A case for ball-tampering to be legalised

Reverse swing made its way into international cricket when Imran Khan and Sarfaraz Nawaz bowled it in the 1980s and Australia's Dennis Lillee picked it up afterwards. 

When the ball swings in one direction but changes trajectory at the very end before landing - that is what reverse swing is.

And to get that, you have to scuff up one side of the cricket ball while keeping the other side shiny. 

The amount a ball will reverse swing though is also dependent on the climate and the pitch. 

Overcast conditions generally can be conducive to swing bowling and the same applies for reverse swing.

Recently, talks have emerged from the International Cricket Council (ICC) of the ball being polished on one end by wax instead of saliva as a safety measurement against Covid-19 when cricket does return.

That would essentially equate to ball-tampering as it would be the use of a foreign object to change the condition of the ball. 

Australian great Shane Warne recently suggested that the ball should be made heavier on one side and lighter on the other from the beginning to assist bowlers with swing and reverse swing.

So it begs the question, should ball-tampering be legalised? 

The laws are murky

The bulk of the laws relating to ball-tampering depends on what the umpires think.

Players have to shine up one end and rough up the other end as naturally as possible, using saliva, their clothes, sweat and the pitch. 

But that does not mean one can use their fingernails or bite the ball or even rub the ball directly on the pitch.

And many times, players have substances like chewing gum, hair wax, suntan lotion, and lip balms which they tactfully rub on the ball from their body to get one side to become shiny. 

What happened as recently as 'sandpaper gate' when Cameron Bancroft got caught using a piece of sandpaper to rough up the ball would not have been seen by the umpires and match referee if not for the broadcasters. 

The host broadcaster usually never shows footage of the home team tampering the ball and it is always the visiting team that gets caught under the scanner. 

Think back to Faf du Plessis shining the ball with mint when South Africa toured Australia in 2016 or Sachin Tendulkar seen using his fingernails to scuff up the ball in India's tour of South Africa in 2001. 

So there are always ways for the players to take advantage of these lows and the players to abide by the laws and play within the 'Spirit of the game'. 

A non-English/Australian invention

Cricket has evolved a lot over time and the laws have also changed accordingly but most of the evolution and change has come from England and Australia - the first two teams to play the game.

From T20I crickets to even the possibility of T10s becoming internationals are all ideas generated by England.

The DLS method is also done by people of the same origin and not one that came from the subcontinent. 

Switch-hits were started by Kevin Pietersen - a player who played for England, although of South African origin. 

The only Asian invention in cricket is the leg glance, which was invented by Ranjisinhji or better known as Ranji, after whom the Ranji Trophy is named.

Ranji invented the leg glance and back-foot defence and although he was born in India, he played 15 Tests for England.

We start to get a pattern of how cricket has been over the ages and how the evolution of it has mainly depended on the changes brought about by England.

So it begs the question, would ball-tampering have been legalised if reverse-swing came from England or Australia? 

Perhaps, and the laws would not be so undefined either if it was legalised.

As things stand, post Covid-19 might just see ball-tampering get legalised, and we could then call it ball treating instead.