Why were Waqar Younis & Azhar Mahmood punished?

[BhupinderSingh]

In the triangular tournament comprising of PAK,SA & NZ back in 2000, cameras showed Waqar removing the dirt on the ball with his nails & Azhar also doing something fishy with the ball but it was not clear what he was doing i.e it was not confirm whether he was using a something to change the shape of the ball or just removing the dirt.No one complained about it but Kiwi match referee John Reid(I 'm not sure if I've typed the name right) declared it ball tampering & banned Waqar for 1 match & Azhar was deprived of 50% of his match fee.After that many people accused him of being a racist as well.
Why was no action taken against English bowlers recently & why were Waqar & Azhar punished?

In 1992, Wasim & Waqar were accused of ball tempering when they won a series against England but their crime became an "art" for the same englishmen when their bowlers did it to win the ashes back in 2005.

And everyone of you is familiar with what happened at the oval.They were again punished without any evidence of ball tempering by racist Australian umpire Darrell Hair.

Don't these incidents show double standards?Surely,what former England Captain Michael Vaughan has said is absolutely right in the light of the above mentioned incidents.

 

[Shri]

What did Vaughan say btw?

 

[BhupinderSingh]

What did Vaughan say btw?

That if Shoaib & Asif were there instead of Broad & Anderson,it would have become a big issue.And it shows the double standards of ICC.

 

[Goughy]

In 1992 Wasim & Waqar were accused of ball tempering when they won a series against England but their crime became an "art" for the same englishmen when their bowlers did it to win the ashes back in 2005.

I cringed reading that. It is such faulty logic. It isnt reverse swing that is on trial here but how it is achieved and what is done to the ball to get it to 'reverse'.

 

[BhupinderSingh]

Michael Vaughan on ball tempering by English bowlers

 

[Uppercut]

I cringed reading the whole thing tbh.

 

[Shri]

That if Shoaib & Asif were there instead of Broad & Anderson,it would have become a big issue.And it shows the double standards of ICC.

Oh, okay. I am not the best person to comment on this issue since I don't have any problem with tampering the ball at all. Especially these days if it helps to bring balance between bat and ball.

 

[BhupinderSingh]

I cringed reading that. It is such faulty logic. It isnt reverse swing that is on trial here but how it is achieved and what is done to the ball to get it to 'reverse'.

So,you have evidence that Wasim & Waqar used illegal ways to get the ball reverse swing in Pakistan's tour of England in 1992?

 

[Jono]

Don't play the poster guys, play the topic. He raises a good point, why wasn't Anderson punished?

Vaughan also accused the world governing body of double-standards, saying there would have been a furore if, for example, Pakistan had been involved.

"If Shoaib Akhtar or Mohammad Asif had been pictured using their fingers on the ball, there would have been uproar."

Can't help but agree with Vaughan here, and commend him on saying it.

 

[zaremba]

It's pretty simple, really.

Each case is different.

The England players weren't punished because neither the on-field umpires nor the (Sri Lankan) match referee found any evidence of ball tampering. If you're going to ball-tamper, you don't do it by gently stopping a rolling ball underfoot (think about it: how do you know you're not putting your foot on the wrong side of the ball, or damaging the seam?). And if you think that Jimmy Anderson was ball tampering, you clearly saw different TV footage than either I or Roshan Mahanama did.

By contrast, Billy Doctrove and Darrell Hair punished Pakistan in '05 because in their judgment, and on the evidence available to them, they believed that there had been ball tampering. So, the cases are different.

FTR, plenty of Pakistan players have got away with ball tampering unpunished in the past. Imran Khan (while playing for my county and gouging a ball with a bottle top) and Aaqib Javed (remember the TV pictures of him digging his thumbnail into the ball?) for example.

Some people keep wanting to harp back to previous perceived injustices. It's not healthy and it doesn't lead to rational argument.

 

[Matt79]

Anderson should have been IMO. Still find the use of the term "racist" in regards to Darryl Hair objectionable, but hey, let's not get into all that again.

 

[Jono]

It's pretty simple, really.

Each case is different.

The England players weren't punished because neither the on-field umpires nor the (Sri Lankan) match referee found any evidence of ball tampering. If you're going to ball-tamper, you don't do it by gently stopping a rolling ball underfoot (think about it: how do you know you're not putting your foot on the wrong side of the ball, or damaging the seam?). And if you think that Jimmy Anderson was ball tampering, you clearly saw different TV footage than either I or Roshan Mahanama did.

By contrast, Billy Doctrove and Darrell Hair punished Pakistan in '05 because in their judgment, and on the evidence available to them, they believed that there had been ball tampering. So, the cases are different.

FTR, plenty of Pakistan players have got away with ball tampering unpunished in the past. Imran Khan (while playing for my county and gouging a ball with a bottle top) and Aaqib Javed (remember the TV pictures of him digging his thumbnail into the ball?) for example.

Some people keep wanting to harp back to previous perceived injustices. It's not healthy and it doesn't lead to rational argument.

There is no difference between what Jimmy Anderson did and Tendulkar in 2000 (or was it 2001?) in South Africa.

The intention is not relevant. Anderson didn't intend to tamper the ball, but he did. Bad luck.

 

[Matt79]

Oh Jono, really. The intention has to be relevant surely...

 

[Uppercut]

There is no difference between what Jimmy Anderson did and Tendulkar in 2000 (or was it 2001?) in South Africa.

The intention is not relevant. Anderson didn't intend to tamper the ball, but he did. Bad luck.

Have you got any footage of the Sachin incident for us to compare?

 

[UncleTheOne]

the anderson footage looks bad, but the accusations thrown at broad are laughable due to the reasons stated by zaremba. no one with ball tampering in mind would use a method where you are equally likely to damage the shiney side of the ball as you are your preferred target.

 

[zaremba]

The intention is not relevant. Anderson didn't intend to tamper the ball, but he did. Bad luck.

Of course it's relevant. Do you really think that deliberate ball-tampering is the same as unintentional ball tampering?

Moreover Anderson didn't change the condition of the ball. Should he have removed the tiny flap of leather that was hanging off it? Well strictly no, he should have got the ump to do that with his little scissors. But that offence is so minor as to be unworthy of any sort of censure except to say "don't do things like that because they might be misinterpreted by people looking to draw inane comparisons with perceived injustices to Pakistan players in the past".

 

[zaremba]

racist Australian umpire Darrell Hair.

Dire posting.

Was Billy Doctrove racist? Well Billy Doctrove doesn't really fit into your conspiracy theory does he, which is why he tends to get forgotten about by those pushing this "conspiracy against Pakistan / subcontinental teams" line.

And at Cape Town, I've no doubt that match referee Roshan Mahanama only decided that there was no case to answer against Broad and Anderson because of his white supremacist bias.

 

[Jono]

Oh Jono, really. The intention has to be relevant surely...

Of course it's relevant. Do you really think that deliberate ball-tampering is the same as unintentional ball tampering?

Only with the length/seriousness of the punishment. In any case how the hell do you determine intention?

By the rules what Anderson did was wrong.

 

[Goughy]

the anderson footage looks bad, but the accusations thrown at broad are laughable due to the reasons stated by zaremba. no one with ball tampering in mind would use a method where you are equally likely to damage the shiney side of the ball as you are your preferred target.

I dont think the Anderson footage looks bad at all. He cleans the seam and removes some dirt and removes a flap of leather that I think was due to Broads boot. He cant be bowling with a flappy ball. He did everything a normal, experienced cricketer would do or would think they were allowed to do exept one thing, he didnt do it under the supervision of the umpire. I didnt realise it had to be do like that until now. Ive cleaned the seam on hundreds of balls over the years. Was always considered legit.

Id send a memo to all players noting that players can "remove mud from the ball under the supervision of the umpire."

I dont think it looked like Anderson was tampering with the ball but if he did he should be punished. However, you cant say he did that based on that flimsy evidence.

 

[zaremba]

So,you have evidence that Wasim & Waqar used illegal ways to get the ball reverse swing in Pakistan's tour of England in 1992?

Yes. Here it is.

Footage from the 1992 tour. Starring Waqar Younis, Wasim Akram and Aaqib Javed. The relevant footage starts at about 1.50.

They were no more punished than were Broad or Anderson. Why not?