Allan Donald - 'Legalise ball tampering'

[JBH001]

Good on Donald, I've said the same thing more than once around here. Its the same reason why I shelve my doubts about the legality of the doosra. Its not just the pitches either, but the sledgehammer bats that are, in my view, under-rated in their impact on the game. I dont know, however, on reflection, if ball tampering is the way to go - but the manufacture of balls with larger and more pronounced seams may be an option. In any case, whatever the merits and demerits of the ball tampering argument, its good that a player of Donald's stature has brought the issue of the balance between bat and ball out into the open again.

 

[SJS]

Good on Donald, I've said the same thing more than once around here. Its the same reason why I shelve my doubts about the legality of the doosra. Its not just the pitches either, but the sledgehammer bats that are, in my view, under-rated in their impact on the game. I dont know, however, on reflection, if ball tampering is the way to go - but the manufacture of balls with larger and more pronounced seams may be an option. In any case, whatever the merits and demerits of the ball tampering argument, its good that a player of Donald's stature has brought the issue of the balance between bat and ball out into the open again.

Absolutely. I had mentioned something similar on CW sometimes back. Why shouldn't bowlers be allowed to do more. Finally, if we manage to make the batsman's life more difficult than it is, it will benefit batting in the long run. Batting standards have always risen and fallen with bowling standards.

The finest batting in the history of the game has been seen only when bowlers have been at their peek.

What I find boring about Test matches today has nothing to do with run rates or drawn games but because no amount of double and even triple hundreds impress me any more for I can see how ordinary and toothless the bowling has become.

Watching Sachin bat in his very early years is such a treat not because he was batting more freely but because he was batting against Imran, Wasim, Waqar, Qadir, McDermott, Reid, Merv Hughes and Alan Donald

 

[Richard]

I think dirt may cross a line somewhere, but sugary sweets, if it isn't already, should definitely be legal.

It's perfectly legal, there's no way to ban players from eating sweets, some weird-ass Aussies just cry foul at it because they don't like their batsmen being swung out and losing series' because of it.

Rubbing the ball on the floor seems a bit 'dodgy' to me and may harm the entrance of a perfectly harmless expansion of tolerance to altering the condition of the ball. I can't be more specific but the image of a bowler rubbing the ball on the floor is the sort of thing that will tip the purist sceptic over the edge.

I'm not neccessarily advocating rubbing it on the floor, just rubbing hands in dust and applying it to the ball.

Having each bowler choose his ball is ludicrous, imo. The idea of an umpire with a box of balls for each bowler just doesn't work. The idea of a single ball per team, per period of time is a staple of the game and I think it is inexplicably, but still, ludicrous to do so.

It's obviously never going to happen - so yes, indeed I was joking - but if it did happen it'd be an excellent change. It's totally unfair that batsmen are allowed to use their own weapon of choice with no-one else on the team damaging their prospects with it, while bowlers aren't.

I'm absolutely dead serious that bowlers should be allowed to try bowling with balls before picking them though.

 

[Jarquis]

Is it actually illegal to rub your hands in dust before rubbing the ball? Woops.

 

[Richard]

Well, no, it's not. But it is illegal to rub your hands in dust then rub the dust onto the ball.

Like alcohol retailing, it's a kinda complicated law that it's easy to break without realising you're breaking it, but not always quite as stringent as it might appear on first glance.

 

[Jarquis]

Yeah, I'm a finger spinner and if my hands are sweating or the ball is a little damp I quite regularly dust my hands for grip. Wasn't aware that I could potentially be cheating.

 

[Richard]

I always dust my hands for a better grip, and I'm a seamer. Madness to put a load of sun-tan lotion cream on in the pavilion then just grab a brand-new ball and not expect to be bowling Beamers by the crateload.

You've just got to be careful not to be actually actively rubbing the dust on the ball. And obviously, as a seamer with a brand-new ball I most certainly don't want to be doing that.

 

[irfan]

I definitely agree with AA's suggestion but am a little apprehensive about how it could be implemented.

I would argue that bowler's should be allowed to modify the condition of the ball using only their nails, dust and saliva (agree with Manee's stance on sugary mints). Any other foreign object like razor blades should be disallowed, as in the end the ball still has to look somewhat symmetrical.

 

[SJS]

This thread inspired me to get up from my afternoon nap and write my next feature.

Its lamenting the non-level playing fields of Test cricket

 

[Streetwise]

It shouldn't be forgotten that most Australian men don't wash for a month at a time so they could stick the ball down the front of their trousers and use their pubic hair much like a scouring pad to scuff the ball.

So Lillian you are extremely familiar with whats inside an Australians pants.

I guess it would have been a big suprise.

 

[Streetwise]

Sure there have been improvements for the batsmen with bats and equipment but bowlers have also had improvements with a new ball every 80 overs and the ability to change them when out of shape. Other things like improved coatings on the ball, detailed video of batsmen before they ever see them, only having to bowl 15 overs an hour, having massages during the game. I would prefer to see bowlers competing on skill level not who's got the longest fingernails.

 

[Richard]

Getting a ball into the right condition to swing is no use unless you have the skill to use it.

Denying the chance for a bowler to use his swinging skills by refusing to allow the ball to be put into the right condition however is denying the chance to use one of the most watchable skills in cricket.

 

[Streetwise]

Getting a ball into the right condition to swing is no use unless you have the skill to use it.

Denying the chance for a bowler to use his swinging skills by refusing to allow the ball to be put into the right condition however is denying the chance to use one of the most watchable skills in cricket.

Why also deny the spin bowler the right conditions to use one of the most watchable skills in the game by denying him the chance to put the pitch in the right condition to spin the ball. Why would you let the seam bowlers damage the ball but refuse the spin bowler the right to go down and rough up the pitch.

 

[Pigeon]

I would like to get a clear definition for "tampering" as Donald wants it to be before passing any comment.

 

[Richard]

Why also deny the spin bowler the right conditions to use one of the most watchable skills in the game by denying him the chance to put the pitch in the right condition to spin the ball. Why would you let the seam bowlers damage the ball but refuse the spin bowler the right to go down and rough up the pitch.

Balls are one thing; pitches are another. If a team's strength is spin, they're well within their rights to order groundsmen to prepare spin-friendly decks but not to doctor the pitch during the course of the match.

Balls are the property of the bowling side AFAIC; pitches are the property of the ground and both teams have to play on them. Therefore I prefer most the sort of pitch which changes as little as possible during the course of a match.

 

[Jakester1288]

I have been thinking about this since the article come out, and I have finally come to a decision.

If the tampering is natural (like being done with natural substances, such as fingernails, dirt, etc), rather than using artificial objects (such as bottle tops), then it is great. Sugary mints to improve saliva, and things similar to that, IMO are also fine. Obviously, if someone pulls out a hacksaw (exaggeration) and rips up the ball completely, then that's not acceptable, but as long as it's natural and doesn't have too much of an effect on the ball, it's fine.

Go, I say.

 

[The Baconator]

The trouble with Donald's suggestion is that it won't solve the problem of tampering. He's only really advocating limited "tampering", so with human nature being what it is they'll always be someone prepared to do more than is permitted.

Very true, someone will always to find an extra edge.

 

[Jarquis]

I have been thinking about this since the article come out, and I have finally come to a decision.

If the tampering is natural (like being done with natural substances, such as fingernails, dirt, etc), rather than using artificial objects (such as bottle tops), then it is great. Sugary mints to improve saliva, and things similar to that, IMO are also fine. Obviously, if someone pulls out a hacksaw (exaggeration) and rips up the ball completely, then that's not acceptable, but as long as it's natural and doesn't have too much of an effect on the ball, it's fine.

Go, I say.

Out of interest have you read the other posts in this thread?

 

[vic_orthdox]

I really don't want to reward someone for having a sharply manicured fingernail.

 

[jondavluc]

I really don't want to reward someone for having a sharply manicured fingernail.

Couldn't agree more.