Tendulkar not guilty of ball tampering, says Match Referee Denness
By Sham Samaroo
December 01, 2001
Finally, after nine days of silence English Match Referee Mike Denness clarified Wednesday that he did not charge Indian superstar Sachin Tendulkar with ball tampering, and said his decision was misunderstood. "Tendulkar was not punished for tampering with the ball, but for failing to call up an umpire to supervise his attempts to clean the ball," Denness was quoted as saying. Television footage showed Tendulkar trying to clean the seam with his fingers, but there was no complaint from on-field umpires that the ball had been tampered with.
Failing to consult with the umpire before cleaning the ball is one thing, but to be accused of ball tampering is a whole different kettle of fish. Much of the present turmoil could have been avoided had Denness simply pointed this out at the Press Conference. Instead, by refusing to offer any explanation, he gave full reign to the media to jump to their own conclusions. And boy, can they jump? In fact, just about everyone, with the possible exception of Bin Laden, has had something to say on the matter. Javed Miandad – the John McEnroe of Pakistan cricket – was the first one out of the gates. Miandad is nothing more than a foul-mouthed thug and hooligan who can hardly hide his overwhelming animosity and hatred for his brothers and sisters across the border. It just so happened that he was a very talented batsman, but a pathetic human being who was an embarrassment to the Pakistanis throughout his career. This is the same Miandad who recently, as Manager, suffered the embarrassment of having half the Pakistani team, including such stalwarts like Wasim Akram and Saeed Anwar, return home prematurely from the tour to New Zeeland because of his dictatorial approach. Did he threaten to hit them with his bat like he did to Dennis Lillee, I wonder? Miandad criticizes the BCCI for refusing to accept the ICC ruling. Does he feel the same way about the Pakistan Cricket Board’s refusal to accept the ICC ruling on Shoaib Akhtar? I don’t think so.
Then, of course, we have the sanctimonious hypocrite Steve Waugh judging Tendulkar without even viewing the footage – talking about the need “to clean up the game”. The truth is that Waugh is still seething over the series loss to India. In an interview before leaving Australia, Waugh had proudly boasted that victory over India would confirm his team’s place in history as the greatest cricket team ever. Unfortunately for Waugh, he lost the series, and not only that, but the Indians ended his record winning streak. A record that relies heavily on psychological confrontation. Waugh, of course, calls it “mental disintegration”. But according to Aussie Sport psychologist Jeff Bond this “mental disintegration” is nothing more than a glorified name for sledging and abusive conduct towards your opponent. Waugh and his band of rogues have insulted, abused and intimidated just about every cricket nation in the world. Here is a short list of abuses that ought to go along with Waugh’s winning record. Under his captaincy we have had:
1) the spitting incident between Glenn McGrath and Brian Lara in the Caribbean. The same Glenn McGrath who called Jayasuriya “a black monkey”.
2) Michael Slater hurling curses and abuse at Rahul Dravid and Umpire Vengatraghavan after a faked appeal for a bump ball was turned down. Waugh, meantime, stood stone-faced at mid off with his hands in his pockets and said nothing.
3) Shane Warne calling Zimbabwean Stuart Carlisle “a f….arsey c…”, after the batsman struck him for 2 boundaries.
4) Steve Waugh’s ugly comment to Hershelle Gibbs after Gibbs dropped him in the semifinals of the 1999 World Cup. That was a dastardly deed.
And while we are here, let us not forget the shenanigans of team mates Mark Waugh and Warne. The two admitted to the ACB to accepting bribes. They brought shame and disgrace upon the Australian cricketing public and several of their own countrymen, including former Skipper Kim Hughes, have since called for their removal from the team. Question for Waugh: Why are they still being allowed to play, Mr. “Lets-clean-up-the-game Waugh? How come you didn’t call for their removal? I’ll tell you why, because you are a part of the cover up.
The BCCI was correct in airing its concerns with the ICC. And about time, I should say. In so doing they highlighted several flaws in the system that everyone agrees need to be corrected. For many years there has been the perception, fairly or unfairly, that in the ICC all members are equal, but some are more equal than others. By categorically refusing even to take the BCCI's request under review the ICC has all but confirmed that perception. Their reaction seems callous, inflexible, heavy handed, and some might even argue, retaliatory. Remember that not only must justice be served, but it is equally important, that it appears to have been served. By taking such an intractable stance the ICC seems to be admitting that it still blames the Indians for blowing the whistle on Hansie Cronje. What they should have done was accept the complaint under review and advise the Indians to go on with the series. But having refused to do that, the ICC were later given a second chance to put things right. They could have acceded to the request of both India and South Africa and replace Denness for the third test, but again they refused. For their part, the Indians should have then played the game under protest. It is simply ridiculous for them to refuse Denness who was the officially appointed match referee. Sadly, emotions and egos got in the way and both parties missed the opportunities for a solution.
So, where do we go from here? The Indians have made their point and now they ought to shut up and get on with the game. After winning the high moral ground they are now giving it back to the ICC by senselessly insisting that Sehwag is eligible for the first test against England. Sehwag is not eligible since he has still to serve his one match ban. ICC has the right to make that determination and, like it or not, we have to abide by their decision. On the other side of the coin, ICC must now acknowledge that there are many weaknesses in the system that need to be addressed. The most glaring is the absence of an appeal’s process – something that goes against the grain of natural justice.