Even before India set foot in Australia to defend the Border-Gavaskar Trophy, the fireworks have been set off Down Under.
As the Rohit Sharma-led side succumbed to a series whitewash at home to New Zealand on Sunday, the India ‘A’ team in Australian city of Mackay was at the centre of an alleged ball tampering controversy.
And even though Cricket Australia cleared the touring party of any wrongdoing, there are no signs yet of the issue dying down.
Former Australia wicketkeeper Ian Healy told SENQ: “When you see a team complain about a ball being changed, they were up to something.”
The Associated Australian Press called it an ‘explosive start to the summer’. “Tamper Temper,” screamed the headline of Australian newspaper Daily Telegraph, refering to the spat between India A captain Ishan Kishan and umpire Shawn Craig over the issue. The report alluded to the previous instances of bad blood between the two sides, including the Monkeygate scandal from 2008.
The allegations surfaced on the start of Day 4 when Australia were resuming at 85 for 3. Defending a total of 224, the umpires handed India A a fresh ball.
“You scratch it, we change the ball. No more discussion, let’s play” umpire Craig reportedly told the players, according to the Sydney Morning Herald.
A miffed Kishan, returning to the national team radar after a year of turmoil, could be heard telling Craig that it “is a very stupid decision” to play with the new ball, to which the umpire replied: “Excuse me, you’ll be on report for dissent. That’s inappropriate behaviour. Because of your actions we changed the ball.”
Not much was to be made of the skirmish for the rest of the day’s play as the partnership between skipper Nathan McSweeney (who may have confirmed his place as opener for the first Test against India on November 22) and Beau Webster that India A were trying to break stayed unbeaten to take their side to a seven-wicket win.
However, things took a curious turn later in the day.
Cricket Australia released a statement a few hours after the furore which seemed to track back Craig’s claims, exonerating both India and Kishan. “The ball used in the fourth innings of the match was changed due to deterioration,” it said, without going into the nature or cause of the deterioration. “Both teams’ captain and manager were informed of the decision prior to the start of play. No further action is being taken.”
Given this is an unofficial Test played on Australian soil, the CA’s bylaws are in place for its regulation. Their playing conditions state that the umpires are allowed to change the ball without enforcing the requisite five-run penalty.
“If the umpires together suspect, but are not certain, that the condition of the ball has been unfairly changed, or that its condition is inconsistent with the use it has received, the umpires may: Change the ball forthwith. The umpires shall choose a replacement ball for one of similar wear and of the same brand as the ball in use prior to the contravention; Bowler’s end umpire shall issue the captain with a first and final warning,” the CA playing conditions 41.3.4 reads.
The playing conditions also state that ball-tampering is a level-three offence, for which a ban can also be imposed on a player.
Although the CA have India a clean chit, some former players were not convinced. Healy went on to add: “India A were gearing up for a big reverse swing session in order to get the Australians under pressure. Australia were chasing a small total and it just didn’t happen (for India A). The Australia A batters were oblivious to it. They just put their head down and performed really well.”
Healy claimed India ‘whinged about it… they didn’t then front the media to deny it.’ “They just closed ranks and didn’t give themselves a chance to sort of say what they thought was happening. But I thought Cricket Australia were clinical, the umpires were good. If they are suspicious about the ball, just change it.”
Sections of the Australian press have alluded to the possibility of the cricket board seemingly bending over not wanting to start a conflict with the ‘all-powerful’ BCCI, citing past examples.
“As the ‘Monkeygate’ scandal proved nearly two decades ago, following through with allegations against India can sometimes prove to be more trouble than they’re worth when you’re the host nation at the whim of the most powerful cricketing nation,” a report in the Daily Telegraph read.
The Sydney Morning Herald suggested that by “appearing to walk back Craig’s words,” the statement released by the CA “removed the prospect of an ugly conflict at the outset of India’s lucrative tour of Australia for five Tests.”
The paper also noted previous examples of such incidents, including during India’s tour of South Africa in 2001 when accusations were made against Sachin Tendulkar, who was given a one-match ban, but did not have to serve it during the final game after the BCCI convinced the opposing board to conduct the third Test as an unofficial one that does not come under ICC purview.
The BCCI has not released a statement over the incident a player, requesting anonymity, has denied ball tampering allegations, suggesting a ‘nail from the sideboards may have brushed the ball.’
I’m Manas Ranjan Sahoo: Founder of “Webtirety Software”. I’m a Full-time Software Professional and an aspiring entrepreneur, dedicated to growing this platform as large as possible. I love to Write Blogs on Software, Mobile applications, Web Technology, eCommerce, SEO, and about My experience with Life.
