Former South African captain Faf du Plessis has revealed the Proteas’ suspicions of Australia’s treatment of the ball during the infamous ‘Sandpapergate’ series went back well before the scandal was unearthed in Cape Town.
In his upcoming autobiography Faf: Through Fire, du Plessis writes that the team began to obsessively watch Australia in the field during the second Test of that series, after a fierce spell of reverse-swing from Mitchell Starc in the first Test inflamed their belief that something was amiss.
“During the first Test in Durban, the Australian pace attack had got the ball to reverse insanely,” du Plessis writes.
“Mitchell Starc claimed nine wickets and, although I regard him as one of the best proponents of reverse-swing bowling I have ever seen or faced, those deliveries in Durban were borderline unplayable.
“He would come in around the wicket with a badly deteriorated ball and get it to hoop past us.
“Our balls had also reversed but not nearly as much as theirs.
“We suspected that someone had been nurturing the ball too much to get it to reverse so wildly, and we watched the second Test at St George’s through binoculars, so that we could follow the ball more closely while Australia was fielding.
“When we noticed that the ball was going to David Warner quite often – our changing room must have looked like a birdwatching hide as we peered intently through our binoculars.
“There was a visible difference between how Mitchell Starc got the ball to reverse in the first Test in Durban and the final Test in Johannesburg. We now know that there was an obvious reason for that.”
Steve Smith and David Warner were banned for 12 months over the incident in March 2018, while Cameron Bancroft, who was caught applying sandpaper to the ball, received a nine-month suspension.
Warner is still banned from any leadership role within the Australian cricket team.
However, du Plessis also admitted to his and the Proteas’ own indiscretions with ball-tampering, including a much-publicised incident in Australia in late 2016 when he was caught using a mint to apply saliva to the ball.
The 38-year old argued that Smith ‘didn’t do much wrong’, expressing ‘tremendous sympathy’ for Bancroft’s ordeal in particular.
Notably, du Plessis excluded Warner from this defence.
“I’m not mentioning this from atop a high horse. In the past, we have also been found guilty of employing unorthodox methods to get the ball to reverse swing,” du Plessis writes.
“In our team, we just thought, ‘Nah! Ball tampering and reverse swing have always been there.’ In fact, it was probably more prevalent when camera technology wasn’t as good as it is today.
“Personally, I don’t think Steve Smith did much wrong. It’s no secret that all cricket teams want the ball to reverse. Not everyone knows how to accomplish this, especially not inexperienced players. But everyone knows it’s wrong to change the condition of the ball. We, too, have pushed those boundaries.
“Steve Smith and I have never been friends but we always played a hard game against each other, and Steve had been willing to defend me publicly in 2016 when ‘Mintgate’ broke.
“I texted him that evening [in Cape Town]: ‘Message of support. Gone through this myself. It is a terrible experience when they attack your character. Hang in there. It will blow over.’
CLICK HERE for a seven-day free trial to watch cricket on KAYO
“He responded, ‘Thanks mate!’ To which I replied, ‘There will be a s–tstorm for a while. But stay strong.’
“I have tremendous sympathy for what he [Bancroft] went through. This is what happens in a team when the culture of belonging is restricted to performance and when players are made to believe that they need to prove themselves at any cost before they feel accepted.”
Du Plessis’ autobiography will be released on October 28.
Dirk
Guest
My understanding is that Du Plessis translates to English as the Zipper.
matth
Roar Guru
Well he would know.
matth
Roar Guru
Fair call
Trevor
Guest
Faf is somewhat of an expert on this topic, having been pinged multiple times for similar behaviour. The South Africans didn't overreact, however, and ban him for a year - they just let the one-match ban stand.
Clear as mud
Guest
Khawaja returns serve today. refers to early SA reverse, earlier than Australia. exactly right.
Homer Gain
Guest
I think you've just proved your sanctimonious enough.
Censored Often
Roar Rookie
So a bloke caught ball tampering long before sandpapergate reckons something is up?
ColinT
Roar Rookie
Using mints is probably worse. The idea is to deposit a sticky residue to one side of the ball. When you return the ball to the bowler you throw the ball into the pitch sticky side down so it collects dirt particles. Works better than other methods except maybe bottle caps that can really score the leather deeply. As for the life ban, I guess I’m just not sanctimonious enough.
matth
Roar Guru
Just means there is no oxygen for the will they won’t they captaincy debate
Micko
Roar Rookie
The problem was a blatant event of cheating meant sponsors would be scrambling to leave, and in fact Matt THE major naming rights of CA: Magellan, DID leave in the weeks following the events in Cape Town! So CA had no choice but to make some drastic decisions & punishments following Cape Town.
Perthstayer
Roar Rookie
We used "unorthodox" methods. Not brave enough to admit to "cheating". His silence about Warner is deafening.
JGK
Roar Guru
Maybe. Doesn’t feel overly different to me.
matth
Roar Guru
They could have equally dealt with this the same way they did with Warne. No ban but just recognition that he was not the ‘right kind of captain’ and just not selected him
James
Guest
Yeah you cant compare this to any other ball tampering or cheating in cricket. Firstly there is a difference between using a mint and sandpaper, a big one. But for me the biggest thing is that Warner and Smith threw the new guy under the bus. Every other cheating instance in cricket was done by the leaders, no one ever asked the new guy to do it. That's the terrible complete lack of leadership thing.
Marty
Roar Rookie
The reason Warner should never be allowed to captain isn’t because of what happened in Cape Town, its because he’s a knuckle dragging ‘attack dog’ with no respect for the game or representing his country. If you don’t believe me just have a look at his efforts last night. Gets beaten neck and crop by the bowler, somehow survives… and then turns around and mouths off?!? It’s all about Davy, always has been and always will be, the only thing bigger than his ego is his mouth. It’s ridiculous, and harks back to the mindless abuse that was a feature of Australian cricket for so many years, and appears to be making a comeback under McDonald. Great. This guy shouldn’t be put in charge of a social netball team, let along a group of impressionable young men who are still learning how to play the game right and how to represent their country.
Clear as mud
Guest
If you read the cricinfo commentary the ball got changed and then went sideways. And exactly the same thing happened with Rabada, who was similarly unplayable Which makes it plausible that the intent of sandpaper was to get the ball changed, as it wasn’t swinging But Faf tells us nothing new here
JGK
Roar Guru
The life ban was for bullying a younger teammate to do your dirty work. Classic leadership failure.
ColinT
Roar Rookie
A life ban on captaincy for ball tampering is a manifestly harsh and unfair punishment handed out to no other player from any other country. Ball tampering has been practised by all test playing teams without attracting such a severe penalty. Players have used bottle tops, gravel, lollies, buckles etc etc in order to get the ball to swing. All should be penalised, but not with a life ban.