Mike Denness, put up or shut up!

On Monday evening, shortly after the completion of the fourth day's play in the second India-RSA Test at Port Elizabeth, news broke that the Indian team, en masse, had been hauled up by the match referee for various offences.

The instinctive reaction would be to accuse match referee and former England captain Mike Denness of bias, or worse. But it could be more instructive to examine the incident in some detail -- with reference to the ICC code that Mr Denness is there to enforce.

And before getting to the issues themselves, it is perhaps pertinent to question the way in which this action has been carried out.

On Sunday evening, word is leaked to certain sections of the media that the South African television company responsible for producing the images for live coverage has handed over to Denness a video clip allegedly showing Sachin Tendulkar tampering with the ball. The story is accompanied by a comment that the match referee is studying the incident.

On Monday, the match referee in the morning intimates to the ESPN-Star network, which is responsible for the commentary, that he sees no reason to believe that Tendulkar is guilty of the offence. Later in the day, it is indicated that the match referee has summoned Tendulkar and several other Indians for another meeting. Further, that he is in close consultation with the ICC.

And finally, late the same evening, the media is tipped off that Denness is going to find Tendulkar guilty of ball tampering, Sehwag guilty of excessive appealing, and assorted other Indian players guilty of assorted other acts of mayhem. We are told, further, that Denness himself will issue a statement on Tuesday.

It begs the question -- why? If Tendulkar is guilty, why did the match referee find it necessary to leak the news of his thoughts, rather than come up with the official statement immediately? If Sehwag is to be suspended for excessive appealing, why did Denness need to inform the media about it, prior to his official statement?

In political circles they call this a trial balloon -- a favourite tactic of governments everywhere. When a government is not sure about the fallout of some contemplated act, you will find a story in the media that runs "Sources close to the government indicated that there is a possibility that such and such an act is likely..."

Then the reaction is assessed -- and if it is negative, the government then comes up with an official statement that goes something like this: "Nooooooooooo, who said we were going to do any such thing? That is all a creation of the media".

For those of us who have been in journalism for a while, this particular tactic is old hat -- and easily recognisable, even when translated into cricketing paradigms.

Now examine the mechanics of the incident, firstly in relation to ball tampering. And ask yourself a couple of questions.

First, is it a fact that umpires are expected to examine the ball at regular intervals to determine if it had been tampered with?

Yes. As per the ICC's rulebook, Law 5 governing Test-Playing Conditions reads, in relevant part, thus: "The umpires shall retain possession of the match balls throughout the duration of the match when play is not actually taking place. During play umpires shall periodically and irregularly inspect the condition of the ball and shall retain possession of it at the fall of a wicket, a drinks interval, at the end of every over, or any other disruption in play."

The umpires shall, please note, periodically inspect the condition of the ball. Was this done? Did either of the umpires notice any irregularity? Did they ask for the ball to be changed?

No? Why not? If the ball was tampered with, why did the umpires allow the Indian bowlers to continue to use it?

Mike Denness is within his rights to pronounce whatever judgement he sees fit -- but if he, and the ICC, do not want that their already tenuous reputation for fairness be further tarnished, he will mandatorily need, when making his statement today, to produce the videographic evidence that he considered, together with the tampered match ball (match balls, incidentally, are marked and saved during the course of a series), and point out what the tampering was that occured. And the umpires will need to take the podium with him, to explain why they permitted the ball, which according to the match referee, had been tampered with, to continue to be used.

Can he do that?

If he does not, then the Indian board, and the manager on tour, need to immediately appeal to the ICC, force that body into a public investigation, and prove to the cricketing public, once for all, whether the allegation is true or no.

And while he is about it, Mike Denness in his statement needs to explain something else to us. To wit -- does he have a rulebook exclusively his own, and one that the rest of us are not privy to?

We have, with us, what purports to be the official rulebook. It was sent to us by the ICC. And on page 14, in the section headed Players, Teams and Officials Code, sub-section E (The Reporting/Notification Procedure), it says, in black on white:

"1.1 An alleged breach of the Rules of Conduct (Editor's note: ball tampering, being an instance of unfair play, falls under the provisions of the Rules of Conduct) can be reported to the referee by:

(a) the umpires, inculding the third or any further umpire appointed for a Test match or an ODI match.

(b) The team manager, either on his own behalf or on behalf of any of his players;

(c) the Chief Executive Officer of the Home Board of a Member Country participating in a Test match or ODI match

(d) The ICC Chief Executive."

Nowhere does it say that a television producer -- namely, a member of the media -- can make such a report. Then again, if Denness is following a rule book that does in fact permit members of the media to report alleged violations, then here goes:

Dear Mr Denness:

As a member of the media, I wish to immediately report South African fast bowler Nantie Hayward for using the 'F' word while bowling in the first Test at Bloemfontein.

I wish to report South African fielder Jacques Kallis for "excessively appealing" after claiming a catch off a ball that had touched the turf.

I wish to report South African bowler Jacques Kallis for bowling a grubber at first slip and then charging up to the batsman and shouting "Let's see you hit that, you ********"

I wish to report South African captain and fast bowler Shaun Pollock for appealing four times for one decision and again, on the fourth morning, for appealing continuously, for almost an entire minute, until the umpire raised his finger.

These violations of breach of the code of conduct are being made by me as a member of the media -- I request that you immediately investigate the same.

Signed, yours truly.

And to take this a bit further, the rulebook says, immediately after the provisions quoted above:

"1.3: A report must be made in writing, signed and dated by the person(s) making the report and, if possible, be on such form as may be provided from time to time by the ICC for the making of reports."

In this connection -- the report I just made, naming Kallis, Pollock and Hayward, is in writing, and duly signed. If the ICC requires it on a specified form, I am willing to fill that form out and sign it, as well. Meanwhile, will Mr Denness kindly produce the written report on which he has taken action, so that it may be clear to all concerned just who made the complaint?

Mike Denness needs to do all this, in the interests of fairness. And if he fails, then the Indian board needs to do something. Namely, to announce the immediate termination of the tour, and to withdraw its players.

This is an international team, it represents our country. The BCCI cannot compromise on an issue that involves the self-respect of the nation -- nothing takes precedence over that. And to stand tamely by and watch its players slandered by anonymous individuals (Again, who filed that report? The elementary principle of jurisprudence is that an accused has the right to be confronted by his accuser, and the ICC code demands that all accusations be made in writing and signed) is to compromise on the self-respect of the players, and of the country.

As to the "excessive appealing" bit -- is it even worth bothering to examine it?

A Glenn McGrath mouthing abuse, after a decade in international cricket, is warned not to repeat the offence. A Hayward or a Kallis mouthing abuse is not even taken note of. But a player in only his second Test is immediately suspended for one Test -- no warning, no nothing.

As friend and cricket columnist Rohan Chandran pointed out in an email just now: Shaun Pollock appeals repeatedly and gets a wicket, Sehwag appeals and gets suspended, go figure!

Considering the way this entire incident has been orchestrated, a question begs the asking: Is South Africa "paying India back" for exposing that paragon of all virtues, Hansie Cronje, as a crook and a liar. And for exposing several other South African players, including members of the current playing team, as corrupt elements who were prepared to back Cronje in his crookery?

If yes, then South Africa needs to note one little thing -- this particular storm in a teacup will blow over. But even after it does, Cronje remains a crook. As do others. Nothing -- not orchestrated abuse masquerading as commentary on South African radio, nor such dramatic tricks aimed at slurring the reputations of Indian players -- can change that fact.

And meanwhile, I find myself with a wish. I had thought that when play resumes this morning, the Indians needed to play it session by session, to first see off the first hour's threat, assess the situation at that point, then take the next step.

Now, I find myself wishing this team has the guts to make a statement. That it has the collective nous to go out there and go after the bowling, as only they can when they want to. That this team tells itself, before stepping onto the field for the fifth and final day of this Test -- We will lose if we have to -- but if we lose, it will be in such a glorious fashion, they will talk about what we did for ever.

For once, I wish this team has -- and shows -- some guts, some spine, some self-respect.

Related reports:
Sachin, Sehwag, Ganguly penalised
What is ball tampering?

Write to the ICC

India's tour of South Africa: Complete coverage