Friday, 30 March 2018

BALL TAMPERING : THEN AND NOW

Steve Smith broke into tears after returning home. His tears are for putting a stain on the great game of cricket. After this emotional speech of Smith, Darren Lehmann decided to step down from the Australian cricket team's head coach position after the fourth test between Australia and South Africa gets over. He said this statement in teary eyes. The Cricketing World is not agreeing to the punishment given by Cricket Australia. Some are seeing this punishment as too harsh. Someone's asking for more hard punishment whereas, some are saying they have made a mistake and it will get corrected with time. Meanwhile, Bancroft has been banned from County cricket, while Hyderabad has named Kane Williamson in place of David Warner as their captain in IPL 2018. Meanwhile, the ICC thinks on the charges of ball tampering from a new perspective. They are thinking about a cricketers' committee, where the names of the committee are in favor of the likes of Anil Kumble, Richie Richardson, Allan Border.
 In the meanwhile, we look a little into the past and see what happened earlier. Earlier these type of charges have been raised. But the first thing is to see the rule.

     The rules say ......

41.3  The match ball – changing its condition

41.3.1 The umpires shall make frequent and irregular inspections of the ball.  In addition, they shall immediately inspect the ball if they suspect anyone of attempting to change the condition of the ball, except as permitted in 41.3.2.

41.3.2 It is an offense for any player to take any action which changes the condition of the ball.

Except in carrying out his/her normal duties, a batsman is not allowed to willfully damage the ball.  See also Law 5.5 (Damage to the ball).

A fielder may, however

41.3.2.1 polish the ball on his/her clothing provided that no artificial substance is used and that such polishing wastes no time.

41.3.2.2 remove mud from the ball under the supervision of an umpire.

41.3.2.3 dry a wet ball on a piece of cloth that has been approved by the umpires.

41.3.3 The umpires shall consider the condition of the ball to have been unfairly changed if any action by any player does not comply with the conditions in 41.3.2.

41.3.4 If the umpires consider that the condition of the ball has been unfairly changed by a member or members of either side, they shall ask the captain of the opposing side if he/she would like the ball to be replaced.  If necessary, in the case of the batting side, the batsmen at the wicket may deputise for their captain.

41.3.4.1 If a replacement ball is requested, the umpires shall select and bring into use immediately, a ball which shall have wear comparable to that of the previous ball immediately prior to the contravention.

41.3.4.2 Regardless of whether a replacement ball has been chosen to be used, the bowler’s end umpire shall

- award 5 Penalty runs to the opposing side.

- if appropriate, inform the batsmen at the wicket and the captain of the fielding side that the ball has been changed and the reason for their action.

- inform the captain of the batting side as soon as practicable of what has occurred.

The umpires together shall report the occurrence as soon as possible after the match to the Executive of the offending side and to any Governing Body responsible for the match, who shall take such action as is considered appropriate against the captain, any other individuals concerned and, if appropriate, the team.

41.3.5 If the umpires agree that in the match there has been any further instance by that team of unfairly changing the condition of the ball, they shall

41.3.5.1 repeat the procedure in 41.3.4.1 and 41.3.4.2.

If the further offense is committed by the fielding side, additionally the bowler’s end umpire shall

41.3.5.2 - direct the captain of the fielding side to suspend immediately from bowling the bowler who delivered the preceding ball; he/she shall not be allowed to bowl again in the match.

- inform the batsmen at the wicket and, as soon as practicable, the captain of the batting side of the reason for the action.

- if necessary, the over shall be completed by another bowler, who shall neither have bowled any part of the previous over, nor be allowed to bowl any part of the next over.(https://www.lords.org/mcc/laws-of-cricket/laws/law-41-unfair-play/)


      In view of this law, seeing the whole thing, it can be understood that Michael Atherton (Eng) did not do the right thing in the England vs South Africa Test match in 1994. It was alleged that he had tampered with the condition of the ball. Although he denied the allegation but he was fined £2000.
   
  Pakistan's Waqar Younis was charged in July 2000 and his 50% match fee was deducted.

      In 2001 during South Africa vs India test match, Mike Dennis accused Sachin Tendulkar of ball tampering and he was suspended for one match. However, later ICC removed the suspension. His offense was that he was picking dirt off the ball without the umpire's permission.

      India's Rahul Dravid was charged in 2004 for using a foreign mint substance on the ball and 50% of his match fee was deducted.

     In 2006, a crazy hype was created surrounding the England and Pakistan Test match. Pakistan was penalized for ball tampering and England was given 5 runs extra. After Tea break, Pakistan later refused to take the field. Then the match was forfeited and England were declared the winner of the match. After that, however, ICC declared the match as a draw, but again MCC directly states that once the results are announced, there is no right to change that result. Finally, after a lot of controversy in 2009, England were declared the winner of the match by ICC.

    In 2010, Stuart Broad and James Anderson were accused of bruising the ball with boot spikes.  Although no punishment was given but Nasser Hussein blamed them for their abusive behavior.

    That year Sahid Afridi, former Pakistan Captain, was suspended for two Twenty20 matches, on charges of ball tampering as he was biting the seam of the ball.

     In the 2012 Australian bowler Peter Siddle has named for same allegations though it has not been proved. Between 2013 and 2014 twice Philander and du Plessis (both South Africans) were accused and after that this Sandpaper Gate controversy surrounding Smith, Warner, and Bancroft in 2018.

     In fact, this work has been used for a long time to hold reverse swings (in the grassless fields) and to keep the shine of the ball (in the grassy field). Even today with so many cameras, it is very easy to do this from some fielding positions without getting noticed. Naturally, this whole thing has shaken the cricketing world and is making everybody think of this situation.





No comments:

Post a Comment