Ball tampering issue at Newlands :Broad Jr, thug like match referee dad, Sunny vindicated ?

[cowboysfan]

http://www.cricinfo.com/rsaveng09/content/current/story/442621.html South Africa have "raised concerns" over the state of the ball with ICC match referee Roshan Mahanama following the third day's play against England at Cape Town. It follows TV footage that showed Stuart Broad standing on the ball as he fielded it in his followthrough. The incident occurred in the 15th over of South Africa's innings when Broad fielded a defensive shot from Hashim Amla by stopping the ball with his boot. Then the TV pictures appeared to show Broad applying pressure with the studs. "There have been several queries from the media about various video footage shown today, and certain allegations being made about the ball," a South Africa spokesman said. "We have raised our concerns with the match referee about it and we've left it to him to decide if any further action or investigation is necessary." However, the England coach Andy Flower said he wasn't aware of South Africa's issues. "The umpires or match referee haven't said anything to us about that," he said. "That's the first I've heard of it so I can't really comment." When asked about the specific incident of Broad stepping on the ball, Flower said: "I think over the years we have seen a lot of tall fast bowlers stop balls with their feet so I don't see anything sinister in it all." When play resumed after lunch the umpires, Daryl Harper and Tony Hill, appeared to have a word with Andrew Strauss, but Flower said he was unaware of any conversation. "It could be all manner of things and I'm not aware of anything. I think it would be wrong to speculate about what they were talking about before we actually know." England have managed to reverse-swing the ball throughout the series, with the most dramatic spell coming on the fourth afternoon at Durban where South Africa fell to 50 for 6, and Flower was adamant it was all down to the bowler's skill. "Without a doubt, I thought they were very skilful in the way they reverse-swung the ball," he said. "We did it a bit at Centurion as well, I think both sides know how to get the ball to reverse-swing and then use it. It's a very well documented skill." This isn't the first time that Broad has been at the centre of controversy during this series. On the third day of the first Test at Centurion he approached the on-field umpires to complain about the length of time South Africa took to ask for a review. He escaped any censure on that occasion but Broad's on-field behaviour has come into focus of late. Sunil Gavaskar claimed in his newspaper column that he avoids punishment because his father, Chris, is an ICC match referee. ------------ anybody saw this incident?

[Deleted_User_1]

Don't worry. Daddy will bail him out.

[Sachinism]

Anyone got a vid, I wanna see this

[Watson87]

It is nothing compared to Brad Haddin's cheat claims, how he stumped broom. Anyway he wasn't tampering just tried stopping it, the media jeez!!

[Desi Cartman]

I saw it and he just stopped the ball. Maybe he should have made sure that he didnt step on it. I dont know if he did it more than once but if its just once then its not a big deal

[Feed]

Ball tampering issue a close chapter for ICC With South Africa not lodging any formal complaint against the English bowlers, the International Cricket Council on Wednesday said it would consider the ball-tampering episode of the Cape Town Test as a closed chapter. More... Ball tampering issue a close chapter for ICC Press Trust Of India Dubai, January 06, 2010 With South Africa not lodging any formal complaint against the English bowlers, the International Cricket Council on Wednesday said it would consider the ball-tampering episode of the Cape Town Test as a closed chapter. "The International Cricket Council confirms that it has received no official lodgment from South Africa team management laying a charge against any England player following reports of alleged breaches of Law 42.3 (changing the condition of the ball). "With play on day four of the match having resumed, the deadline for submission of such notification has now passed," the ICC said in a statement. "In addition, having reviewed relevant television footage, the umpires decided not to bring a charge against any player for a breach of Law 42.3. As such, the ICC now considers this specific matter to be closed," it added. England pacer Stuart Broad was seen stopped the ball with his boot and then stepping on it with spikes, while his bowling colleague James Anderson was also seen tinkering with the seam. A Cricket South Africa spokesman said the Proteas did mention the incident to Match Referee Roshan Mahanama but decided against lodging a formal complaint. Note: By posting your comments here you agree to the terms and conditions of www.hindustantimes.com

[Feed]

‘If it was Pak what would we make of it?’ Michael Vaughan has expressed his concern over alleged ball-tampering by England players at Newlands. More... ‘If it was Pak what would we make of it?’ The Guardian London, January 06, 2010 Michael Vaughan has expressed his concern over alleged ball-tampering by England players at Newlands. Television footage of Stuart Broad and James Anderson appeared to show the pair trying to alter the ball’s condition to accelerate reverse-swing. Footage showed Broad stopping a straight drive with the sole of his boot while Anderson was seen picking at scuffs on the ball. “It certainly looks like Anderson has had some kind of play on the ball,” Vaughan said. “Broad stood on the ball, and then Anderson collected it... and started playing around the area where Broad had created the scuff marks. They were just trying to get the ball to reverse swing. It looks quite bad on TV, and I'm disappointed because I don't like to see that sort of action in a game. You have to look at the world of cricket, and if it was Pakistan what would we make of it?” Nasser Hussain was also not surprised to learn of SA’s concerns. Hussain said: “We've all been there, we're not whiter than white, where you see the ball and think would it be nice to get nails into that, get it reverse-swinging. But you’ve just got to leave it alone because if the opposition see you doing like that to the ball they get very fidgety.”

[Feed]

England accused of persistent cheating during Test series by South Africa One of South Africa's leading players, AB de Villiers, has said that England's "naughty" cricketers should have been reported and that they were guilty of working on the ball at the second Test in Durban as well as here in Cape Town. The ball-tampering row refused to go away, even though the matter was officially closed by the ICC earlier in the day. More... England accused of persistent cheating during Test series by South Africa • De Villiers casts doubt over Durban victory • 'We know we have done nothing wrong,' says Cook Paul Weaver at Newlands guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 6 January 2010 21.46 GMT One of South Africa's leading players, AB de Villiers, has said that England's "naughty" cricketers should have been reported and that they were guilty of working on the ball at the second Test in Durban as well as here in Cape Town. The ball-tampering row refused to go away, even though the matter was officially closed by the ICC earlier in the day. England, who were chasing 466 to win the game after South Africa had declared at 447 for seven, closed on 132 for three. "I think there should be a formal complaint. We spoke about it at Kingsmead because I look after our ball when we bowl and the captain asked why they get the ball to reverse a bit earlier," said De Villiers, who also claimed that there was "tension" between the sides. "The questions had been asked a few days before this Test and they still got it to reverse a bit quicker. Maybe they just have more skills." On Tuesday night a spokesman for Cricket South Africa revealed that the team management had "raised their concerns" about the condition of the ball with the match referee, Roshan Mahanama, after television footage had shown Stuart Broad placing his foot on it as he stopped it and his fellow fast bowler Jimmy Anderson picking at it. But De Villiers' comments will infuriate the England team because they felt that the issue was over once South Africa failed to file an official complaint to Mahanama before the start of this morning's play. It was then that the ICC officially closed its book on the matter and the umpires decided to take no action. Asked why South Africa had not made an official complaint, De Villiers said: "I'm not really sure, I thought we did. [The coach] Mickey Arthur actually told us he sent an email through, but I'm not really aware of that. I think there should be a formal complaint because the ball did reverse after that and there was quite clearly a piece of leather off the ball after he'd [broad] stepped on it and it's not the first time it happened. It's a little bit naughty. I wouldn't say he deserves to be banned but it should be looked at definitely. "All I know is that it's not on to be climbing on to the ball with your spikes. We all like to get the ball to 'reverse' all over the show, as long as you do it in a legal way." He added: "There's a bit of tension around, but we know it's important to stick to our game plans." But what will enrage England is that when De Villiers was asked what he had seen, specifically, he replied: "I can't say I saw anything. It's up to the footage on TV and maybe there will be something there. I haven't seen anything, I just know they've been reversing it a few overs earlier than us." Dr Mohammed Moosajee, the South Africa team manager, said: "There was an indentation on the ball and there were marks across it. That is why we asked the match referee to have a look. They have decided to take no action and we're happy with that." De Villiers' comments will be seen as more gamesmanship from a side who have tried on a number of occasions on this tour to get under England's skin. Alastair Cook, one of England's dismissed batsmen, said: "We're glad the matter is closed. We've done nothing wrong. We know what we've been doing is fine. The umpires, match referee and everyone else – with all the TV evidence – have said we've done nothing wrong and we're totally 100% confident in our camp that is true. That's what's been proved." Cook said that England's bowlers deserved to be recognised for their skills, and not placed under suspicion. He said: "We've been trying to find ways of getting the opposition out abroad when the Kookaburra [ball] goes flat, and the lads have been very skilled and put in a lot of hard work with [bowling coach] Ottis Gibson to become better reverse-swingers of the ball."

[patriot]

Ball tampering issue at Newlands :Broad Jr, thug like match referee dad, Sunny vindicated ? http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/cricket/2797669/South-Africa-Broad-has-done-it-before.html Sunny wrote a piece on this last week and a ******* cricinfo gora questioned Sunny's rationale. http://blogs.cricinfo.com/thelonghandle/2010/01/come_now_sunny.php I would love to see this SOB, Andrew Hughes, comment on Broad Jr. after this. Untill BCCI can't get this stinking match referee bias towards players from Aus in particular and Eng, its so called power is still over-rated.

[fineleg]

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/cricket/2797669/South-Africa-Broad-has-done-it-before.html Sunny wrote a piece on this last week and a ******* cricinfo gora questioned Sunny's rationale. http://blogs.cricinfo.com/thelonghandle/2010/01/come_now_sunny.php I would love to see this SOB, Andrew Hughes, comment on Broad Jr. after this. Untill BCCI can't get this stinking match referee bias towards players from Aus in particular and Eng, its so called power is still over-rated.

Problem with BCCI is apathy. Unbelievable apathy. They dont care unless money is directly involved. Indian player like Gambhir gets penalized and the Wat$on$ of the world go scot free, and BCCI babus are busy drinking lassis.

[Online]

Contrast this to http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/01/21/1074360836935.html

[Feed]

David Lloyd: Ball-tampering, pah! Just leave Jimmy Anderson be In effect Anderson had his wrist slapped by the umpires and that is the end of the matter. As it should be. It has gone on forever and it is no more serious that that.More... DAVID LLOYD: Ball-tampering, pah! Just leave Jimmy Anderson be By David Lloyd Last updated at 12:07 AM on 07th January 2010 Jimmy Anderson, to me, is guilty of no more than the equivalent of driving at 35 miles per hour in a 30 mph zone. Yes, according to the strict letter of the law, he was in the wrong judging by the TV pictures we saw yesterday but to me it is no big deal and the ICC are right not to punish him. He was certainly not driving recklessly, as it were, at 90 mph. I think the whole subject of ball-tampering is exaggerated in our game. There are far bigger issues than a bowler just trying to slightly assist the process of roughing up one side of the ball to gain reverse swing. The worst excesses of ball-tampering, traditionally, have centred around picking the seam and that has virtually been eradicated now, not least because the Kookaburra ball used in many countries around the world virtually has no seam at all. There are 32 television cameras being used by three different companies in this Test match and the players are acutely aware that anything they do will be picked up by at least one of those cameras. So Anderson will have felt that he was doing nothing wrong, even if the pictures seem to show him scratching the ball. To me, what he was doing was doodling with it. You still have to be a very skilful bowler to make the ball swing. Umpires, whatever people think, are not stupid and I used to be one. The correct way to deal with something like this is what I understand exactly happened. The umpires had a word with Andrew Strauss just to remind him that they should inspect the ball at all times and that if a piece of leather protrudes then they have to deal with it, not the bowler. In effect Anderson had his wrist slapped by the umpires and that is the end of the matter. As it should be. It has gone on forever and it is no more serious that that. This issue has blown up because a local television director presented a DVD of footage to the South African team management and they stirred it up by making it public without making an official complaint. People have asked me if a bigger fuss would have been made if a Pakistani had done what Jimmy did but I certainly wouldn’t have complained. People like Waqar Younis and Wasim Akram were highly skilled performers, as Anderson is too. Leave him alone. Case closed. Get on with the game.

[Feed]

Nasser Hussain: If it had been an Indian or a Pakistani, we'd say it was cheating I cannot believe that match referee Roshan Mahanama has not dragged James Anderson into his office, sat him down and asked him to explain himself.More... If a Pakistani or Indian had done what James Anderson did, we'd say it was cheating By Nasser Hussain Last updated at 12:23 AM on 07th January 2010 I cannot believe, having seen incriminating pictures of Jimmy Anderson for the first time on Wednesday, that match referee Roshan Mahanama has not dragged him into his office, sat him down and asked him to explain himself. I presume Mahanama has seen the television coverage that we saw on Wednesday. And if he has not then he should have made it his business to. And those pictures showed Anderson coming very close to what you would consider to be ball-tampering. I am not suggesting Anderson gouged the ball or really affected its condition. What the pictures showed to me was more like an inquisitve, dreamy sort of scratching that, at best, is very marginal as to whether it is an offence. There is no doubt in my mind that if a Pakistani or Indian bowler had been caught doing what Anderson did then we all would have come down on them like a ton of bricks. We would have said that they were cheating. I do not think the International Cricket Council have covered themselves in glory at all here. Their statement yesterday basically said that there had been no official complaint from South Africa, so that was the end of the matter. Well, who is running world cricket? It is down to the ICC to deal with the big issues in the game like match-fixing, ball-tampering, poor over-rates and the like. If they have seen TV pictures and feel that Anderson did something wrong then it is up to them to do something about it, not wait for South Africa to point the finger. South Africa, meanwhile, are at fault for pointing the finger but not going through with their complaint. You cannot politely accuse someone of cheating. What they have done in saying they had ‘concerns’ about the state of the ball is make a serious accusation and then run away when they were challenged to back it up. Make no mistake, ball-tampering in many forms has gone on forever and in recent times we have seen lip-salve, mints, Vaseline and even jelly beans used to get shine on the ball. I have sympathy with the views of someone like Allan Donald who believes that what Anderson and many others before him have done did should be allowed. This is a game heavily weighted in the batsman’s favour and if by allowing bowlers to be a bit more clever in what they do with the ball there is more skill and reverse swing in the game then cricket would be better for it. Yet while scratching is not allowed then we should make sure it does not happen. Anderson and Stuart Broad, who was foolish in treading on the ball, should learn their lesson and be more careful in future. I have never seen Jimmy do anything like this before and I certainly have not heard talk of him being someone who tampers with the ball. He has got away with this and he should be thankful and make sure it does not happen again.

[Feed]

De Villiers: 'Broad clearly altered the ball' Ball tampering threatened to overwhelm the Test series between England and South Africa yesterday. The tourists, who will probably lose the third Test today, were cleared of any wrongdoing without being charged, while the home side insisted officially that they accepted the findings but it was an issue that clearly will not go away. De Villiers: 'Broad clearly altered the ball' By Stephen Brenkley Thursday, 7 January 2010 Ball tampering threatened to overwhelm the Test series between England and South Africa yesterday. The tourists, who will probably lose the third Test today, were cleared of any wrongdoing without being charged, while the home side insisted officially that they accepted the findings but it was an issue that clearly will not go away. The way that South Africa feel was expressed by their batsman A B De Villiers after play on the fourth day of the Test with his side needing seven more England wickets to win. "I think there should be a formal complaint because the ball did reverse after that," he said. "There was obviously quite clearly a piece of the leather off the ball after Stuart Broad stepped on it and it's not the first time it has happened. It was a little bit naughty. I'm not saying he deserves to be banned but it should definitely be looked at." TV footage showed Broad standing on the ball with his spikes early in South Africa's second innings, after which his fellow fast bowler, Jimmy Anderson, could be seen apparently scratching the ball and playing with an errant piece of leather. To obtain the mysterious ingredient of reverse swing – so-called because it goes in the opposite direction to conventional swing – one side of the ball must be dry and rough, the other in pristine condition. South Africa expressed reservations to the match referee after the ball apparently started reversing much sooner than they thought appropriate, although they were well on top in the match. They declined to make their complaint formal yesterday by charging England with altering the condition of the ball. In a statement the ICC said that the umpires had brought no complaint and that the matter was closed. Dr Mohammed Moosajee, South Africa's team manager, said that they accepted the findings. "If you looked at the TV footage you could see quite clearly the ball was altered," he said. "We raised our concerns. There was no insinuation at all." England's vice-captain, Alastair Cook, said they were surprised when the ball started reversing so early. "We were trying to look after the ball conventionally and we were surprised," he said. "The outfield is lush but the square is more abrasive. From nowhere it got scuffed up on the square and it did reverse swing. It was a little bit to do with the overhead conditions and credit ought to be given to the bowlers." That England are sailing close to the wind was made extremely clear by one of their former captains, Michael Vaughan. He said on BBC Radio Five Live: "It certainly looks like Jimmy Anderson has had some kind of play on the ball. You have to look at the world of cricket and if it was Pakistan what would we make of it? It's a very delicate situation." Picking the seam is part of the game. The unspoken rule is that you do not get caught. England nearly did. They had better watch it. More...

[achilles]

Stuart Broad was found tampering the ball, and so was James Anderson, in the ongoing test vs South Africa. I won't be surprised if he gets away again. Which means Sunny Sir is right ! Congratulations Mr. Hughes Sir. You made a fool out of yourself on the internet by being an absolute cynic.

[saneindian]

James Anderson ball treatment 'delicate situation', says Vaughan: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/international/england/6940443/South-Africa-v-England-James-Anderson-ball-treatment-delicate-situation-says-Vaughan.html Vaughan told BBC Radio Five Live: "It certainly looks like Jimmy Anderson has had some kind of play on the ball. "You have to look at the world of cricket and if it was Pakistan what would we make of it? It's a very delicate situation. "Stuart Broad stood on the ball, and then Jimmy Anderson collected the ball, whether it was the next over or the over after, and started playing around the area where Stuart Broad had created the scuff marks. "They were just trying to get the ball to reverse swing. It looks quite bad on the TV screens, I'm quite disappointed because I don't like to see that sort of action in a game." Vaughan believes Anderson's actions may arouse more interest with the ICC than Broad's behaviour. "It's Jimmy Anderson just picking at the ball and shining it in a certain technique which is probably more worrying," Vaughan said. "I don't like to see that in the game and I'll be very interested to see how the ICC respond to it." Nasser Hussain, Vaughan's predecessor as captain, was not surprised to learn of South Africa's concerns after the footage emerged. Hussain said: "We've all been there, we're not whiter than white, where you see the ball and think would it be nice to get nails into that, get it reverse-swinging. "But you've just got to leave it alone because if the opposition see you going like that to the ball they get very fidgety. "Some cricketers of old allegedly would get their nails into it, use implements to really scrape it off and it would go very quickly. "It doesn't look like James Anderson is trying to do that. "He's been in the middle and he's playing with the thing but that is right on the edge of acceptable, he probably hasn't altered (the ball) that much, but if he does it for 30 overs he is altering the ball." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lets see what the ICC does now.

[DomainK]

It's ridiculous that both got away without even having to explain. Sunny was so right.

[asterix]

Srilanakans are known to suck up to anything English but hadn't Mahanama went bit far in his sucking up? What the heck Mahanama is doing there? These Lankan match refrees can only act against other South Asian teams..Chewtiya Mahanama..

[Sachinism]

I'd like to see the views of everyone who says there is no bias in ICC

[achilles]

I thought there must be a good reason why ICC refers to Roshan Mahanama as the "BEST Match Referee in the panel". He's been decent so far, but this is ridiculous. Planet cricket seems to be mum about this development.