Loading ...It looks like the entire controversy about that “catch” – or catch that never was – by AB de Villiers off Andrew Strauss in the second England-Proteas cricket Test at Headingley has now been swept under the carpet.
A week has passed since the ball went into his right hand and he dropped it to the ground before scooping it up and claiming a fair catch. But absolutely nothing has been done about it. Neither does any disciplinary action seem likely against De Villiers for what was certainly not in the spirit of cricket and undoubtedly a serious violation of the ICC Code of Conduct.
The gravity of this type of behaviour is illustrated by the fact that in 2003, Pakistan captain Rashid Latif was banned by the match referee for five ODIs for claiming a catch that popped out of his hands (wicketkeeper’s gloves) in a Test against Bangladesh. Ironically, the match referee on that occasion was South Africa’s Mike Procter!
Why was De Villiers exonerated? Was he perhaps saved because of his magnificent knock of 174? Surely not! Or was it because Strauss was eventually allowed to bat on?
Such unsportsmanlike actions cannot be allowed to go unpunished, regardless of the personalities involved. It is important to protect the traditions and spirit of the “gentlemen’s game” of cricket which have been so eroded during the past few decades, mainly because of professionalism.
So why was there no intervention from match referee New Zealander Jeff Crowe? Why did he not make a judgment one way or another; whether De Villiers’ claim to have taken the catch was a willful intent to deceive – to cheat, or whether it was merely the actions of someone with a guilty conscience for dropping an important catch?
Even if his verdict was the latter – inexplicable as it may have been – it would have shown that he had considered the matter. But, instead, he remained silent throughout the controversy.
And it was all there on the television screen for millions to see. That uneasy, almost sheepish, expression on De Villiers’ face after his appeal for the catch, spoke volumes, revealing the whole story long before the help of the third umpire was called in. It was clear that he had not taken a fair catch and, more importantly, that he was quite aware of it, too! Yet, he went further and completed his appeal by triumphantly holding the ball aloft.
There is, however, also cause for concern in that some senior Proteas around De Villiers had witnessed him dropping the ball before scooping it up again. Instead of cautioning him, they celebrated with him.
The whole incident, understandably, invoked the ire of commentators – all distinguished former cricketers who obviously cherish the spirit of the game of cricket dearly. They labelled it as “shameful” and “cheating”. Sir Ian Botham sounded angry when he said: “That is as bad as I have seen.” He later added: “The man must get his mind right – full stop” (or words to that effect).
Proteas coach Mickey Arthur came out in defence of De Villiers, saying that he (De Villiers) was genuinely convinced that he had caught the ball. Yet, on the other hand, De Villiers did not seem as sure about it when he reportedly told newspapers that he had approached Proteas skipper Graeme Smith before the third umpire had given a decision and told him that he was “not 100 percent sure” whether he had taken the catch…
And in case you want to query why I do not criticise England captain Michael Vaughn’s disputed 50-50 catch off Hashim Amla, it’s because it was not the same thing at all.
Television replays showed that he might have slipped his fingers under the ball – but nothing was conclusive and Amla returned to the crease. In the De Villiers “catch”, the ball was grounded after being in his hand – and then he claimed it after scooping it up with the other hand.
Get over it. Theres no need to punish AB for something he never did. And calling someone a cheat is about aas low as you can go. It’s just a game, you old guys take this game far too seriously. Your complaint about AB isn’t in the spirit of the game, get over yourself. Great article though.
(Report abuse)