South Africa news January 15, 2013

De Kock, Ontong face disciplinary


Quinton de Kock, South Africa's limited-overs wicketkeeper batsman, could miss some of the one-day series against New Zealand pending the outcome of a disciplinary hearing.

De Kock, 20, and Cobras captain Justin Ontong will appear in front of a disciplinary commissioner "as soon as possible" according to Cricket South Africa after an altercation between de Kock and Alistair Gray, when the Cobras were fielding during their first-class match last week.

Allegedly, de Kock pushed Gray after the umpires, Brian Jerling and Shaun George, changed the ball because they believed "the conditions of the ball had been altered" by the Cobras after 20 overs in the Lions second innings. De Kock was batting at the time and in accordance with protocol was asked to choose a replacement ball.

The Cobras were reportedly unhappy with his choice because he selected a ball which was much older than the original one. Words were exchanged, following which there was a slight scuffle. The Lions won the match by eight wickets and lie third in the table while the Cobras remain at the top, despite the defeat.

De Kock will appear in front of the commissioner on charges over his role in pushing an opposition player, while Ontong will face charges of ball tampering which the Cobras have denied. The ball itself will be sent away for tests to determine whether it was damaged in any way.

If found guilty, de Kock will be banned for two matches which could rule him out of the first two ODIs in the series which starts in Paarl on Saturday. The second fixture takes place in Kimberley on Tuesday with the last match to be played in Potchefstroom on January 25. Should de Kock be ruled out, AB de Villiers will have to don the wicketkeeping gloves despite his plea to rest his chronically bad back.

Firdose Moonda is ESPNcricinfo's South Africa correspondent

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Faizan on January 18, 2013, 9:02 GMT

    Saffers, you better solve your problems because team Pakistan is coming to win Tests, T20s and ODIs.

  • mahjut on January 17, 2013, 22:51 GMT

    Overall averages are a guide - but not to form ... an average of 29.70 at 32 years old is not just "not bad" it is, at least, a decade long standard for SA keepers :) ... but this keeper at least was blooded at test level, found wanting, sent back to FC cricket with a mission to improve and his 2011/12 season average rose above 50, and 2012/13 remains above 40...a "consistent performer" for the Lions since 2007 according to cricinfo! hope cricinfo's stats are right .. been quite an enjoyable 1/2 hour

  • mahjut on January 17, 2013, 22:17 GMT

    @ Surley ... within an organisation, it is always 'good practice' to let people know where they stand [like those - certainly not all who left 'in frustration' - told they'll never get a contract]. I never mentioned 'fair', because I am not suggesting there's been a strong system of places based on merit in the team (as indicated in the Hall/Klusener eg). Kuhn has a right to feel aggrieved - as does Thami, for different reasons; being taken to Eng as reserve to Bouch and when the position became free, another fills it. That is - even if temporarily - worse than being told you will NOT get a 'contract'. Fact is, although SA do well despite their issues sport is not separate from politics and blooding Elgar (who would always move aside for JP) seemed to serve no better function than having played Thami - if development/the future was the reasoning. The best balance for SA has AB as keeper but NZ was a chance for someone - an 'in form' Thami was sidelined again. So, Oz trip = UK facade???

  • des on January 17, 2013, 16:54 GMT

    mahjut: Contracts are publicly announced. I've never heard of anyone else get a contract before even making the team. The players who left SA mostly did so because they were told they would never get a contract (or would lose theirs, like Botha), so they took up offers elsewhere.

    He was taken to Aus as backup to AB, De Kock was not. It's pretty clear that De Kock is the limited overs keeper and Thami is test reserve. Not bad for someone with a FC average less than 30 who is 32 if you ask me. As Kuhn with a FC average of 48 about fairness.

  • mahjut on January 17, 2013, 15:56 GMT

    and Surley ... in addition to my comment obviously he was not back up to AB he was back up to Bouch. He is now back up to AB (till he gets injured? ... then he'll back up to de Kock). Considering the exodus of SA plyers it'd be an interesting lineup of folk happy to be treated that unfairly

  • mahjut on January 17, 2013, 15:52 GMT

    surley ... although i don't think he should be in the first 11 and have never suggested it (certainly no more than Bouch ever should have been anyway), I simply have no definitive answer to your question. I assume they have and the fact we don't know about it is due to the fact the promise was kept. de Kock's average is good but Parnell burst on the scene too - people do ... which is, by and large, why they're handled better these days. As far as him being treated fairly, well i'm not sure i would feel happy being taken around to carry drinks and "look the part" with no chance of a game, but who knows - maybe he's content playing the part. He certainly did everything else asked of him ... ie have a good season with the bat! he did

  • des on January 17, 2013, 14:41 GMT

    mahjut: Has anyone else been given a 'promise to play' and a national contract for what will happen in 2 series time? I can't think of anyone, and I don't think that's the correct way to select a team as form and circumstances can change in this time.

    Instead of being treated 'unfairly' I think he's been treated well, and is backup to AB despite having a lower FC average than Kuhn or De Kock. I think many more players would like to be treated this 'unfairly'.

  • Gordon on January 17, 2013, 13:18 GMT

    If De Kock is ruled out for a match or two I seriously hope that they pick another keeper. Rudi Second should get a chance because he is an opener and he is young. Come on blood someone new it doesn't bother me who but someone who isn't that old. The thing about Second is his skills would be on show for everyone to see and even if he doesn't do that well because of the pressure I am sure he is a good enough player to play for South Africa at a later date since he is only 23.

  • Dummy4 on January 17, 2013, 12:24 GMT

    De Kock is a very young man with enormous expectations placed upon him.It's unclear whether his behaviour was a "once-off" or not and what the exact circumstances are,what was said in the middle,etc.He will have to be wary of opponents riling him or his game could get affected in the fujture.The cricket field should never have physical confrontation.

  • mahjut on January 17, 2013, 11:29 GMT

    @StaalBurger - Like SA has always made sure "the best players play..." lol ... Rudolph, Hall, Boucher, Dipenaar (and it pains me to say: MacKenzie) were given loong runs in the side but were never much better (if better at all) than a whole host of FC players (consider that Hall was in for Klusener) around SA. Boje and Harris are forgivable becasue i think they probably were the best around at the time. It's always a risk to judge everyone by your standards ... presenting an arguement in favour of Tsolokile's is not necessarily a simple exercise in proving one's political correctness (though my feeling is that proving that to you would be very dificult indeed) ... there are many obvious reasons to select him, not least; the fact that he went about last season making runs @42ave as he was told to (which resulted - correctly - in a promise to play). de kock may have made more but he is a newboy and has looked pretty vulnerable so far to me after taking the step up

  • No featured comments at the moment.