Ball tampering
In the sport of cricket, ball tampering is an action in which a fielder illegally alters the condition of the ball. The primary motivation of ball tampering is to interfere with the aerodynamics of the ball to aid swing bowling.
Definition
Under Law 41, subsection 3 of the Laws of Cricket, the ball may be polished without the use of an artificial substance, may be dried with a towel if it is wet, and have mud removed from it under supervision; all other actions which alter the condition of the ball are illegal. These are usually taken to include rubbing the ball on the ground, scuffing with a fingernail, using sandpaper or other sharp object, or tampering with the seam of the ball.Purpose
Generally, the purpose of altering the state of the ball is to achieve more favourable bowling conditions. Examples of ball tampering would include a fielder applying a substance, such as lip balm or sweetened saliva, to shine one side of the ball or pick the seam of the ball to encourage more swing. Conversely, roughening one side of the ball by use of an abrasive or cutting surface is also ball tampering.Altering a ball legally
Using spit and/or sweat is common and, for practitioners of swing bowling, it was integral, though now considered illegal after the COVID-19 pandemic. The moisture gained from spit or sweat when combined with polishing, smooths out one half of the ball which in turn allows air to pass over one side of the ball more quickly than over the other. When bowled correctly, a bowler can get the ball to move from one side to the other through the air. Also, it is common for fielders to rub the ball against their clothing to dry or polish it, as seen in most cricket matches.Sanction
The umpires are responsible for monitoring the condition of the ball, and must inspect it regularly. Where an umpire has deemed a player to be guilty of ball tampering, five penalty runs are awarded to the other side, and, if desired by the opposing captain, the ball is immediately replaced. The replacement ball is chosen by the umpires, and should match the condition of the previous ball as closely as possible. Depending on additional agreements laid out before the beginning of a series of matches, the team may instead be permitted to choose the ball from a selection of balls in various stages of use.If a bowler is found to be guilty of repeated ball tampering he can be prohibited from continuing to bowl in that innings. Following the conclusion of play, additional sanctions are usually brought against a ball tamperer, as it is considered a serious offence. The captain may also be penalised, if he is also responsible for the conduct of his players on the field.
Examples and allegations
The use of foreign substances to polish the ball is illegal, but may be difficult to detect by the umpires. Saliva used to be commonly used to add shine to the ball. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic this has now been banned due to the risk of viral transmission through saliva. It is unclear if this rule will ever be reverted, and players are now using other legal ways to shine the ball such as sweat. Substances which have been used for this purpose include hair gel, sugar from sweets, and lip balm. Some commentators have suggested that this form of undetected ball tampering may be common.Picking at the threads of the main seam or 'lifting' the quarter seam to aid conventional and reverse swing respectively are also illegal. Modifying the quarter seam can be particularly difficult to detect or prove.
There have been a number of high-profile instances of alleged ball tampering, particularly in international cricket due to the increase in television coverage. As ball tampering is a form of cheating and is often difficult to prove, accusations have frequently been controversial.
Chris Pringle, 1990
During a tour of Pakistan, New Zealand bowler Chris Pringle used a concealed bottle cap to rough up one side of a ball during a 1990 series in Faisalabad. Pringle and his captain, Martin Crowe, both later admitted to this after they had retired from the game. The New Zealand team had suspected the Pakistan team of doing the same in the series, but there is no evidence beyond their claims.Michael Atherton, 1994
In the "dirt in pocket" affair, then England captain Michael Atherton was accused of ball tampering during a Test match with South Africa at Lord's in 1994, after television cameras caught Atherton reaching into his pocket and then rubbing a substance on the ball. Atherton denied ball tampering, claiming that he had dirt in his pocket which he used to dry his hands. He was also accused of lying to the match referee. Atherton was summoned to the match referee and was fined £2,000 for failing to disclose the dirt to the match referee.Waqar Younis, 2000
of Pakistan became the first player to receive a suspension for ball tampering after a match in July 2000, and was fined 50% of his match fee.Sachin Tendulkar, 2001
In the second Test match of India's 2001 tour of South Africa, at St George's Park, Port Elizabeth, match referee Mike Denness suspended Sachin Tendulkar for one game in light of alleged ball tampering. Television cameras picked up images that suggested Tendulkar was scuffing the seam of the cricket ball. The ICC later cleared Tendulkar of ball tampering charges, though said he had cleaned the ball without the umpire's permission.Rahul Dravid, 2004
of India rubbed a cough lozenge on the shiny side of the ball at The Gabba during an Australian Tri-Series match against Zimbabwe. India won the match, but footage emerged of Dravid tampering with the ball, and he was fined 50% of his match fee.England cricket team, 2005
admitted in his autobiography, Coming Back to Me, that he used mints to shine the ball to produce more swing:"It was my job to keep the shine on the new ball for as long as possible with a bit of spit and a lot of polish. And through trial and error I finally settled on the type of spit for the task at hand. It had been common knowledge in county cricket for some time that certain sweets produced saliva which, when applied to the ball for cleaning purposes, enabled it to keep its shine for longer and therefore its swing." He found Murray Mints worked the best.
The admission came three years after the conclusion of the 2005 Ashes series, in which England beat Australia, 2–1.
Pakistan cricket team, 2006
In 2006, an alleged ball-tampering issue overshadowed a Test match between Pakistan and England, whereby Pakistan refused to take to the field for the evening session after being penalised for ball tampering in the afternoon. Television cameras caught the umpires discussing the condition of the quarter seam. Pakistan are believed to have intended a protest against the decision by delaying their return after tea; however, while they were refusing to play, the umpires awarded the game to England in accordance with the Laws of Cricket.At 19:50 UTC it was finally announced at a press conference that the Test was over. The ECB's statement said that England were awarded the match by the umpires as Pakistan refused to take the field after being warned that under law 21.3, failure to do so would result in them forfeiting the game. This is the first time a Test match has been decided this way.
As a result of Pakistan's forfeiting of the game, Inzamam was charged and found guilty of "bringing the game into disrepute", though he was cleared of the charges relating to "changing the condition of the ball".
In July 2008, the International Cricket Council changed the result of the match to a draw. On 1 February 2009, the ICC reversed their earlier decision, and changed the match result back to a win for England.
James Anderson and Stuart Broad, 2010
In January 2010, England bowlers Stuart Broad and James Anderson were accused of ball tampering by stomping the ball with the spikes of their boots in the third Test Match against South Africa.Broad maintained that he was just being lazy, because it was in Cape Town that day.
Nasser Hussain, who had captained Anderson, said: "Stuart Broad and James Anderson were wrong to behave in the manner they did and I've no doubt that if a player from another country did the same we'd have said they were cheating."
No charges were formally requested by South Africa even though they made the accusations at a press conference.