South Africa vs Australia: Fair play or foul wicket?

Let me take you back to the early summer in 2008 when South Africa was visiting India for a test as well as an ODI series. I’ll take you back to one of those test matches, the third test to be exact, played in Kanpur. India won that match by 8 wickets. After the match, there came up a critical group of people who refused to stamp the Kanpur wicket as a proper “Test Wicket” as viewers witnessed a dramatic collapse of South African in the second innings for just 121 runs. The matter went up to the ICC who ordered to look in the matter and thus an official investigation begun soon after.

Going back a few years further back, in 2004, to when Australia visited India. After already having lost the test series 2-0 with one final test to go at Mumbai, India managed to sneak a win with a narrow margin of 13 runs. The match saw some dramatic incidents that included the test getting over in under three days with Micheal Clarke, the part time off spinner, running through the Indian batting line up in the second innings with career best figures of 6/9 (he took 5 wickets in mere 30 balls, 6 in 6.2 overs). The Indian spinners then joined the party with Murali Kartik leading the attack, and wrapped up the Australian innings for 93 runs needing a mere 107 runs to win. Again, a debate erupted on the nature of the pitch and high officials reported the case to ICC, calling foul play. The governing body once again did not lose time after that and ordered an official enquiry into the matter.

Now let’s get back to reality. South Africa and Australia contested their 1st test match at Cape Town, which recently ended with South Africa winning the match. There are certain aspects in common between this match and the incidents described above. The match at Cape Town ended in mere two-and-half days. A total of 23 wickets fell on the second day, a first in the history of game since 1902 i.e. 109 years later. Not a single wicket was scalped by a spinner and the pacers dictated the terms throughout. The spinners, from both the sides, bowled a total of 13 overs in the whole match collectively.

No debates have yet been launched on the pitch, instead all are praising the “sporting wicket” that would take test cricket ahead and instill interest in the game again. What I smell here is nepotism. Don’t you? My doubts are only getting stronger when the talks over Ferozshah Kotla’s pitch have gained momentum for its double bounce nature while no one complained about the Cape Town wicket, with experts taking it lightly by saying it’s just one of those funny days, some even Australia became complacent in their batting efforts of 2nd innings, while others just putting it down as a coincidence.

Being an eternal optimist and looking at it objectively, I in fact enjoyed the game very much, but then I also enjoyed the aforementioned two matches and didn’t think any foul play was involved there as well. Thus, I am not differentiating between the incidents, which many of so-called experts are doing.

I understand the nature of the game. I understand when a team is playing a match at its home, it has every right to create wickets of its liking; wickets which would help them win and giving the upper hand against its rivals. That’s what we call as “Home Advantage”. I understand that South Africa must have pushed for the green pitch with fast bowling being their strength. They would have had reason for being not confident with the debutant spinner Imran Tahir.

It is the same with India as well. Having spin as their most potent weapon, which has led to many famous Indian victories, India has every right to push for the wickets that would provide it the advantages more than its oppositions just like South Africa has. India has a right to prepare double paced pitch or the turning square wicket as per its liking because that’s where the Indian strength lies. All they want to ensure that the pitch lasts for 5 days which has happened in each of the cases discussed earlier.

Now let’s come to ICC. The governing body was established in order to maintain fairness in the game, to ensure that the game is being played in the right spirit and no country dominates over any other unfairly. To do this, there must be fairness in its rulings to prevent it from being corrupt or compromised. The governing body must ensure that it does not develop double standards in its approach and thus lose the trust of some member countries. With such limited countries playing the game, the ICC definitely cannot afford lapses such as the one I have highlighted.

To conclude, I don’t know whether the pitch at the Newlands ground will be investigated or not. But, looking at the similar incidencts, this too calls for an official enquiry. Let’s see what happens!