Suits keep dead ball alive, but catch-22 looms

Times Media

TELFORD VICE, Cape Town

IN cricket seasons past, when a six was hit the ball was dead the instant it crossed the boundary. But, in franchise T20 matches this summer, the ball is never more alive than when it soars into the stands.

When that happens, intensity leaps. Television cameras transfer their attention from the field to the crowd with a jolt. The commentary crackles with sudden excitement to follow that lead, describing in detail and at length what happens next.

Replays of spectators catching or trying to catch the ball invariably seem more plentiful and longer than those of the stroke that put the ball within the fans’ grasp.

Through this looking glass, it is difficult to tell whether the stars are the paying public or the professionals paid to entertain them.

There is a powerful reason for all the fuss: money. Should a six be hit during a game that is broadcast on television, and should a spectator over the age of 18 - a legal issue - catch the ball cleanly - no juggling - with one naked hand - no glove - and should the catch be captured by the cameras - for auditing purposes - the catcher stands to win R1-million or part thereof.

If there is only one winner, they hang on to all the cash. If there are more, they share it equally. Happy days.

But former test batsman Barry Richards, who knows his way around cricket’s business end having served as Queensland Cricket Association chief executive for nine years, saw a dark lining in what might appear to be a silver cloud.

“The marketing suits have too much say in what happens in the game and the players have too little say,” Richards said on Wednesday.

“Now that there’s money involved, spectators are going to be pushing and shoving each other out of the way to try and catch the ball.

“What happens when one of them gets injured? Who pays for that?”

Going into Wednesday night’s match between the Titans and the Dolphins in Benoni, no injuries had been reported. But there were two winners.

Bosman Puren made his grab when the Knights’ Pite von Biljon smashed Lions fast bowler Dwaine Pretorius for six in Potchefstroom on November 9.

Five days later at the Wanderers, Kallie van der Merwe hung on when Rassie van der Dussen put Sybrand Engelbrecht over the midwicket fence.

Van der Merwe, a 20-year-old draughting student, plays for Heidelberg Cricket Club and follows the game. But that day he had his eyes on the prize.

“I went to that game to win the money,” Van der merwe said on Wednesday. “I watch a lot cricket, but that time that’s why I went - for the money.”

By then, Liam Banks and Arno Kotze had done what was required to cash in, both during the triple header at the Wanderers on November 2. But there was a catch - they were 17 and 15 years old respectively.

That they were disqualified by their ages was unbeknown to at least one cricketer, Beuran Hendricks, who tweeted a photograph of one of the two fans that he captioned, “Big ups to this guy ...”

News of the catch-22 spread along with unhappy reaction. “Rules must be broken at times,” one tweet read. “Poor guy was cheated,” went another.

Richards, too, thought the rule unfair: “He did what they asked him to do. It’s his money - put it in a trust for the kid.”

Since that marketing mishap, either Cricket SA or the sponsors have tweeted a link to the competition rules at least six times.

So far, they have not been caught out again.