There was no dearth of controversy in the recently-concluded Ashes series. The fresh row erupted following the umpires’ decision to change the ball on Day 4 of the fifth Test at the Oval.
During the 37th over of Australia’s second innings, Usman Khawaja was hit on the helmet by a delivery from England pacer Mark Wood. The impact was so severe that it reportedly altered the shape of the red cherry, prompting the umpires to replace it.
England bowlers made the most of the unexpected ball change on the final day as they bundled out the visitors for 334 to win the match by 49 runs and level the Ashes 2-2.
This decision to change the ball triggered a debate and speculation among cricket fans and experts. In fact, Australian batting legend Ricky Ponting demanded a proper investigation.
Amid the outrage, cricket ball manufacturer Dukes has said that it will launch an investigation into the ball change.
According to a report in Code Sports Australia, whispers coming out of England camp have suggested the replacement ball gifted to them was in fact a five-years’ old version of the Dukes’ ball and not one from the more docile batch produced for 2023.
“I can’t imagine they would risk putting a ball in there with a different date on it, Frankly the match referee should be on top of it. We do bang that number in quite hard, so even if the gold comes off the ball is imprinted. It wouldn’t be easy to get rid of it. I’m not saying it’s impossible (it was a 2018 or 2019 ball), but it’s not likely.”
“ … I’m going to investigate myself, because it affects me … my name is at stake so it’s important they don’t misallege something wrong with the ball,” Dukes owner Dilip Jajodia was quoted as saying in the report.
England pacers managed to generate significant movement post ball change on Day 5 at the Oval, suggested by the ball-tracking data during the broadcast.
"The biggest concern I have is the big discrepancy in the condition of the ball that was chosen to replace the one (that had gone out of shape). There's no way in the world you can even look at those two balls there and say in any way are they comparable."
"At the end of the day, if you are going to change the ball, you want to make sure that you get it right, so (you make it) as close as you possibly can to the one that you're changing it from."
"Now if you have a look in that box, there weren't too many older-condition balls in there. There were some older ones that were picked up, the umpires looked at that and threw them back."
"I just cannot fathom how two international umpires that have done that a lot of times before can get that so wrong. That is a huge moment in this game, potentially a huge moment in the Test match, and something I think actually has to be investigated: whether there was the right condition of balls in the box, or the umpires have just, blasé, picked one out of there that they think will be okay to use."
Asked about the same, an ICC spokesperson was quoted as saying in the report, “The ICC does not comment on the decisions taken by umpires in matches. We can, however, confirm that all balls are preselected before the start of every match and when the situation calls for it, the match officials choose the ball that is closest to the condition of the ball that is being replaced.”
(With IANS Inputs)
