rana Naved ul-Hasan gave to George Dobell on cricket website cricinfo, external in which he confirmed he had heard the alleged comment.

"I'm not aware Rana is involved with this investigation?" Vaughan says. Mulcahy replies: "Well let's keep going."

He is then shown an email from ul-Hasan to Rafiq's previous legal representative Asma Iqbal, in which ul-Hasan again corroborated the claim.

Vaughan emphasises the fact his name is not mentioned in the email.

ECB lawyer Mulachy posits that is "not possible" for Vaughan to "categorically deny" he made the alleged comment given he does not remember everything he said during that match on 22 June 2009.

Vaughan says he has "a very clear mind about back in 2009" and that he knows he didn't say the words alleged.

He adds that in the history of him as a player he doesn't know of any time where he would've gone on to a pitch and said something to a group of team-mates that could "put them in a bad state of mind" before trying to win a game of cricket.

Vaughan: "Knowing me in 2009, that's not the sort of thing I would've said".

Mulcahy suggests Vaughan cannot be so sure and he says that in the 30 years he has been in cricket, whether as a player or as a broadcaster since 2010, he has never had a team member come to him with "a comment I could've said" that would not allow them to perform.

He says the alleged comment would've put those players in a "position where they wouldn't be able to perform to their maximum".

Mulcahy suggests the words are "so bad they would've affected the morale of your team?"

Vaughan: "Yes."

ECB lawyer Mulcahy, cross-examining, asks Vaughan if he agrees the phrase he is alleged to have said is "unacceptable"?

Vaughan: "Absolutely."

Mulcahy: "And is racist and/or discriminatory?"

Vaughan: "Absolutely."

Mulcahy: "You also accept even just the phrase 'there's too many of you lot' is racist and/or discriminatory?"

Vaughan: "Absolutely."

Mulcahy asks if he thinks even the term "you lot" to indentify a group by their race is racist and/or discriminatory?

Vaughan: "I agree."