ONE really wondered if the recent match referee controversy blinded the BCCI President, Jagmohan Dalmiya, so completely, that emotions prevailed over sense.
For, such were his demands on the International Cricket Council after the second Test against South Africa at Port Elizabeth that the Centurion game, the final Test of the three-match series, was stripped of its official status.
It was a face-off of such magnitude that, had an understanding not been reached in time, it could well have split the world body. In fact, the home series against England was in jeopardy till two days before the opening Test in Mohali.
The result of the barter was that match referee Mike Denness' one-Test suspension on Virender Sehwag held good (so did the suspended sentences on the other five), with the Delhi all-rounder missing the Mohali Test, which had been what Dalmiya had contested: saying that Sehwag had sat out at Centurion, which according to the BCCI 'is official' (a resolution was passed to this effect at the working committee meeting), and hence could play at Mohali.
Dalmiya seems to have given in on that, but he has made sure that ICC will establish a Referees Commission that will examine and report to the ICC Executive Board on whether the ICC referee followed the procedures and acted in accordance with the ICC Code of Conduct, including the guidelines on the natural justice as set out on page 55 of the Code, during that Port Elizabeth match. The matter would be discussed in full in the ICC Executive Board meeting in Colombo in March, provided the BCCI makes a written submission.
Also, the said Commission will be appointed by the ICC in consultation with the BCCI and will consist of persons of the highest reputation and at least two of them will be reputed former cricketers.
Even better is the fact that the Commission will also be asked to advise on matters, a five-point agenda which needs to be cleared, as a part of the current restructuring of the match referees panel.
It wouldn't be an exaggeration to say that controversies are good for the game. The recent one, which also saw Mike Denness become the most hated man in India after he accused Sachin Tendulkar of ball-tampering, only goes to reiterate the belief, for it would soon be the cause which effected necessary, meaningful changes to the Code.
Cricket, over the years, has had its share of controversies, ignited, among others, by differences in culture, class and colour apart from national pride. The major ones have had a lasting effect on the game, have enabled the game develop.
From early days on in English cricket, until when Sir Len Hutton became the first professional, in 1953, to lead England in Test cricket, there had existed the class difference - gentlemen, the upper echelon so to say, and the players. Only the former were believed to possess leadership qualities. In fact, the professionals, players that is, had to address them as Mr.
But the first big controversy which rocked world cricket was Bodyline, the tactic resorted to by MCC captain Douglas Jardine to curb Don Bradman and win the Ashes in the 1932-33 series in Australia.
The line of attack by pacemen Larwood, Voce and Boce, after the shine had left the new ball, was directed at the line of the body, short-pitched, thus forcing the batsman to think primarily about the protection of his person.
There were as many fielders as strategically required on the leg-side. Though well within the rules of the game, Bodyline contravened the spirit of the game. Moreover, there was an Imperialistic touch about Jardine, the upper class that he was, which angered the Aussies. So much so that the infamous tactic saw relations deteriorate between England, then the head of the Empire, and one of its major colonies, before matters were set right.
The Bodyline series led to the legislation that not more than two fieldsmen can be posted on the leg-side behind the batting crease and later to the introduction of the law against persistent short-pitched bowling.
The 60s saw Australian Sir Don Bradman and Englishman Gubby Allen - foes on the field but close friends off it - come together to eradicate chucking. In the early 1950s, there was suspicion regarding the action of South African fast bowler Cuan McCarthy and later England left-arm spinner Tony Lock. South Africa's Geoff Griffin was suspect too, as also England's Harold Rhodes.
Things were beginning to get out of hand when as many as five Australians during Peter May's England's visit in 1958-59 were believed to have suspect actions. They were Ian Meckiff, Gordon Rorke, Keith Slater, Trethaway and Hitchcock. Of them, three figured in Tests.
This was when the two great statesmen of the game decided that throwing had to be eliminated at all costs. Griffin and later Meckiff were no-balled out of cricket in the 60s while Rorke and Slater faded away naturally.
But then the controversy persisted with West Indian Charlie Griffith while the 90s saw bowlers from the sub-continent being singled out. The actions of Sri Lanka's Muttiah Muralitharan and now Suresh Perera, Pakistan's Shoaib Akhtar, India's Rajesh Chauhan and then Harbhajan Singh and later Australia's Brett Lee came under a cloud. Some underwent reforming (ICC has introduced a panel) while it was medically proved that Muralitharan and Akhtar have defects in their arms. The latest though is that the ICC is still not happy with Akhtar's action. The problem is, the rule concerning chucking is not precise.
One could well say that it was cricket's loss that the international careers of such greats like the Pollock brothers, Graeme and Peter, Barry Richards, Eddie Barlow and Mike Procter were cut short owing to the evils of apartheid.
The Springboks were excluded from the ICC in 1970 owing to apartheid, the discrimination of the blacks and Cape-coloured by the powerful white minority, and returned to the fold in 1991 after the Government changed its policies and attitude. It goes to show that sport is a celebration of life and what affects one affects the other.
Basil D'Oliveira was the centre of the controversy which led to South Africa's expulsion after it cancelled England's tour of 1968 for having 'Dolly', a Cape-coloured, in the squad.
Came along Packer's Circus in the 70s, May, 1977 to be precise. The Aussie media magnate signed up 35 of the world's premier cricketers with lucrative contracts to play a series of limited-overs matches during the Australian summer that year.
Christened World Series Cricket, it was triggered off by Kerry Packer's indignation at the Australian Cricket Board which had rebuffed the former's offer of huge sums of money for exclusive rights to televise cricket on Channel 9. The rights had traditionally been given to the Australian Broadcasting Commission.
By the second year, WSC, comprising a well-known West Indian team, Packer's Australians and a Rest of the World led by Tony Greig, was gaining in popularity, so much so that it began to challenge the very structure of world cricket, as it was in direct conflict with international itineraries.
The ACB and the ICC, realising the dangerous trend, were quick to end it, signing a multi-million dollar contract with Packer. This was how big money came into the game.
One could well say that the use of vaseline by England fast bowler John Lever in the Madras Test of the 1976-77 was the start of what could be broadly termed as ball-tampering, because it later progressed to the use of lip ice, gouging of ball and lifting of seam.
In fact, it was a hornet's nest that Imran Khan, the former Pakistan captain, stirred in 1994 when he confessed to ball tampering in his playing days and about being surprised that the British tabloid journalists "only discovered" about ball-tampering during the 1992 home series when Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis "destroyed" the host.
To make matters worse, Imran's class conscious remark during that issue set off another controversy. He said that University educated men supported him in the ball-tampering view and those like Freddie Trueman, Allan Lamb and Ian Botham were unable to take a rational view. He was sued for libel, but was cleared by the court.
Between those years, Trevor Chappell, under orders from brother and captain Greg Chappell, did the unexpected in 1981 when he delivered the last ball of the B&H one-day international against New Zealand at Melbourne under-arm. The Kiwis needed six for victory from the last delivery. The playing conditions of the remainder of the B&H matches were amended to prohibit under-arm, the oldest form of bowling.
And finally to betting and match-fixing, which rocked the game in 2000 which many perceive as the result of lack of official action in that infamous incident back in 1981, when Dennis Lillee and Rod Marsh betted against their own side at Headingley. Heroes fell in the form of Hansie Cronje and Mohammed Azharuddin and quite a few others were tainted. The ICC now has an anti-corruption unit.
Biased umpiring has probably been the most contentious issue. The ICC has addressed it to an extent by establishing an international panel. But the home umpire factor in international matches is something that needs to be looked at, for it is they who are under tremendous pressure.
The concept of third umpire, backed by technology, is good no doubt, but has its own drawbacks. Technology in umpiring has this knack of cutting both ways. In situations where they can use it they are at an advantage, but when they cannot and make a mistake they are hounded by one and all (who have the advantage of the slo-mo).
All this goes to prove that cricket has lived through many a controversy, and, more importantly, the game has evolved following each one of them.
Comments
SHARE