Reputations are important things. Whether they are well deserved or not, they tend to follow you around. The perception that India’s players indulged in “over-appealing” dogged them for many years. It took a change of captain and an almost total change in personnel to get past this taint from the Ganguly years. The sight of Umpire Steve Bucknor wagging his finger sternly at Indian wicketkeeper Parthiv Patel seemed to confirm what many, starting (at least) with referee Mike Denness in 2001 felt – that in the field, India tended to appeal excessively, often for ridiculous cases.
Whether this reputation for excessive appealing was merited is a debatable point. Over-appealing is a fairly simple idea. Players are allowed to appeal anything, but they must not continue to ask the question after the Umpire has made a decision. Once the Umpire says not out, any continued appeal amounts to over-appealing. ‘Over-appealing’ has little to do with either the volume or the intensity of the appeal. One other thing is true about the over-appealing problem – running towards the Umpire as one asks the question is considered intimidatory and is discouraged.
Once India acquired this reputation, it was hard to shake it off.
When it comes to ball-tampering, Pakistan have a long standing reputation of attempting it. Starting with Imran Khan in the 1980s and Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis in England in 1992, the reputations of generations of Pakistan bowlers as ball tamperers has been persistent. This is true to the extent that in a controversial Test at the Oval in 2006, they were fined 5 runs for tampering by Umpires Darrell Hair and Steve Doctrove. Simon Hughes, who was later asked to inspect the ball, concluded that the Umpire had “guessed” that the ball was tampered.
“The problem was Hair was guessing, using the flimsiest evidence.
“The marks on the ball were not blatant enough for the drastic measures Hair took,” former Middlesex and Durham seam bowler Hughes commented.
England, on the other hand, seem to be involved in a ball tampering row on a regular basis, and yet, seem to have avoided a reputation for ball tampering. Consider the facts:
1. Marcus Trescothick admitted that England had regularly tampered the ball using Murray Mints (after apparently testing several other types) during their 2005 Ashes victory in England. As Chloe Saltau reported here, an Australian player had even cottoned on to the fact that the ball always returned to the bowler via Trescothick, but nobody could make an allegation as they feared being accused of sour grapes. Damien Fleming observed that while he appreciated the English bowlers’ wrist position, he was surprised that they got the ball to reverse after 40 overs in English conditions.
2. In 1994, Michael Atherton was caught on TV in the 1994 Lord’s Test against South Africa picking at the ball before handing it to Darren Gough. The Match Referee Peter Burge let Atherton off. Seven years later, Michael Denness would haul Sachin Tendulkar up for doing the same thing in a Test at Port Elizabeth. Atherton was caught on TV using dirt from his pocket on the ball in the same 1994 Test and was fined.
3. In 2010, Stuart Broad was caught with his spiked boot on the ball (however, note the caption). Former England captain Michael Vaughan thought Broad (and James Anderson, also accused) was lucky to get away without official censure.
4. In 2013, England have been accused by former England fast bowler and captain Bob Willis of tampering the ball. On the field, Umpire Aleem Dar changed a 12 over old ball in the 25th over of England’s bowling innings against Sri Lanka, 3 overs into Ravi Bopara’s spell with that same ball. In 2009 Bopara was accused by Dermot Reeve of ball tampering in New Zealand. Going by Ashley Giles’s response, it is clear that Willis was referring to Bopara.
Ironically, Bob Willis was the other bowler involved in John Lever’s vaseline incident in India during the Chepauk Test of the 1976-77 tour. Giles played all 5 Tests in the 2005 Ashes – the series in which England tampered the ball using mints. James Anderson, who sounds so wounded (“disappointed and frustrated”) in his response to the most recent allegations was accused of ball tampering in 2010 alongside Broad. It is a bit rich when people themselves have previous been accused of ball tampering and have played in Tests in which their teammates have described in detail how it took place, claim that it doesn’t happen and that they don’t do it.
English county cricket is by all counts a hot bed of ball tampering. Pakistan’s fast bowling greats learned about tampering in the county game, and in 2005, in the middle of a controversy about tampering involving Surrey and Gloucestershire, the former England seam bowler Derek Pringle wrote that ball tampering was widespread and perhaps shouldn’t be such a controversial thing.
England’s defense of ball tampering allegations has been cynical and professional. In 2010, with Stuart Broad caught up in ball tampering claims, England coach Andrew Flower defended him saying that “we have seen a lot of tall fast bowlers stop the ball with their boot” – a classical non-denial denial, which had the added virtue (if you will) of changing the character of Broad’s actions. Amazingly (or perhaps not so amazingly), the English Press Corps which consists of many former cricketers, failed to notice Flower’s shift.
Every time there is a ball tampering allegation against England, they come out against it hard. Headlines report a “furious England” denying allegations, or England “strongly denying” allegations.
Yet, the reports keep coming. County cricket is the true cradle of the game, no matter how much money BCCI might have. Over the last 40 years, the County Championship has been the venue where the world greatest talent has been polished to produce three of the greatest teams in this period – West Indies, Pakistan and Australia, not to speak of England. They have given the world T20 cricket, and they have also been the venue of the most sophisticated ball-tampering operations which were then borrowed by bowlers from Pakistan. Pringle writes about how Sarfaraz Nawaz and Allan Lamb, teammates at Northants, were at it.
When will England acquire a reputation as serial ball tamperers in the same way that India once had a reputation for over-appealing? England have been accused more often than any other team in the recent past of ball tampering. They have employed former English players who played in series in which we know they tampered the ball in high team management posts. Their first class game has been the cradle of ball tampering. They have been accused by former England players and captains of ball tampering, and been found to have been lucky by a former England captain in one specific episode. Their denials are becoming increasingly ridiculous.
David Hopps is right that there is a lot of rumour but no hard evidence in the current episode. Darrell Hair was guessing when he accused Inzamam’s Pakistan of ball tampering in 2006. Is there any chance at all that an ICC Referee or Umpire would dare to “guess” against England? It would just not do would it, for England to acquire a reputation for ball tampering, even though the rest of the world learnt it there, they have admitted to doing it before, and keep getting suspected or accused by opposing teams – Australia and South Africa, and their own former players and captains – Reeve,Vaughan and Willis.
There is no evidence against England in this instance. Or, to put it more accurately, there is no smoking gun – such as a video of Rahul Dravid spitting a lozenge on to the ball, or Michael Atherton rubbing dirt on to it, or Robert Key sandpapering the ball, or Shahid Afridi biting it.
Given the depth of know-how which must exist in the England set up and the various county set ups for reason illustrated above, and given how different England look as a bowling attack when its not moving in the air (this gives them a motive to try and find ways to make it move in the air as often as possible), it is reasonable to wonder why England have not acquired a reputation for ball tampering.
Every time England get the old ball to swing, or a ball that’s 10 overs old to reverse, there ought to be questions asked and suspicions raised. For that is what it means to have a reputation for doing something – a reputation which England have done enough to deserve.
I will end by tackling one specious argument which I find to be especially silly when it comes to ball tampering. When made in jest, it is funny, but when made seriously it holds no water. This is the point about whether or not ball tampering “worked”. That ought to be a moot point. Ball tampering occured when Atherton rubbed dirt on the ball, or when Dravid rubbed a half eaten lozenge on the ball, or when Trescothick admitted to using Murray Mints in the 2005 Ashes. What happens afterwards is besides the point. Whether or not the law ought to be changed is a matter of policy, which ought to be debated. But it is not all right for tampering to be condoned while the law is what it is. Such condoning is invariably uneven – we hear many more arguments condoning ball tampering when England are accused, than, say when Pakistan are accused.
Given the occurrences since 2005, and given County Cricket’s undeniable status as the cradle of contemporary ball tampering, England deserve serious suspicion every time they achieve something out of the ordinary with the ball.
