Ball tampering not the crime of the century

Ball tampering is cricket’s version of the nanny state. It’s just another example of batters being treated as Princelings.

The ball tampering “scandal” which engulfed India A on the final day of their tour match against Australia A in Mackay on Sunday is cricket’s latest hysterical moment.

At the start of the final day, the umpires replaced the ball because it had been “scratched”, taking the spotlight squarely away from Australia A captain Nathan McSweeney, whose unbeaten 88 guided his team to a seven-wicket victory over the tourists in the four-day match.

McSweeney has all but batted himself into the first Test team following the collective failure of Marcus Harris, Sam Konstas and Cameron Bancroft to make a case for Australia’s vacant opening position. And all-rounder Beau Webster did himself no harm either with an unbeaten 61 in an unbroken partnership of 141 with McSweeney.

But the headlines are all about ball tampering, as if it is somehow the crime of the century.

India A wicketkeeper Ishan Kishan avoided a charge of dissent despite an on-field argument with an umpire Shawn Craig, who told the India players the ball was changed because it was scratched, even though a Cricket Australia statement later said it was due to “deterioration”.

“You scratch it, we change the ball. No more discussion, let’s play,” Craig was heard saying over the stump microphones. That led to a heated exchange with Kishan who replied: “So we are going to play with this ball … that’s a very stupid decision.”

Craig responded: “Excuse me, you’ll be on report for dissent. That’s inappropriate behaviour. Because of your actions we changed the ball.”

All this fuss over a few marks on a cricket ball.

Yes it can lead to skilled pace bowlers generating reverse swing but so what. The game has been increasingly weighted in favour of batters. Modern “unpressed” bats have bigger sweet spots that hit the ball miles, even though they don’t last very long, hence batters taking a dozen or more on tour.

The irony is that batters don’t need to hit the ball as far because there is a rope which is now metres inside the boundary to protect fielders from crashing into the fence. Many a six these days would have been caught on the fence a generation ago.

As long as fielders don’t bring a pocket knife, bottle top or some other foreign object onto the field for ball surgery, let them “manage” the ball however they like. Part of batting’s skill is learning to play against the swinging ball

If cricket was really serious about a proper balance between bat and ball the Test playing countries who make up the International Cricket Council would get serious about pitch doctoring.

Batters should learn to play in all conditions but not when a curator fails to turn the hose off (hello, England seamers) or forgets to turn it on (hello, subcontinental dust bowls).

It was such a shock that New Zealand beat India in their just completed series. India are a good side who play to their strengths by doctoring wickets to suit their spinners. Some “rag” from the first ball, as veteran Australian opener Usman Khawaja once observed about deliveries turning sharply.

That supernatural Kiwi triumph was India’s first home series loss going back 12 years, having won the previous 18 series. And that 2012 victory by England was an outlier. India’s previous series loss at home had been against Australia 20 years ago, the only baggy green success in India since 1969.

So let’s not get precious about ball tampering and punishing players when administrators in most Test nations so wholeheartedly endorse the creation of dodgy surfaces for the home team. If cricket was serious about being played fairly it would have independent officials overseeing pitch preparation.

The ICC commits to this practice during global tournaments but that appeared to be a token gesture during the World Cup in India last year. There is a classic picture of Australian captain Pat Cummins standing mid pitch the day before the final against India in Ahmedabad with his arm outstretched as if about to take flight.

He was pointing at both ends of the pitch, which were bare and underprepared for India’s spinners, compared to a flatter surface in the middle to try and nullify Australia’s pace attack. As it turned out Cummins bowled and captained brilliantly, India choked, and Travis Head blazed their spinners to all parts for a superb century, allowing Australia to emphatically claim the title.

But ball tampering is considered one of cricket’s great sins, like running out a batters backing up (a Mankad). The dopey batter deserves to be out for not staying in their crease and taking a potentially unfair advantage running between wickets. But the bowler is vilified as the nebulous spirit of cricket is invoked.

Then there’s the case of seemingly sozzled and confused Lord’s members during the Ashes last year, when Jonny Bairstow walked out of his crease before over was called and Alex Carey stumped him. The Lord’s members chanted “cheat” and worse when the Australians came in for lunch a short time later for what was a perfectly legitimate dismissal. Carey later received death threats.

The “cheat” tag goes back to Australia’s South African tour in 2018 when Cameron Bancroft produced sandpaper to rub on the ball during the Cape Town Test. Amid the uproar Bancroft was suspended for nine months while captain Steve Smith and vice-captain David Warner were both stripped of their leadership positions and rubbed out for a year.

The punishment didn’t fit the crime, even if Smith and Bancroft later made it worse by claiming sandpaper wasn’t involved.

So if administrators can shamelessly sanction pitch doctoring almost everywhere almost all the time, then fielders should be able to tamper with the ball. Just skip the sandpaper.