Hi,

These allegations have been denied by England but they cannot deny that Broad stepped on the ball. What was his reason for doing so if the ball had already been stopped? Although the ICC stated the matter is closed, from what I've heard over the radio they could be taking action against Broad and Anderson by banning them from atleast the next game.

"The problem with the accusations that South Africa made, and they were pretty serious, is that you can’t suddenly back-track on them"

I'm not sure SA's back tracking means much. It shouldn't be their responsibility to lodge an official complaint anyway, this should be the umpire's job.

SA might not complain simply because they have no way to be sure whether Broad's was an intentional attempt to tamper the ball, or how much it actually affected the ball in the end.

It should be up to the ICC/Umpires/Referee to look into the incident and decide what course of action to take.

What no-one has satisfactorily explained to me is why it matters whether or not South Africa complain about it. The issue is one of fair and unfair play and as such is one for the umpires (and perhaps match referee) to deal with---Law 42.2 states that the umpires are the sole judges of fair and unfair play and Law 42.3 (a) and (b) state what can and can't be done to the ball. In particular

"It is unfair for anyone to rub the ball on the ground for any reason, interfere with any of the seams or the surface of the ball, use any implement, or take any other action whatsoever which is likely to alter the condition of the ball, except as permitted in (a) above"

"(a) above" simply says that you are allowed to polish, dry and remove mud from the ball.

Surely what Broad did is likely to alter the condition of the ball?!? The law makes no mention of intention, so it is irrelevant whether he was being malicious or just careless.

Are you really surprised the ball tampering issue is reignited. There was real surprise at the amount of reverse swing Broad got in the Durban test after 15 overs. It was enough to fool both Kallis and de Villiers into leaving the ball. The spikes on the ball plus the controversy about pointing while running up to bowl give a clue as how Broad plays cricket but if one wants real insight look no further than his appalling review after gloving the ball in the Newlands test. Robin Jackman remarked there was NO WAY one would not have felt that off the glove.