Saffers vs Aussies

First topic message reminder :

Slightly surprisingly SA have gone in with only four bowlers, electing to play De Bruyn over the impressive Ngidi - Aussies team unchanged from the final Ashes test.

4 test series should be a good one - Aussies batting first at Kingsmead, and Morkel already causing Bancroft some trouble

JDizzle wrote:All depends whether this was, as they claim, the first time they had done it. Which I would like to believe, possibly naively, but rough from the pitch applied to a piece of tape to change the condition of the ball? Seems a very intricate method to be decided upon in a quick meeting of the leadership group... Presumably which contains Warner and AN Other (Lyon?) who's should also receive hefty fines.

Also, I'd be interested on any insight on why Atherton wasn't forced to resign in 1994? I suppose you can argue dirt isn't the same as an artificial substance, but he knew he was being shady... Were things just different back then, in regards to not having the videos spread so fast maybe?

Hi JD - Rob Key speaking very well on Sky and absoluting laying into Smith.

As for Atherton in '94, a few factors:

- the use of soil and it not (so much) being an artificial substance definitely helped his cause despite, as you say, it clearly being shady

- amongst (some of) the English public, there was a perception that other countries had been getting away with far worse (bottle tops) for too long and that it was about time we caught up with them

- England's manager Illingworth fined and bollocked Atherton in a poorly handled and publicly broadcast press conference which probably engendered some sympathy and support for the captain

- the internet and social media was in its infancy so things didn't catch fire and go worldwide with the speed and emotion that they do now

- Atherton's characteristic stubbornness and resilience to ride out the storm.

My least favourite part is them getting Bancroft to do it. Something about that is worse. That’s risking someone else’s career for a decision that was definitely made well above his head.

That’s the weakest part of the captain’s decision making, being too happy to sacrifice someone else

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:My least favourite part is them getting Bancroft to do it. Something about that is worse. That’s risking someone else’s career for a decision that was definitely made well above his head.

That’s the weakest part of the captain’s decision making, being too happy to sacrifice someone else

A few people have compared it to the situation with Butt and Asif leaning on Amir as a susceptible junior player. They're not comparable cases at all given the criminal nature of spot fixing, but the manipulation of a junior player to do the dirty work is being compared to the leadership group knowing about it.

I personally think it's a pretty lazy comparison given the huge difference in scenarios surrounding the two cases. The fact it's popped up in a few places is an indication of how big a backlash has come from this though.

Any investigation into this will inevitably mean going back through footage of previous games with a fine tooth comb. Any suspect footage found (such as Bancroft seeming to put sugar in his pocket) will be treated with absolutely no sympathy as well.

You know smiths in trouble when the Courier Mail is calling for him to go - the reaction in Australia seems to be worse than anywhere else!

This business just makes me sad.

What on earth was Smith thinking ? The man has been so on top of his own game, has just won a major series and has his team generally playing pretty impressively , despite the loss of the last match... Why risk your reputation over a half-baked scheme to gain an illegal advantage that may or may not make a serious difference to their chances of winning this match ?
Smith says the coach wasn't involved : not sure that is going to be widely believed. Really has tainted the whole team now ...crazy.

This series was looked forward to by many as potentially one of the great cricket contests ; and indeed there have been some very fine performances in it - de Villiers , Rabada , Cummins ... but this on top of the Warner - de Kock nonsense and Rabada's unsavory send offs is going to mean it will go down in history for all the wrong reasons : as primarily an example of what happens to a sport when people forget that a sport is exactly what it should be. Not a war , to be won at all costs.

Cricket will survive. But it's taken a nasty blow.

Spot on post alfie.

I am disturbed by the 'matter of fact' type attitude in his presser by Steve Smith. His attitude came across as 'I am untouchable' after allowing a junior player to attampt to take the rap. Really poor.

Sunshine in Cape Town today...not sure the Australian players are feeling too sunny though. The body language is a bit subdued as you'd expect. Even the spectators.

It is going to be a hard day for them all I think. SA will want to push on and build this lead to give themselves plenty of time to bowl Australia out...new ball due shortly and I wouldn't be surprised to see AB go into overdrive with the field up.

So Smith and Warner have been removed from their captaincy roles for the rest of this test. How’s that looking to anyone watching it?

Steve Smith (captain) and David Warner (vice captain) have stood down from their posts for the rest of this test match with wicket-keeper taking over as stand-in captain.

I am curious as to what happened with the tampered ball? Ah commentators have just answered my question. Amazingly, at tea they knew of the ball tampering but did not change it. Unreal.

Born Slippy wrote:So Smith and Warner have been removed from their captaincy roles for the rest of this test. How’s that looking to anyone watching it?

I am watching it. You'd put good money on South Africa winning this now. They now have a 300+ lead with 5 wickets still standing and Australia must be feeling demoralised - not the kind of mindset needed to chase down a massive total in the final innings.

Warner now admitting he's culpable. This should extend beyond this test.

De Villiers out and South Africa 269 for 6.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Steve Smith (captain) and David Warner (vice captain) have stood down from their posts for the rest of this test match with wicket-keeper taking over as stand-in captain.

I am curious as to what happened with the tampered ball? Ah commentators have just answered my question. Amazingly, at tea they knew of the ball tampering but did not change it. Unreal.

Tbf I’m not sure it actually had much effect on the ball (the umpires inspected it), which is part of what makes it so bizarre!

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Steve Smith (captain) and David Warner (vice captain) have stood down from their posts for the rest of this test match with wicket-keeper taking over as stand-in captain.

I am curious as to what happened with the tampered ball? Ah commentators have just answered my question. Amazingly, at tea they knew of the ball tampering but did not change it. Unreal.

Tbf I’m not sure it actually had much effect on the ball (the umpires inspected it), which is part of what makes it so bizarre!

Hmm but it had been tampered with. Even if it were only once it happened it was still a ball that had been tampered with. They have boxes of old balls used when a ball needs changed so surely the common sense and fair thing to do is prevent Australia to continue to bowl with a ball they had tampered with.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Born Slippy wrote:So Smith and Warner have been removed from their captaincy roles for the rest of this test. How’s that looking to anyone watching it?

I am watching it. You'd put good money on South Africa winning this now. They now have a 300+ lead with 5 wickets still standing and Australia must be feeling demoralised - not the kind of mindset needed to chase down a massive total in the final innings.

SA were heavy favorites to win even without the tampering controversy and the ensuing events
We must not water down their super effort to " a demoralized Aus lost due to events"

KP_fan wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Born Slippy wrote:So Smith and Warner have been removed from their captaincy roles for the rest of this test. How’s that looking to anyone watching it?

I am watching it. You'd put good money on South Africa winning this now. They now have a 300+ lead with 5 wickets still standing and Australia must be feeling demoralised - not the kind of mindset needed to chase down a massive total in the final innings.

SA were heavy favorites to win even without the tampering controversy and the ensuing events
We must not water down their super effort to " a demoralized Aus lost due to events"

No I wasn't doing that - sorry if it seemed that way. Of course they had the upper hand anyway but ensuing events just magnifies greater the advantage South Africa hold.

On the events itself...I think it's too convenient to step down the captain / VC , express remorse and move on with the game

cricket must follow, Olympic & Tennis Example

If caught cheating......the medals are take back retrospectively and the NATION banned from the next Olympic for atleast that event if found that there was an organized conspirancy....such as Russia

Or Tennis when caught doping.....you are banned for 6 months or a year as in case of Sharapova

There should be an investigation & Smith / Lehman / Warner put under oath and asked to Testify how long it's been going for
and any Aussie wins during that period annulled at the very least

Cummins strikes to have De Kock caught behind as he goes chasing quick runs. South Africa 324 for 7 with the lead now edging up towards 400.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Steve Smith (captain) and David Warner (vice captain) have stood down from their posts for the rest of this test match with wicket-keeper taking over as stand-in captain.

I am curious as to what happened with the tampered ball? Ah commentators have just answered my question. Amazingly, at tea they knew of the ball tampering but did not change it. Unreal.

Tbf I’m not sure it actually had much effect on the ball (the umpires inspected it), which is part of what makes it so bizarre!

Hmm but it had been tampered with. Even if it were only once it happened it was still a ball that had been tampered with. They have boxes of old balls used when a ball needs changed so surely the common sense and fair thing to do is prevent Australia to continue to bowl with a ball they had tampered with.

Hi Craig and all - I understand fully where Craig is coming from but no one ever knows with any certainty how a replacement ball will behave. That's a major reason why fielding captains and their bowlers are so keen to claim that a ball is out of shape when they're, for example, not getting swing and things aren't going their way. A different untampered ball might actually have helped Australia more than sticking with the ball that Bancroft had been trying to change through artificial means.

It was right that it was for the umpires to make a judgement on the state of the ball concerned, not that they seem to have covered themselves in much glory as I get the impression (I didn't follow things live) that they were far from proactive with the situation.

guildfordbat wrote:

JDizzle wrote:All depends whether this was, as they claim, the first time they had done it. Which I would like to believe, possibly naively, but rough from the pitch applied to a piece of tape to change the condition of the ball? Seems a very intricate method to be decided upon in a quick meeting of the leadership group... Presumably which contains Warner and AN Other (Lyon?) who's should also receive hefty fines.

Also, I'd be interested on any insight on why Atherton wasn't forced to resign in 1994? I suppose you can argue dirt isn't the same as an artificial substance, but he knew he was being shady... Were things just different back then, in regards to not having the videos spread so fast maybe?

Hi JD - Rob Key speaking very well on Sky and absoluting laying into Smith.

As for Atherton in '94, a few factors:

- the use of soil and it not (so much) being an artificial substance definitely helped his cause despite, as you say, it clearly being shady

- amongst (some of) the English public, there was a perception that other countries had been getting away with far worse (bottle tops) for too long and that it was about time we caught up with them

- England's manager Illingworth fined and bollocked Atherton in a poorly handled and publicly broadcast press conference which probably engendered some sympathy and support for the captain

- the internet and social media was in its infancy so things didn't catch fire and go worldwide with the speed and emotion that they do now

- Atherton's characteristic stubbornness and resilience to ride out the storm.

Yes, Key was excellent - as normal. Although he was more laying into to the general hypocrisy of this Aussie side, with their need to comment on take the moral high ground on every issue, rather than this isssue in particular.

Cheers for the info on Athers! Certainly feels like he got off a little lightly if he are calling for heads here. I think definitely the lack of social media must have played a big part, and one of things from this case is the complete outcry from the Aussie public/media (even the PM had made a statement!) where, as you say, Athers got a bit more leeway.

guildfordbat wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Steve Smith (captain) and David Warner (vice captain) have stood down from their posts for the rest of this test match with wicket-keeper taking over as stand-in captain.

I am curious as to what happened with the tampered ball? Ah commentators have just answered my question. Amazingly, at tea they knew of the ball tampering but did not change it. Unreal.

Tbf I’m not sure it actually had much effect on the ball (the umpires inspected it), which is part of what makes it so bizarre!

Hmm but it had been tampered with. Even if it were only once it happened it was still a ball that had been tampered with. They have boxes of old balls used when a ball needs changed so surely the common sense and fair thing to do is prevent Australia to continue to bowl with a ball they had tampered with.

Hi Craig and all - I understand fully where Craig is coming from but no one ever knows with any certainty how a replacement ball will behave. That's a major reason why fielding captains and their bowlers are so keen to claim that a ball is out of shape when they're, for example, not getting swing and things aren't going their way. A different untampered ball might actually have helped Australia more than sticking with the ball that Bancroft had been trying to change through artificial means.

It was right that it was for the umpires to make a judgement on the state of the ball concerned, not that they seem to have covered themselves in much glory as I get the impression (I didn't follow things live) that they were far from proactive with the situation.

Balls (oh the innuendo) are funny things though. I mean would the tampering be visible to the eye? Apparently, sticky tape was what was being used on it so I cannot see how that would alter the physical appearance of the ball but still aid in helping the ball move - if you see what I mean.

KP_fan wrote:On the events itself...I think it's too convenient to step down the captain / VC , express remorse and move on with the game

cricket must follow, Olympic & Tennis Example

If caught cheating......the medals are take back retrospectively and the NATION  banned from the next Olympic for atleast that event if found that there was an organized conspirancy....such as Russia

Or Tennis when caught doping.....you are banned for 6 months or a year as in case of Sharapova

There should be an investigation & Smith / Lehman / Warner put under oath and asked to Testify how long it's been going for
and any Aussie wins during that period  annulled at the  very least

I agree with KP_f's sentiments.

I'm just waiting and dreading to hear that too easy and common modern expression, ''It was a mistake''. No, it wasn't. A mistake is when I put the black refuse bin out instead of the green one - an example of an innocent but mistaken action. This was a deliberate and pre-planned action which was clearly known by all involved to be blatantly wrong and in direct contravention of the laws and spirit of the game.

I would add that Smith's remorse and assurances of it never happening again strike me as having been occasioned only by being found out rather than any true feelings of regret.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Steve Smith (captain) and David Warner (vice captain) have stood down from their posts for the rest of this test match with wicket-keeper taking over as stand-in captain.

I am curious as to what happened with the tampered ball? Ah commentators have just answered my question. Amazingly, at tea they knew of the ball tampering but did not change it. Unreal.

Tbf I’m not sure it actually had much effect on the ball (the umpires inspected it), which is part of what makes it so bizarre!

Hmm but it had been tampered with. Even if it were only once it happened it was still a ball that had been tampered with. They have boxes of old balls used when a ball needs changed so surely the common sense and fair thing to do is prevent Australia to continue to bowl with a ball they had tampered with.

Hi Craig and all - I understand fully where Craig is coming from but no one ever knows with any certainty how a replacement ball will behave. That's a major reason why fielding captains and their bowlers are so keen to claim that a ball is out of shape when they're, for example, not getting swing and things aren't going their way. A different untampered ball might actually have helped Australia more than sticking with the ball that Bancroft had been trying to change through artificial means.

It was right that it was for the umpires to make a judgement on the state of the ball concerned, not that they seem to have covered themselves in much glory as I get the impression (I didn't follow things live) that they were far from proactive with the situation.

Balls (oh the innuendo) are funny things though. I mean would the tampering be visible to the eye? Apparently, sticky tape was what was being used on it so I cannot see how that would alter the physical appearance of the ball but still aid in helping the ball move - if you see what I mean.

Hi again Craig - yeah, I do see what you mean. I would still say though that it was for the umpires to make a call. One thing I think they could have done (and perhaps they even did) is continue with the existing ball but reserve the right to change it if it started showing any signs of unnatural movement.

guildfordbat wrote:

KP_fan wrote:On the events itself...I think it's too convenient to step down the captain / VC , express remorse and move on with the game

cricket must follow, Olympic & Tennis Example

If caught cheating......the medals are take back retrospectively and the NATION  banned from the next Olympic for atleast that event if found that there was an organized conspirancy....such as Russia

Or Tennis when caught doping.....you are banned for 6 months or a year as in case of Sharapova

There should be an investigation & Smith / Lehman / Warner put under oath and asked to Testify how long it's been going for
and any Aussie wins during that period  annulled at the  very least

I agree with KP_f's sentiments.

I'm just waiting and dreading to hear that too easy and common modern expression, ''It was a mistake''. No, it wasn't. A mistake is when I put the black refuse bin out instead of the green one - an example of an innocent but mistaken action. This was a deliberate and pre-planned action which was clearly known by all involved to be blatantly wrong and in direct contravention of the laws and spirit of the game.

I would add that Smith's remorse and assurances of it never happening again strike me as having been occasioned only by being found out rather than any true feelings of regret.

The real disappointing thing about it all was that it was clearly admittedly pre-planned, Lehmann looks like he was in on it and Steve Smith's press conference remarks were cheap, nasty and seemed all a 'matter of fact' almost like he was shrugging his shoulders with it all.

As for the punishment well you first need to find out how long this ball-tampering regime was 'at it'. They claim it was the first time they had did it. If so I cannot see how past results can be expunged unless a confession comes from this 'leadership group' to say how long they have been doing it. I think a ban for the players involved is an option but as to the length of that ban then who knows and how will that be decided.

Smith saying in press conference that Lehmann didn't know - I beg to differ about that. During the incident when it was clear it was caught on camera Lehmann is seen radioing down to the third man who moments later went out onto the pitch and warned Bancroft who hid the offending yellow tape he had used. That says Lehmann did know about it.

It's hard to see how Lehmann can or should be excused. Even if he wasn't in on it*, he should have had a grip on what Smith and the players were up to. As said by David Lloyd, they appear ''totally out of control''. Not just in this match but for some time before that.

Edit: I posted this before seeing Craig's post immediately above. Very difficult to argue with what Craig says there - and I'm not going to!

Wonderfully astute comment I've just heard from former New Zealand captain James Franklin on Smith's assertion that it hadn't happened before,''You'd like to think it is the first time but sometimes when you say it is the first time, it's only because you've been caught for the first time.''

Nobody really knows how long it has been going on or what triggered it. A plausible theory is that the Aussies have become embroiled in what has become a bitter series and as it looks to be heading South Africa's way they decided they can't accept defeat against a team that has got right up their noses and so decided to break the rules and tamper with the ball. It was evidently pre-planned as Bancroft took a tool onto the pitch to do it.

One of the problems for Smith - and Lehmann - is that any assurances that this is a "one off" are unlikely to be wholeheartedly accepted (whether true or not).
Msp alluded to previous events in Bangalore ; and while that drs business was nothing like as serious as this it does assist in making this particular Australian leadership combination look less than honest. You can live down one "indiscretion " perhaps ...but when you start to look like a serial offender your reputation is surely shot...

Bancroft has been charged by the ICC : in light of the press conference (I haven't seen it myself) surely there will be charges leveled against Smith as well ? Whatever Cricket Australia want to do I think the immediate future might be out of their hands.

Lead to 400. How many do SA want , I wonder ? They'll want to give themselves plenty of time to dismiss Australia : regardless of the extra pressure on them from the events of yesterday it shouldn't be assumed they will just fold.
Smith himself is sufficiently bloody minded that I wouldn't put it past him to use the situation as a spur to bat for a day and a half.

Rabada gone ...300 for Lyon : pity his achievement is overshadowed by the other stuff.

Don't think they'll bat much longer now.

Vernon Philander gets his 50 and the declaration must surely be imminent. South Africa 366 for 9 and lead by 422.

Alfie - South Africa should have enough and more now - if Australia were to win, it would be the highest ever successful run chase in Tests. However, I fully take your point about Smith's bloody mindedness.

Thought exactly the same about Lyon's 300.

And the final wicket falls as South Africa set a target of 430. That would be a world record run chase.

I’d be surprised if Lyon isn’t part of this leadership group. He’s as much a prize plank as any of them

According to a few Australian cricket media outlets the 'leadership group' consists of Smith, Warner, Starc, Hazlewood and Lyon

Smith has been suspended for one test by the ICC

https://twitter.com/thecricketermag/status/977853720103915520?s=21

Hahahahahahhahahahah Davie!

Nathaniel Jacobs wrote:According to a few Australian cricket media outlets the 'leadership group' consists of Smith, Warner, Starc, Hazlewood and Lyon

Like I said earlier I'd be gobsmacked if Lehmann did not know anything about it. Cameras picked him up on his radio contacting the third man (on a radio) shortly after it became clear Bancroft had been rumbled. The third man then went onto the pitch and passed on a message to Bancroft who hid the offending item down the front of his trousers. Now if that were the message from Lehmann and he had no knowledge then you'd expect him to message the third man and tell him to tell Bancroft to go over to the umpire and own up.

Quite a sizeable leadership group - half the team.

ICC have acted quickly to ban Smith for the last Test. Cannot think Cricket Australia will leave it at that ; but it does give them the space to investigate the whole messy business properly and deal with it at the end of this tour.

Significant that Paine - apparently outside the "leadership group" has taken the reins...I guess he will have the job at Jo'burg. Where it goes from there is anyone's guess but I don't think Warner , for one , will be considered...

Seeing some pretty drastic penalties suggested - many from Australian fans. This has certainly hurt over here though I've not yet had a chance to discuss it with my cricket colleagues. It's the evident premeditated aspect to this that really offends most . The "line" between gamesmanship and outright cheating was so clearly crossed I am astonished none of these so called "leaders" could see what they intended was wrong...
Ah well. The sun will come up tomorrow I guess...in the meantime Warner and Bancroft are somehow surviving some hostile new ball bowling. Doesn't look as if they are going to fold meekly but you'd think four more sessions should be enough for SA to get the job done.

I see how huge a story it is - front page and lead headline on the BBC news website.

For now, though, all we can do is wait and see the outcome at the conclusion of this test. And with odds of South Africa winning this at 2/7, when it should be 1/25, it's print money time.

Well I don't see anyway back into positions of amy authority for Smith or Warner. I reckon Bancroft will get the chop (permanently) as he is seen as far more dispensable and Smith and Warner may get a short ban and on their return will not be considered for their old roles.

At tea on the fourth day, Australia are 47 for 0 in pursuit of 430 runs.

What a brainless way to lose a wicket. Bancroft run-out and Australia are 57 for 1.

CaledonianCraig wrote:What a brainless way to lose a wicket. Bancroft run-out and Australia are 57 for 1.

Scratchy innings from Bancroft

On a happier note, I recommend the truly masterful, dignified interview given by Adam Gilchrist available on the BBC sport website. Now THAT is a top Australian, phenomenal performer and top top all round good bloke.

And Warner is snared by Rabada and Australia are 59 for 2.

And now Maharaj captures the wicket of Khawaja. Australia 59 for 3.

Shaun Marsh out first ball to Maharaj with an outstanding catch by Markam in close.

Maharaj on a hat-trick.

Mitch Marsh survives and Australia are 59 for 4.