South Africa penalised by umpires for ball tampering in Test against Pakistan

Pakistan have demanded an explanation from the International Cricket Council after South Africa’s Faf du Plessis escaped with a fine of 50 percent of his match fee for ball tampering in the second Test in Dubai.

Pakistan were on the receiving end following the only previous occasion in Test history when the umpires have changed a tampered ball and imposed a five-run penalty, at the Oval in 2006. They were widely accused of cheating and, when they refused to take the field, the was Test forfeited.

The chairman of the Pakistan Cricket Board, Najam Sethi, tweeted: “PCB is writing a letter to the ICC, seeking explanation of inconsistency by match referee in application of tampering rule.”

Du Plessis, who pleaded guilty to the charge, was not given any suspension by the ICC match referee David Boon, he was simply fined half his match fee.

While it is not surprising that former Pakistan players have waded into the debate, they have gained support from a more unexpected source, England’s captain Michael Vaughan, who tweeted: “Anyone caught ball tampering should be banned for at least ten matches.”

Du Plessis was caught in full view of the television cameras when South Africa were fielding during Pakistan’s second innings. He is seen vigorously polishing the ball, which would be tolerated in normal circumstances, only in this case it was on the zip of his trouser pocket, a somewhat more abrasive substance than synthetic fibres.

The television commentator, former South African captain Kepler Wessels, said while the camera was on du Plessis: “The issue there is that zip. That’s the problem.”

Former Pakistan captain Rashid Latif also thought it was a problem. “The punishment is very lenient. I think Faf should have been banned for six months,” Latif said, “plus the captain of the team should be held responsible and punished.”

Pakistan’s former fast bowler Shoaib Akhtar, who was not only fined but suspended for ball tampering in 2003, told Geo Television in Pakistan: “[The] ICC can’t do justice on merit. It doesn’t have any guts to do so.”

As match referee, Boon offered the extenuating circumstance that du Plessis’s act was “not part of a deliberate and/or prolonged attempt to unfairly manipulate the condition of the ball.” Given the vigour with which du Plessis rubbed the ball on his trouser zip, this was an unusual use of the wording “not deliberate”.

Du Plessis was spotted by the TV umpire, Paul Reiffel of Australia, on Friday evening. The on-field umpires, Ian Gould and Rod Tucker, called over South Africa’s captain Graeme Smith, changed the ball and awarded Pakistan five penalty runs.

Given that the South African pace bowler Vernon Philander was also caught on camera in the act of apparently scratching the ball with his left finger, the statement released by AB de Villiers, South Africa’s vice-captain, rang rather hollow: “Honestly, we’re not the team that scratches the ball. We don’t cheat, it’s as simple as that. I know Faffy very well, he’s the last man to try anything like that.” Except that du Plessis has now pleaded guilty.

View the original article here

Ashes 2013: TV umpires chief Simon Taufel believes officials need more training

Taufel, who stood in 74 Tests before retiring last year aged 41, now works for the International Cricket Council and is in the process of building a training programme for officials across all forms of the game in an attempt to lift the standards of third-umpiring, and to widen the diversity of the elite panel that at the moment includes eight out of 12 umpires from England or Australia.

The third umpire’s decisions have been one of the most controversial aspects of the current Ashes series, beginning with the wrongly overturned lbw decision against Jonathan Trott in the first Test and including a couple of close calls on faint edges behind at Lord’s. Commentators have blamed the third umpires for failing to apply the decision review system properly and Taufel believes more training is required for what has become a pressurised job as technology increasingly influences cricket.

Taufel also reveals how modern umpires working in the glare of television cameras even practise in front of a mirror how to overturn appeals without looking as though they have lost confidence.

“Umpiring in today’s international cricket is a different being to what it was when I started,” Taufel told The Daily Telegraph. “We expect our third umpires to sit behind a TV and think it is going to be 100 per cent right all the time. The results prove us dif­ferently. It is an incredibly chal­lenging role.”

The third umpire spends about 80??per cent of his time watching television images but also has to monitor over-rates, logo infringements and communications between officials and the television broadcaster. Last week in Sri Lanka, Rod Tucker, the Australian umpire, was ill and missed a match between Sri Lanka and South Africa but rather than use the local umpire to fill in as third official, he was instead asked to umpire on the field such is the specialist nature of the TV job and the amount of training required.

“We have 45 people [officials from the elite panel and international list] who can be third umpires. That is a lot of people we need to train with limited resources and time,” Taufel said. “All I have at my disposal is three umpire coaches and myself and the co-operation of host broadcasters. That is a big challenge. It demands the appropriate training and focus of skills to catch up where we are on field.

“No system is perfect. All have drawbacks and positives. There are some fundamental decisions that people who make decisions have to look at.

“People focus on not trying to bring DRS down or to find holes in it. Don’t ask is it right or wrong but ask are we using it in most effective way to serve officials, players and values of the game?”

Taufel, who delivered the Cowdrey Lecture at Lord’s on Tuesday night, is also helping those at the top to cope with having decisions overturned, an umpire’s equivalent to dropping a catch or playing a bad shot. “Years ago you could stand on field say I have called it and done the best I can. Now you see decisions dissected on big screen in front of you, get instant feedback from third umpire.

“Dealing with instant feedback is more of a challenge these days. The better umpires learn to deal with that faster and even work on body language to a point when they will stand in front of a mirror or a colleague and practise having to reverse and change a decision in a way that still looks strong and promotes confidence.”

With only two umpires from the subcontinent on the elite panel, Taufel recognises the need to lift standards around the world and avoid the current situation where only four umpires are able to control 10 Ashes Tests. “We have to try and move away from situation where we have eight umpires from England and Australia. That is reflective of how well Cricket Australia and the ECB structure their domestic system. Ideally you would want to broaden that pool because it [the Ashes] is a high profile series.

“It is pressurised, it is hard work and you would like to think we can balance our appointments a lot more so we are getting a much better spread of workload.”

Taufel pinpointed the importance of integrity in his speech last night and believes players must question whether they are acting in the interests of cricket, a view which questions Stuart Broad’s decision not to walk after edging to slip in the first Ashes Test.

“It is for each player to look at themselves and how they play the game,” said Taufel. “My message to anyone involved in the game is do the right thing and put interests of the game ahead of personal interests. That is the spirit of cricket. Everything we need to do is from the point of view of integrity.

“Respect the opponent, respect the game and its future and make sure everything you do is based on honour and integrity for advancing the game of cricket. If you are doing that above self-interest then that is a good thing.”

View the original article here

Umpires given power to curb ball tampering

Umpires have been empowered by the ICC to take action on ball tampering even if they only have suspicion that the condition of the ball has been changed and have no eye witness evidence.

The decision, taken by the ICC Board at their annual conference in London, comes in the wake of controversy in the Champions Trophy when England faced allegations of ball tampering.

The former England captain, Bob Willis, had said that umpire Aleem Dar was 'on England's case' and 'that one individual is scratching the ball for England' when the ball was changed during their tie against Sri Lanka at The Oval.

The ICC has now formally asserted that umpires are free to act on any unproven suspicions of ball tampering. They have approved a two-step on-field process, including penalising the fielding team on the second offence and reporting the fielding captain. The rule will come into effect on October 1.

According to the new regulation, if the umpire believes the condition of the ball has been "changed" but there is no witness to identify which player was behind it, the umpire will replace the ball and issue a first and final warning to the fielding captain.

If umpires suspects a second offence, they can award a five-run penalty to the batting team, replace the ball again and report the fielding captain under the ICC code of conduct.

England gained substantially more reverse-swing in their opening match against Australia and have responded to veiled expressions of suspicion by countering that the skill of their bowlers and superior ball management is at the heart of their success.

But the umpires - Aleem Dar and Billy Bowden - changed the ball during their second match against Sri Lanka. England's captain Alastair Cook was visibly agitated by the change of ball, which he felt contributed unfairly to England's defeat.

The official word from the ICC at the time was that the ball was changed because it was misshapen.

Although no ICC official or member confirmed if that incident was discussed at the meeting, it is understood that it did play a part in the rule change.

While the five-run penalty for ball tampering is not new, the process for the on-field umpires to follow is a new development. It was mooted by the ICC's cricket committee and chief executives committee, and ratified by the ICC Board.

It is understood the main reason behind making amendments were to remove the "grey areas" within Law 42.3, which deals with the condition of the ball.

Currently, umpires - if they feel that the condition of the ball has changed beyond the permitted allowance - can inform the fielding captain that they are replacing the ball in addition to awarding five penalty runs.

Umpires, though, have been wary to take such an action for fear of potential consequences.

The ICC Board sanctioned two other changes to the playing conditions as well, also to be implemented from October 1. Firstly, the on-field umpire will be able to ask the television umpire to check if a delivery that claims a wicket is a no-ball on height, if he has doubts.

And zing wickets - the stumps and bails that have LED lights that flash when they are struck - will come into use in ODI and Twenty20 cricket.

These stumps were used in Australia's Big Bash League T20 tournament, and the ICC had commissioned an independent assessment of the technology before adopting it.

View the original article here