CRICKET: Paul Martin
THEY froze in amazement when denied, they ran in from the far-flung corners of Headingley to congratulate supposed wicket-takers, they stared in mute (and not so mute) amazement at the umpires. It was, as Kepler Wessels said afterwards, “a bit ridiculous”.
The English press made a meal of the remarks: they love anything that puts England on the spot when their team is not winning.
England’s clearly intimidatory tactics on the last day at Headingley worked, I suppose, in one instance: Gary Kirsten given out caught behind off a ball that seemed to brush nothing more incriminating than his clothing.
But though Wessels later complained of “unfair pressure” being put on umpires, the occurrence was less explicable by a desire to cheat than by a huge sense of frustration.
England simply could not force home an advantage they had seemed to enjoy from day one. After all, they had scored 477 runs and had South Africa reeling at 31 for three and 105 for five. Then England batted too slowly in their second innings to establish a lead big enough for an early declaration. This despite not having to face Allan Donald at all.
True, South Africa were not entirely innocent: a bowling rate of 23 overs in two hours before lunch was somewhat cynical … yet the overall overs-per-hour figure throughout the match averaged just more than 15, and that is perfectly legitimate — faster in fact than was achieved by South Africa’s pace attack at Lord’s.
There is no doubt who came out of the test match the happier. The jollity at the Holiday Inn in Leeds was mirrored by a rapid England party disappearance, partly necessitated by county commitments, but also reflecting the team’s disappointment.
Atherton had little compunction in defending his team’s appealing: “there’s no crime in appealing if you think you deserve a wicket.”
That was not the way the umpires saw it.
They never wish to be quoted, but one of the three (remember, there’s a guy up there watching the replays) told me: “It was most annoying and they clearly thought they could intimidate us. But they can’t. It’s a trend in world cricket that I do not appreciate.”
Peter Kirsten put the matter into somewhat generous perspective when he told the press: “In their position we’d probably have done the same.”
I doubt it though. And anyway, South Africa wouldn’t be in that position, because they have started to learn how to not let their opponents off the hook.