CRICKET TEST MATCH:AB DE VILLIERS believes South Africa should have made an official complaint about their ball-tampering suspicions and "naughty" England seamer Stuart Broad to match referee Roshan Mahanama.
England’s hosts pulled back from the brink of kickstarting a major controversy yesterday when they chose to take their concerns no further, after officials in the third Test at Newlands straight-batted their initial query.
England had already rejected “any suggestion of ball-tampering or malpractice” on the part of any of their players – and the International Cricket Council subsequently issued a lunchtime statement, making it clear the matter was closed.
South Africa needed to complain officially – and therefore effectively lay a charge against either Broad or James Anderson – before start of play on day four of the match. When they failed to do so, Mahanama had a choice of two courses of action – having reviewed the video evidence and that of umpires Daryl Harper and Tony Hill. He could decide the matter merited his investigation anyway, or conclude – as he soon did – there was no reason for that.
South Africa’s concerns centred on an incident in which Broad stopped a straight drive with the bottom of his boot, Anderson’s general management of the ball and their own perception that it had become unusually scuffed.
De Villiers, whose team last night had England 132 for three in their second innings and were therefore closing on a likely series-levelling victory today, does not appear to be convinced justice has been done. “All I know is that it’s not on to be climbing on to the ball with your spikes,” said De Villiers. “We all like to get the ball to “reverse” all over the show, as long as you do it in a legal way.
“I think there should be a formal complaint, because the ball did “reverse” afterwards, and there was quite clearly a piece of leather off the ball after he’d 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.”
De Villiers admits he has yet to see any evidence of England deliberately and unfairly interfering with the condition of the ball. But he has been confused at the opposition’s ability to find reverse-swing earlier than his own team throughout the series. That was especially notable in England’s victory at Durban, where Broad took a sudden rush of second-innings wickets in an unexpected South Africa collapse. “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,” De Villiers reported. “The questions had been asked a few days before this Test, and they still got it to “reverse” a bit quicker.”
England batsman Alastair Cook was last night equally adamant England have nothing to be ashamed of. Asked if they are angry at the way events unfolded, he said: “We were a little bit. We’ve done nothing wrong.”
Recalling those latter stages of the St Stephen’s Day Test in Durban, he added: “The outfield was quite lush, but the square ends were abrasive. But we were very surprised at the time (by early reverse-swing), because we were all thinking we’ve got to try to look after the ball conventionally; then from nowhere, it got scuffed up on the square and did reverse-swing. I think it was a little bit to do with the overhead conditions as well, and we’ve got to give a bit of credit to our bowlers.”
Cook stressed too England’s bowlers and their above-board and skilful tactics deserve to be recognised, rather than placed under suspicion. “We’ve been trying to find ways of getting the opposition out abroad when the Kookaburra 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,” he said. “It’s not just the ball; the bowlers have to take credit. I couldn’t reverse-swing any ball, if I tried.”
DAY FOUR
Overnight: England 273 (M J Prior 76, A N Cook 65; M Morkel 5-75, D W Steyn 4-74). South Africa 291 (J H Kallis 108, M V Boucher 51; J M Anderson 5-63) and 312-2 (G C Smith 162 no, H M Amla 95).
South Africa: Second Innings
G C Smith c Collingwood b Onions 183
J H Kallis c Prior b Anderson 46
A B de Villiers c Broad b Anderson 34
J P Duminy c Prior b Anderson 36
M V Boucher c Bell b Swann 15
D W Steyn not out 1
Extras b8 lb7 nb2 pens 5 22
–––
Total 7 wkts dec (111.2 overs) 447
Fall of wickets: 1-31 2-261 3-346 4-376 5-401 6-442 7-447.
Did Not Bat: M Morkel, P L Harris, F de Wet.
Bowling: Anderson 22.2-1-98-3; Onions 22-4-87-1; Swann 37-5-127-3; Broad 22-4-79-0; Pietersen 3-0-6-0; Trott 5-0-30-0.
England: Second Innings
A J Strauss c Amla b Harris 45
A N Cook c Boucher b de Wet 55
I J L Trott not out 24
K P Pietersen lbw b Steyn 6
J M Anderson not out 0
Extras b1 lb1 pens 0 2
–––
Total 3 wkts (51 overs) 132
Fall of wickets: 1-101, 2-107, 3-129.
To Bat: P D Collingwood, I R Bell, M J Prior, S C J Broad, G P Swann, G Onions.
Bowling: M Morkel 12-3-26-0; Steyn 14-3-30-1; de Wet 8-4-19-1; Harris 13-2-43-1; Kallis 4-1-12-0.
