Should Cricket Drop the Saliva Ban? Tim Southee Joins Mohammed Shami in Calling on ICC to End Suspension

Cricket has traditionally been a balancing act between ball and bat, but the last while has thrown the scales rather far in favor of the batter. In an era where high totals are par for the course, fast bowlers find themselves scrambling to discover methods to gain any sort of upper hand. This has reopened the controversy surrounding the International Cricket Council's (ICC) move to ban the use of saliva to polish the ball permanently—a rule that was first brought in as a temporary measure during the COVID-19 pandemic.

India's star pacer Mohammed Shami recently expressed his disappointment with this ban, asking the rule to be overturned in a bid to enable bowlers to produce reverse swing, a very important ability for fast bowlers. Now, former New Zealand pacer Tim Southee has joined him in his appeal, asking the ICC to undo the ban and restore some sort of advantage to the bowlers in the game.

Why Was the Saliva Ban Imposed?

The ban on saliva was initially implemented in May 2020 as part of worldwide health regulations to contain the spread of COVID-19. Historically, bowlers have employed their saliva to polish one side of the cricket ball, which aids in keeping the aerodynamics of the ball intact and makes reverse swing easier. To reduce the chances of spreading the virus, ICC suspended the use of saliva temporarily.

By September 2022, this restriction was made permanent, a decision that disappointed many bowlers who relied on the technique to extract movement from the ball. With the pandemic largely under control and other COVID-era restrictions lifted, many players, including Shami and Southee, believe it is time for the ICC to revisit the rule.

Mohammed Shami’s Call for Change

Following India's win against Australia in the Champions Trophy semifinal, Shami freely vented his anger over the saliva ban. He stressed that reverse swing, a major fast bowlers' weapon, has greatly lost its sheen with this restriction.

"We're attempting [getting reverse swing], but use of saliva on the ball is prohibited," Shami added. "We keep making an appeal that we would be permitted to use saliva so that we could introduce reverse swing into the game and make it a little more exciting."

Reverse swing is especially useful on dry, abrasive pitches, as seen in the Indian subcontinent. It helps bowlers get movement in the air, making batting difficult even on flat tracks. Shami’s comments have reignited discussions among cricketing experts, with many believing that lifting the ban could restore some balance between bat and ball.

Tim Southee Weighs In-‘Bowlers Need an Advantage’

Backed by Shami, even Tim Southee has called for the ICC to reconsider the ban, claiming that the game has become too batter-friendly. On ESPNcricinfo's Match Day, the ex-New Zealand pacer elaborated that teams score more than 300 runs in limited-overs cricket, making it increasingly difficult for bowlers to have an impact.

"That was a regulation introduced due to COVID, but as a bowler, you'd want to have an edge," Southee said. "We're seeing the game trending the way it is, where teams are putting up 362 and consistently going over 300 in this format. I believe there needs to be an element in favor of the bowlers, and if that's a bit of spit, then I don't think it can't be used."

Saliva vs. Sweat-Which Works Better?

Most bowlers contend that sweat does not work as well as saliva in preserving the condition of the ball. Sweat may keep the ball shiny, but it does not have the stickiness that saliva has, which facilitates a better coating on one side of the ball and adds to the reverse swing.

Southee explained that in white-ball cricket, swing is predominantly observed in the initial overs, and then the ball is easier to hit. But in red-ball cricket, reverse swing is very important, particularly in conditions where traditional swing vanishes once the ball gets old.

"I believe the ball only swings early on for a few overs [in white-ball cricket]. But with the red ball, you can get it back, and naturally, sweat can be in short supply at times in different regions of the world," Southee said. "Whereas saliva, you're able to gain access to it from multiple sources and in all regions of the world."

With these trends in mind, Southee feels saliva becomes an even more important factor in red-ball cricket, where swings are depended on by bowlers to harass batsmen for lengthy periods.

The Debate-Must the ICC Think Again?

The ban on saliva by the ICC at the time was done in line with health and hygiene issues, but since the world has since changed, according to critics, the rule is no longer relevant. If the use of saliva were to be reinstated, it would return control to the bowlers, particularly in Test cricket, as the skill to produce reverse swing is usually what makes or breaks a team.

But there are counterarguments as well. There are some who think that dependence on saliva is old-fashioned and that bowlers should adjust themselves to contemporary cricket conditions. Second, permitting saliva application could kindle again controversy about ball tampering, which has dogged the sport historically.

Despite such misgivings, the rising tide of voices calling for the ban on saliva to be relaxed indicates that the ICC will soon have to reassess the regulation. With such cricket legends as Shami and Southee weighing in, the controversy about whether or not cricket must resume its classic techniques continues to grow.

Conclusion

Cricket is a dynamic sport, and although rule adjustments are always needed for the game's advancement, they must also aim to balance fairness among batters and bowlers. The permanent saliva ban has certainly made things more difficult for the fast bowlers, resulting in higher scoring rates and less opportunity for reverse swing.

With the likes of Mohammed Shami and Tim Southee demanding the ban be overturned, the ball is now in the ICC's court. Will the governing body listen to the plight of fast bowlers and reinstate the use of saliva, or will it remain with the existing rule and compel bowlers to look for other options? The decision to this question could determine the future of cricket's bat-ball balance.