Curious that the clearly discernible obscenities directed at Indian batsmen during the second Test by such as Jacques Kallis and Mornantau Hayward failed to reach the ears of English match referee Mike Denness.
Noteworthy that England take on India in a Test series in India just days after the third South Africa versus India Test.
Incontestable that having Sachin Tendulkar and some of his colleagues under a cloud can’t harm the chances of the English tourists.
Remarkable that Denness has shed neither the bludgeoning bat that characterised his playing days nor nostalgia for the days of the British Raj. Darryl Accone, Johannesburg
Hard not to sympathise with the furious reaction in India to Sachin Tendulkar’s one-match suspended sentence for ball tampering? Not at all!
On the contrary: considering the evidence, it is unfathomable that there was any disagreement with the sentence that was given by the ICC, or it must have been because of its leniency. If we want this most beautiful game to regain its old lustre we will have to nip this kind of transgression in the bud.
I can therefore fully sympathise with Mike Dennes that he is sick and tired of the tendency of especially India and other subcontinental teams to send the opposition packing by random, dishonest appeals. Even this Saturday, on the second day of the third match, the man at silly was claiming a catch off Klusener, whereas it was very obvious that the ball had bounced first.
Clean cricket starts with the reinstalment of honesty and gentlemanship in the game. And while we’re at it we should start punishing bowlers for vocally abusing batsmen, a practice of which most teams, and especially Australia and South Africa, are guilty.
As for crying out racism when things are not going your way India, puhlease! Robert JD de Neef, Howick
The latest cricket scandal is enough to turn one’s stomach. While there are good reasons for regarding the penalty inflicted upon at least one of the Indian team members as unduly harsh, the protests from India served only to exacerbate matters, for they semed to indicate that the protesters in India regard cheating as acceptable.
When the South African authorities, under pressure from the minister of sport, bent before the Indian threat to cancel the rest of the tour which is nothing less than blackmail, they put self-interest before principle and honesty. Cheating is cheating.
Cricket has never reached a lower moral level than it has over the past couple of years and the South African attempt to redeem the game in their handling of the Hansie Cronje case did a great deal to restore its reputation, at least in South Africa.
This latest surrender before the threat from India has ruined all that and the rottenness has set in once more, this time at the very top of the cricket administration. It is enough to make one wonder whether South Africa is fit to host the coming Cricket World Cup.
There seems a conspiracy of silence about Mike Denness. Has he received an apology? What an insult he has suffered for doing his duty, being honest and supporting fair play! Terence Beard, Grahamstown
The controversy surrounding the disciplining of several Indian cricketers during the second test in South Africa, including star batsman Sachin Tendulkar, raises several questions.
First among these is the lack of consistency in the arbitrary selection of misdemeanours by match referees and cricket officials in meting out justice in the game. Why does a referee suddenly choose to make an example of excessive and apparently unwarranted appealing? It is not as if excessive appealing is a rare occurrence in international cricket. Does this mean that all match referees will clamp down in a similarly harsh manner against such offences in future?
Second, the allegation of balltampering is a more serious offence than excessive appealing and, of course, merits more serious consideration before passing judgment, which we are told match referee Mike Denness did.
Third, decisions dealing with cricketing misdemeanours, whether intended or not, often seem to be levelled against teams from the developing or colonised countries. There is thus the perception that the colonial, racially ordained masters of cricket, represented by countries like Australia and England, and until recently South Africa, tend to be biased in meting out selective justice in cricket.
Finally, let me turn to the television replay evidence that was critical in convicting Tendulkar. I was watching the television coverage at the time and saw little wrong with his actions under normal speed. However, the moment viewers were provided with slow-motion replays, there was a decidedly deliberate and sinister connotation to the images on the television screen. And of course, this is what the match referee looked at repeatedly in passing judgement, not what happened in reality under normal speed, but a slower version of that reality.
Now this is quite different from using cameras to decide whether a catch was cleanly taken or not. This was using a distorted version of reality in deciding on the intention of a player in rubbing his finger along the seam of the ball. Naturally, the slower the movement, the more suspicious it looks. This works fine in Hollywood action sequences, but when slow-motion replays are used as hard evidence in cases of alleged misconduct on the sportsfield, that’s an entirely different matter. L Govender, Centurion