A probe by the SLC, an upset ICC and a furious star batsman. The Sri Lankan team would not have gambled for all of this when they plotted to stop Virender Sehwag from getting a hundred.

By Rajarshi Gupta

Ironically, cricket’s biggest controversy in recent memory had to come in an encounter between India and Sri Lanka. The two sides have played each other so often over the last two years, it was almost impossible to believe something might go awry on the field. But it did and how.

It was an attempt at gamesmanship. India had recovered from a massive 200 run routing at the hands of New Zealand and were poised for victory against the Lankans. Virender Sehwag, the man who ran riot in the Test series days back, had done it again. Suraj Randiv, talented and young, bowled one that got past Sehwag and then the normally reliable Kumar Sangakkara. Four byes. India needed one to win and Sehwag needed one for a hundred.

Now, watching the proceedings on TV, many would have suspected of what Randiv could have done the next ball. A simple wide down the leg side would have left Sehwag stranded on 99. The batsman might have guessed as much. Instead, he got two legal deliveries that he hit straight to point. No runs. 99 not out.

There were smiles all around, a naughty grimace here and there. Someone on the field must have got to Randiv. “Don’t let him get his hundred”. As it appears now, it was Tillekaratne Dilshan, often hailed as Sehwag’s counterpart in the Sri Lankan team. As reports emerge of his involvement in the controversy, one wonders how the two Delhi Daredevil players will take to each other. The next season should be fun.

The point is, was it worth it? Was stopping Sehwag from getting to a well-deserved hundred really have to be that important? Yes, the Lankans could have made it difficult by not giving him a dolly, by getting fielders inside the circle, by trying to block the single. But a deliberate no-ball? That was carrying things a little too far.

Sehwag did appear to joke about it once the match got over and he marched off the field with skipper MS Dhoni. However, the explosive opener was charged up in the press conference, accusing Randiv of overstepping on purpose. He reminded the media of how Lasith Malinga had successfully stopped Sachin Tendulkar from getting to a hundred in Cuttack. Well they got away with it primarily because it was Dinesh Karthik on strike and Malinga’s slinging action could have justified that shocker down the leg-side. But that no-ball, huge even by a pacer’s standards left the world stunned. No one expects this from Sri Lanka.

Sangakkara, ever the gentleman on the field, owned up to the controversy and said he would have to talk tough with Randiv if the no-ball was indeed deliberate. What he had undermined at an earlier stage of the storm was the possibility of a senior player being involved in the chain of communication. A 25-year-old off-spinner, barely getting into his strides in international cricket would not have bowled that no-ball on his own accord- even though that mischievous thought might have crept up in his mind.

Now that Dilshan’s role has come under the scanner, what does the captain do? Not that there is much to do. Things are already out of his hands with Sri Lankan Cricket constituting a committee to probe into the manager’s take on the controversy. With the ICC keeping a close watch on how SLC deal with the situation, there is bound to be some chill in the Lankan dressing room.

Neither Dilshan nor Randiv would have gauged how a no-ball could have snowballed into something so drastic. Legally, the bowler did nothing wrong but it was the spirit of the game that took a mauling.

Meanwhile, Sehwag and the rest of the India camp were happy that SLC and Randiv had apologised for the incident but the damage had been done. The Board was left red-faced at what happened. Having won kudos for fair play from the ICC, this was the last thing they needed. The Sri Lankan players will be ruing that moment of madness. Was all of that worth it?

The ‘no-ball saga’ is also a reflection of how players are bound to use laws of the game to their favour. Suarez did that against Ghana in the FIFA World Cup to stop the Africans from reaching the semis not too long back. He got sent off and did not play the next but lo! He was a hero back home in Uruguay. Randiv on the other hand has been a major embarrassment.

It was strange to see a batsman getting penalised for a no-ball. Consider the same equation. Sehwag unbeaten on 99, India needing one run to win: Had it been a legitimate delivery and had Sehwag still clobbered that one for a six, he would have finished unbeaten on 105. Then why should he have paid for a no-ball? Strange and bemusing.

Obviously, there are standard procedures in place for laws in all sports but what governing bodies do need to guard against is devious players who try to walk around them. Apologies don’t count for much after the very fabric of the game has been tarnished.

Have Your Say: Here And Now