The quality and consistency of the Dukes ball has become one of the most disruptive themes in this Test series, with players and pundits alike expressing concern over its wear and behaviour. While the second new ball is usually expected to assist seamers, multiple instances across matches have shown teams requesting replacements far earlier than anticipated, either due to the ball going soft, losing shape, or simply behaving unpredictably.
For bowlers banking on control, reverse swing, or bounce off the surface, the lack of uniformity has proven frustrating, leading to frequent interruptions in play.
On Day 3 at Lord’s, play came to a halt yet again as England requested a ball change mid-session. With drinks already having been called moments earlier, the timing of the request raised eyebrows. What followed was a prolonged break of over seven minutes as the umpires rifled through the box of replacements before handing the new ball to Chris Woakes.
Ian Ward, who was on-air during the ball change, expressed frustration at the timing of the umpires' decision. He questioned why the process hadn’t begun during the drinks break itself, pointing out that valuable playing time was being lost by addressing it immediately after the scheduled interval.
{{/usCountry}}Ian Ward, who was on-air during the ball change, expressed frustration at the timing of the umpires' decision. He questioned why the process hadn’t begun during the drinks break itself, pointing out that valuable playing time was being lost by addressing it immediately after the scheduled interval.
{{/usCountry}}“Here we go again. Another ball change. I've to say, this is ridiculous. If they decide to change the ball, why was that not decided at the start of the drinks break? We waited for the entirety of the drinks break. They should be playing again now. Now they are going through the entire procedure. This process could've started right at the start of the drinks break,” Ward said.
Shastri blasts umpires
Ravi Shastri, who had joined the commentary box by then, was furious, too, as he questioned the “common sense” behind the decision and wondered whether the umpires simply “forgot” to change the ball earlier.
“I couldn't agree more. It's common sense, it's basic. It's hard to explain. The case is, did they forget? What's quite amazing is that they checked five balls and all five of them didn't go through the ring. So, why have a box in the first place?” said Shastri.