India A controversially accused of ball tampering against Australia A, angry Ishan Kishan calls referee’s decision ‘stupid’

India A wicketkeeper Ishan Kishan could face disciplinary action after a tense altercation with referee Shawn Craig over an alleged ball-tampering incident during the fourth day of the match against Australia A in Mackay. The controversy erupted at the start of play at the Great Barrier Reef Arena on Sunday when Craig insisted on changing the match ball due to visible scratches, which the referee attributed to the Indian team’s actions.

This decision led to a heated argument between the players and the referees, with Shan expressing his dissatisfaction.

Caught on the stump microphone, Craig firmly rejected the Indian team’s questions and said, ‘No more discussion, let’s play. This is not a discussion.” However, Kishan questioned the decision and asked, “So we have to play with this ball? That is a very stupid decision.”

His comments prompted a swift reprimand from Craig, who warned the young wicketkeeper, saying: ‘Excuse me. You will be reported for dissent. That is inappropriate behavior.”

Craig didn’t hold back in suggesting that the India A players had tampered with the condition of the ball, resulting in the mandatory substitution. He was heard saying: “You scratch it, we change the ball,” before adding: “It is because of your actions that we changed the ball.”

If India A players are found to have deliberately altered the condition of the ball, Cricket Australia’s code of conduct may impose sanctions on those involved, including possible bans.

What does the rule say?

Cricket Australia’s Code of Conduct clearly outlines penalties for actions likely to change the condition of the ball, in accordance with Article 2.15.

“Any action(s) likely to change the condition of the ball and not specifically permitted under Law 41.3.2 may be considered unfair,” the code said. It further clarifies that “referees will use their judgment to apply the principle that actions taken to maintain or improve the condition of the ball, provided no artificial substances are used, will be permitted. Any action taken with the aim of damaging the condition of the ball or accelerating the deterioration of the condition of the ball is not permitted.”

The code also places responsibility on the team captain – Ruturaj Gaikwad in this case – if individual players cannot be identified in any breach. “The team captain of the offending side may violate this Article 2.15 if the player or player support personnel involved in the violation cannot be identified, or if the violation was planned or systematic to the extent that the team captain knew, or should have known, there was an infringement.”