Pakistan v South Africa, 2nd Test, Dubai, 4th day

Another 'C' word for South Africa?

South Africa's reputation of being arguably the most professional and respectable team has taken a hit by the ball-tampering episode

Firdose Moonda in Dubai

October 26, 2013

Comments: 34 | Text size: A | A

Wayne Parnell, Dale Steyn and Allan Donald chat during practice, Centurion, October 18, 2011
Alland Donald, the South Africa bowling coach, in the past had advocated getting the ball "in the dirt" to accelerate the scuffing up of one side while protecting the other © Getty Images
Enlarge

Once the anger has subsided, there may be some time to appreciate the irony. Pakistan, the last and only other team to have penalty runs awarded against them for ball-tampering in a Test match, were on the receiving end of another side's wrongdoing.

Despite AB de Villiers' insistence that South Africa "play in a fair manner", Faf du Plessis pleaded guilty to the Level 2 offense of changing the condition of the ball. His misdemeanour is in cricket circles what not wearing your seatbelt is in real life - it's the wrong thing to do but it's so widely done that it only really matters if you get caught.

All teams look after the ball in ways they think will advantage them. That is allowed. What they are not allowed to do is change the ball so much that it disadvantages the other team disproportionately. That sounds confusing because it is and with so much grey area, there have been some arguments over the years to legalise "preparing" the ball.

That is the term Allan Donald, the current South Africa bowling coach, used to describe what bowlers need to do to ensure they are not shut out of a game that has increasingly grown to advantage batsmen. Four years ago, Donald said bowlers need a defence mechanism to "fall back on" so that they are able to generate reverse swing on flatter pitches. While he said he knew the ICC would "shoot me for saying it", Donald advocated getting the ball "in the dirt" to accelerate the scuffing up of one side while protecting the other.

Televisions pictures showed du Plessis was doing exactly that. He was rubbing the dry side of the ball on his trousers, in "vicinity of the zipper on his trouser pocket" as the ICC's release put it. Du Plessis' actions were brazen, they were easily found out by the cameras, immediately picked up by the television umpire, conveyed to his on-field colleagues and quickly acted on. The changes made to the playing conditions at the beginning of this month allowed Ian Gould and Rod Tucker to deal with the issue as soon as it happened.

Perhaps South Africa were not aware that could happen. De Villiers revealed he did "not know all the facts of the matter" when runs were added to Pakistan's total and the ball was changed. He was certain South Africa had not done the wrong thing, even though the ICC immediately called it a case of ball-tampering. That was how the questions began.

Why would a team 351 runs ahead, who had their opposition three down with more than two days left in the match on a surface that was deteriorating, feel they needed to do something extra? Yes, the Dubai surface has not got a drop of moisture the seamers can take advantage of, neither has it cracked open. But South Africa should not have been in that much of a hurry.


"Stop scratching your balls" reads a flag held up by two spectators, a light-hearted comment over the alleged ball-tampering allegations, England v Pakistan, 1st ODI, Cardiff, August 30, 2006
All teams look after the ball in ways they think will advantage them. What they are not allowed to do is change the ball so much that it disadvantages the other team disproportionately © Getty Images
Enlarge

What they may have experienced was extreme frustration, particularly since they had dismantled their opposition for 99 in the same match and have become accustomed to ending Tests swiftly. De Villiers jokingly said South Africa would have liked to finish the match "in two days if we can". Even though that may be a reflection of what they really expected to happen, it reveals something about their impatience.

Given the match situation and the nonchalance with which du Plessis conducted his mischief, could also be a sign this is something that they have become accustomed to doing. And that thought could be the most damaging thing to happen to South Africa in the aftermath of this incident.

It means their previous performances will be scrutinised and their many fine achievements in the recent past examined with this incident in mind. Take, for example, just this match and you will find people wondering how it was possible that Dale Steyn managed to find reverse swing from the 20th over of the Pakistan first innings while Pakistan's bowlers barely found any for the 163.1 overs they were in the field.

Having become the world's No.1 team on the back of a reputation for being a group of cricketers who conduct themselves arguably in the most professional and respectable way, to have a blight of this nature on their reputation will hurt South Africa. They are seen as a team who do the right thing, now one of them is seen as a culprit who got away.

Du Plessis was fined 50% of his match fee after David Boon was "satisfied that this was not part of a deliberate and/or prolonged attempt to unfairly manipulate the condition of the ball". Boon called the sanction "appropriate". More severe sanctions attract a higher percentage of money being docked - up to 100% - and a match ban of one Test, two ODIs and two Twenty20s, but none of those were meted out to du Plessis despite the visual evidence suggesting he was aware of what he was doing.

On the same day as Saeed Ajmal was officially reprimanded for excessive celebrations - something few people even noticed - it seemed as though the variance in the punishments for offenses was too great. When considered in the context of previous players who have been suspended for the same, such as Shoaib Akhtar and Shahid Afridi who had to sit out two matches each, du Plessis can be considered to have got off lightly.

There may be other consequences and South Africa's clothing manufacturer may be among the parties involved. The zipped pockets could come under scrutiny and the mechanism may be removed. There may be a debate sparked about the various methods used to shine the ball and possibly another wave of lobbying for ball-tampering to be less regulated.

For now, it remains a breach of the code of the conduct and if players are found doing it, they will probably be punished in some way. That is what happened to this South African team. Their defenders will say they just did what everyone else is doing and were not smart enough to hide it. Their critics will call them cheats. Like the other c-word they are called, it's not a label they will wear with pride.

Firdose Moonda is ESPNcricinfo's South Africa correspondent

RSS Feeds: Firdose Moonda

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by mzm149 on (October 28, 2013, 17:58 GMT)

A B de Villiers survived a plumb LBW. Otherwise result would have been quite different.

Posted by MK88 on (October 28, 2013, 12:36 GMT)

I am a SAn,and I am very disappointed with Faf's actions, and I think he deserved a bigger punishment. I am really surprised because we had an upper hand in that game. However, people need to be careful with their suggestions on what could be done to curb ball tampering. We cannot have an umpire bringing scratched balls to the fielding team. That's just wasting the game like we are doing with hit-and-run T20s. Test batsmen should learn to grind in and score runs and test bowlers should learn how to strangle the run rate and take wickets. That's how we know cricket, and for some of us, that's how we love it.

Posted by SaudSami on (October 28, 2013, 6:10 GMT)

It's remarkable how Philader's ball scratching was not even reported. Philander's scratching was very similar to what Shoaib Akhtar did and was made to sit out 2 games for. There is an 'R' word that nobody in mentioning in ICC's behaviour.

Posted by Greatest_Game on (October 27, 2013, 20:20 GMT)

@ Sheikh Ubair writes: "My question to them who consider south africa as a top team How many world cups or ICC mega events won by africa ? The reality is more harsh than they think "Chokers"

SA won the first Champions trophy - an "ICC mega event."

However, discussions here have been STRICTLY about test cricket. Bringing ODI & T20 into THIS conversation, is pointless, irrelevant, & seems an excuse for you to use the word "Chokers." Well done - you managed that.

What you have NOT discussed is TEST cricket, & without question SA are the top test team. The majority of test followers agree that SA has the most consistent, & best, current test record. They agree for the simple reason that it is true.

If you disagree, it's your choice, & right. I, and most cricket followers, will respect & defend, that right, although your post is not relevant, is disrespectful, & is wrong about the Proteas, the top test cricket team in the world.

Get over it. Get used to it. It is the truth.

Posted by   on (October 27, 2013, 16:03 GMT)

My question to them who consider south africa as a top team How many world cups or ICC mega events won by africa ? The reality is more harsh than they think "Chokers"

Posted by   on (October 27, 2013, 15:21 GMT)

Perhaps they did it in the first innings also?

Posted by   on (October 27, 2013, 14:43 GMT)

@Muhammad Akbar: Why not bowl each delivery with a brand new ball?

Posted by   on (October 27, 2013, 13:18 GMT)

@Claremont7 ! U r right that it is a batsmen friendly game and bowlers should be allowed to rough up the ball to make the game interesting. BUT it should be bowlers from both teams who should be allowed to scratch the ball like this. It's unfair when one team reverse swings the ball from 20th over, and the other team doesn't do it for 163 overs they bowled. Lets be fair !

Posted by   on (October 27, 2013, 12:13 GMT)

Reverse Swing is dying Art. The most spectacular sight in cricket world is when a bowler makes a ball to reverse swing. It is even much more lovely than to see a batsman hit a six. I think ICC should take steps to protect the bowler. Even low scoring competitive matches are entertaining.

Posted by Cricket_Man on (October 27, 2013, 10:07 GMT)

A clear investigation should be carried out by ICC to check whether tampering was done even in the first innings too, as the writer rightly points out that the ball shockingly started reversing after the 20th over in the first innings. The video footage of the entire first innings of South African bowling should be closely scrutinized to check if tampering was done in the first innings too. Also the key South African players should be quizzed to find out whether it was just Faf's own action or was he just a tool to tampering plan made by the entire South African camp. Failure to do so would should exactly how concerned ICC is about the image of our game Cricket. Please post Cricinfo!!!

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Firdose MoondaClose
Tour Results
Pakistan v South Africa at Dubai (DSC) - Nov 15, 2013
South Africa won by 6 runs
Pakistan v South Africa at Dubai (DSC) - Nov 13, 2013
South Africa won by 9 wickets (with 33 balls remaining)
Pakistan v South Africa at Sharjah - Nov 11, 2013
South Africa won by 117 runs
Pakistan v South Africa at Abu Dhabi - Nov 8, 2013
South Africa won by 28 runs
Pakistan v South Africa at Abu Dhabi - Nov 6, 2013
South Africa won by 68 runs
More results »
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days