Pakistan v South Africa, 2nd Test, Dubai, 4th day October 26, 2013

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
34

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.

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

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • mzm149 on October 28, 2013, 17:58 GMT

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

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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"

  • on October 27, 2013, 15:21 GMT

    Perhaps they did it in the first innings also?

  • on October 27, 2013, 14:43 GMT

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

  • 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 !

  • 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.

  • 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!!!

  • mzm149 on October 28, 2013, 17:58 GMT

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

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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"

  • on October 27, 2013, 15:21 GMT

    Perhaps they did it in the first innings also?

  • on October 27, 2013, 14:43 GMT

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

  • 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 !

  • 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.

  • 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!!!

  • Claremont7 on October 27, 2013, 9:02 GMT

    The Bowlers are always on the receiving end, because the way most of the fans find excitement in the game. They want the hard hitting boundaries in the slogging by the Batsmen to their opponent. Crowd love big hits, big score and fast and fury. Batsman has full protective gear to his body and covering all the stumps and hit the 5-6 ounce ball. Bowler's weapon is only that ball aiming and throwing with certain governing rules about swinging the arm and the foot behind the line, at the three stumps. The bowling line also governs the precise corridor to attack the batsman. Odds are against the bowler all the time. Yet in order to win a match the Bowler has to bowl the opponent out twice. Bowler should be allowed to rough up the ball to some extent that could keep a fair balance against the batsman.

  • on October 27, 2013, 7:59 GMT

    ICC can put an end to ball tampering issues by doing it themselves. Just like how batsman have power play, bowlers should have something which I term a "reverse swing" play. Every 80 over slot in a test match should have a 15 over spell. ICC approved dozen cricket balls that are scrubbed on one side should be made available for the fielding captain to choose from. If bats can be made thicker, wider, heavier , smoother then bowlers too deserve something.. Let the batsmen use these power blades all the time but bowlers should have a 15 over leverage at least. Similary with regards to field restrictions in ODI instead of reducing the number of fielders in the outfield how about the idea of bringing in the ropes by say 5 metres during power play and still allow the usual 5 fielders outside. Let the batsman take a risk and it also gives the bowler a chance!!

  • on October 27, 2013, 7:42 GMT

    ICC can put an end to ball tampering issues by doing it themselves. Just like how batsman have power play, bowlers should have something which I term a "reverse swing" play. Every 80 over slot in a test match should have a 15 over spell. ICC approved dozen cricket balls that are scrubbed on one side should be made available for the fielding captain to choose from. If bats can be made thicker, wider, heavier , smoother then bowlers too deserve something.. Let the batsmen use these power blades all the time but bowlers should have a 15 over leverage at least. Similary with regards to field restrictions in ODI instead of reducing the number of fielders in the outfield how about the idea of bringing in the ropes by say 5 metres during power play and still allow the usual 5 fielders outside. Let the batsman take a risk and it also gives the bowler a chance!!

  • pjd_Howzat on October 27, 2013, 7:36 GMT

    C == Champions

    that is the only C that the South African cricket team stand for.

    If you want to label the SA team with any other C, then you must be choking or cheating to try and move the spotlight away that it is sub-continent sides that have always used the C word more often than not to alter the condition of the ball.

  • observor on October 27, 2013, 7:16 GMT

    50% fine for ball tampering. 5 years ban on a no ball. What a contrast. This shows how ICC is handling the game. No wonder why Cricket has not flourished as other sports did.

  • on October 27, 2013, 6:38 GMT

    @Henrick Loven-Inzamam captain of the Pakistani side which was charged by Hair for ball tampering was acquitted of that charge upon investigation.Obviously one would feel humiliated and frustrated being on the receiving end of a false charge.In this case there is clear cut evidence in the form of video footage.Both cases are very different.

  • Fanatic_cricko on October 27, 2013, 3:47 GMT

    A great and timely article. ICC should come up immediate changes to capture these problems. On the otherhand, should start penalisizing the batsmen too for taking un-necessary time outs, changing bats and gloves (too frequent) to get more relaxed time and waste match timing. This is too common now a days and in particular Dhoni the biggest example. If you do not believe watch his last 50 ODI and T20s.

  • on October 27, 2013, 2:59 GMT

    Will Ian Gould and Rod Tucker get the same disgraceful treatment that Darrell Hair got for upholding the laws of cricket? That Darrell Hair should get an official apology from the ICC is of course out of the question.

  • SyedKabirHussainy on October 26, 2013, 22:47 GMT

    I like the article very much. It sums up the Pakistan's position in ICC, they think PCB cannot do anything even after worst has happend. PCB should stand, 50% match fee for Ajmal and du Plessis for the two offences which are poles appart as far as severity is concerned.

  • indicricket on October 26, 2013, 22:11 GMT

    I have a question here. Does deliberately bowling the odd no ball really have an impact on the result of a test match?

  • on October 26, 2013, 21:54 GMT

    Reverse swing is an art which not a lot of bowlers can do. So legalizing scuffing up the ball won't really help. And if u ask the great bowlers who were masters they will tell that the conditions to do reverse swing are also very important factor not just having a half rough and half shining ball. But what if the spinners also demand some kind of condition required to get more spin on non spinner friendly pitches. If they are to legalize some thing to do with the ball for flat track for fast bowlers then they must get opinion from spinners as well. So i don't think it can or should be legalized. What SA did was totally unfair and was not in the spirit of the game. He should have got much more punishment.

  • angel_kazmi on October 26, 2013, 21:00 GMT

    Its same like a father never admits fault of his own son and only let him go after some oral harsh words...

  • Chamelion on October 26, 2013, 20:13 GMT

    Nice article.

    Now I truly understand what 'C' in CSA stands for.

  • on October 26, 2013, 16:37 GMT

    Polishing the ball should not be allowed. cut the root.

  • ladycricfan on October 26, 2013, 15:49 GMT

    Let the ball manufacturers "prepare" cricket balls with one side shiny and one side roughed up. Play the first 40 overs of the match with the current shiny ball which produce conventional swing and the next 40 overs with the manufacturer roughed up ball which will produce reverse swing.

  • on October 26, 2013, 15:36 GMT

    I think doing reverse swing should also be considered as ball tempering because u also change the condition of the ball by rubbing it with trouser which enables the ball to shine on one side.i don't know how this is not considered as changing the condition of the ball

  • Manso on October 26, 2013, 14:28 GMT

    5 Runs added, 50% Match fee fined. I think Chicken feed. ICC shd come up with more STRICT penalities. Maybe, allow 1/2 dismissed Bats , to bat again. Then it wl hurt !!!

  • Omar-Briganto on October 26, 2013, 14:26 GMT

    @CrICkeeet It is NOT Mr. Moonda , she is Ms. Moonda :)

  • on October 26, 2013, 12:27 GMT

    Mindless act! But I thought the penalty is enough, if done with a strong warning. After all the act had little impact, given the context of the game. That of course is no excuse, in any case. Pakistan's forfeiting of the match in England owed to their refusal to resume proceedings in time. But that too was harsh and should have been avoided. With spinners dominating, and such massive lead, du Plessis's foolishness seems hard to digest.

  • CrICkeeet on October 26, 2013, 12:04 GMT

    An excellent article by Cricinfo reporter Mr. Moonda...

  • on October 26, 2013, 11:18 GMT

    Great article. At last someone with proper conscious and no prejudice. That 20th-over-REVERSE-swing thing is really shady. Steyn is a world class bowler but Imran Khan and the two Ws are much more better because they invented it and they went against the legends head on. Maybe they should be asked if reverse swing can be achieved after just 20 minutes of red ball on a Dubai pitch. The answers would be most revealing.

  • on October 26, 2013, 11:18 GMT

    Shud hv ben banned for at least 5 test matches!!

  • on October 26, 2013, 11:00 GMT

    yes it should have been at least 1 match ban. how did boon came to that decision that it was not deliberate?

    It is not about team. it was 1 person really. and should have been awarded the punishment . 50% means he has got away very cheaply here.

  • on October 26, 2013, 10:29 GMT

    ICC should set rules about the dress. I believe the punishment for du plessis is not enough.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • on October 26, 2013, 10:29 GMT

    ICC should set rules about the dress. I believe the punishment for du plessis is not enough.

  • on October 26, 2013, 11:00 GMT

    yes it should have been at least 1 match ban. how did boon came to that decision that it was not deliberate?

    It is not about team. it was 1 person really. and should have been awarded the punishment . 50% means he has got away very cheaply here.

  • on October 26, 2013, 11:18 GMT

    Shud hv ben banned for at least 5 test matches!!

  • on October 26, 2013, 11:18 GMT

    Great article. At last someone with proper conscious and no prejudice. That 20th-over-REVERSE-swing thing is really shady. Steyn is a world class bowler but Imran Khan and the two Ws are much more better because they invented it and they went against the legends head on. Maybe they should be asked if reverse swing can be achieved after just 20 minutes of red ball on a Dubai pitch. The answers would be most revealing.

  • CrICkeeet on October 26, 2013, 12:04 GMT

    An excellent article by Cricinfo reporter Mr. Moonda...

  • on October 26, 2013, 12:27 GMT

    Mindless act! But I thought the penalty is enough, if done with a strong warning. After all the act had little impact, given the context of the game. That of course is no excuse, in any case. Pakistan's forfeiting of the match in England owed to their refusal to resume proceedings in time. But that too was harsh and should have been avoided. With spinners dominating, and such massive lead, du Plessis's foolishness seems hard to digest.

  • Omar-Briganto on October 26, 2013, 14:26 GMT

    @CrICkeeet It is NOT Mr. Moonda , she is Ms. Moonda :)

  • Manso on October 26, 2013, 14:28 GMT

    5 Runs added, 50% Match fee fined. I think Chicken feed. ICC shd come up with more STRICT penalities. Maybe, allow 1/2 dismissed Bats , to bat again. Then it wl hurt !!!

  • on October 26, 2013, 15:36 GMT

    I think doing reverse swing should also be considered as ball tempering because u also change the condition of the ball by rubbing it with trouser which enables the ball to shine on one side.i don't know how this is not considered as changing the condition of the ball

  • ladycricfan on October 26, 2013, 15:49 GMT

    Let the ball manufacturers "prepare" cricket balls with one side shiny and one side roughed up. Play the first 40 overs of the match with the current shiny ball which produce conventional swing and the next 40 overs with the manufacturer roughed up ball which will produce reverse swing.