The Controversial Adelaide Test: A Clash of Skill, Grit, and Frustration

Few Test series in the modern era have matched the intensity, passion, and controversy of South Africa’s 1997-98 tour of Australia. The two sides, both brimming with world-class talent and fierce competitiveness, collided in a gripping contest that was ultimately overshadowed by an umpiring decision that still fuels debate.

Heading into the third and final Test in Adelaide, Australia led the series 1-0 after a crucial victory in Sydney. For South Africa, this match was not merely an opportunity for redemption—it was a battle to reclaim their standing against a team that had, time and again, found a way to break their resistance. The Proteas dominated large portions of the Test, putting themselves in prime position to secure a rare overseas win. But as the final moments unfolded, a single decision—one that blurred the fine lines between technicality and spirit—would leave the visitors seething.

The Defining Moment: Hit-Wicket or Not?

Australia, set a formidable target of 361, found themselves reeling at 202 for six. Mark Waugh, their elegant stroke-maker, stood firm amid the ruins. His resistance was admirable, though his survival owed much to South Africa’s generosity in the field—particularly Adam Bacher, who put down multiple chances. Yet, the moment that incited the most fury came in the dying stages of the match.

With just eight overs remaining, Waugh took a sharp blow to the arm from a Shaun Pollock short delivery. The ball ballooned toward gully, where Pat Symcox dived forward to claim what he believed to be a fair catch. The South Africans erupted in appeal, but umpire Doug Cowie turned it down. As Waugh turned away, the edge of his bat brushed against the stumps, dislodging the bails. Square-leg umpire Steve Randell noticed it immediately, and a fresh appeal followed.

The decision was sent upstairs to third umpire Steve Davis, who meticulously reviewed the incident against ICC’s Law 35. The law stated that a batsman could only be given out hit-wicket if the stumps were broken either while preparing to receive, in the act of playing a stroke, or immediately after setting off for a run. Waugh’s dismissal, Davis ruled, did not meet these criteria. He was given not out.

For South Africa, it was a hammer blow. To them, the evidence was clear—Waugh had lost control of his bat, and in their eyes, that was enough. Pollock later lamented, “If a batsman loses control and hits the stumps, that’s out.” The frustration was palpable, and their captain, Hansie Cronje, made his displeasure brutally clear.

Cronje’s Rage and the Fractured Spirit of the Game

The aftermath of the decision saw one of the most infamous acts of protest in Test history. Enraged by what he perceived as an injustice, Cronje stormed into the umpires’ dressing room and drove a stump through the door. It was an uncharacteristic moment for a man known for his composure, but it symbolized the raw emotion that had gripped his team.

Symcox, reflecting on the match years later, did not attempt to conceal his lingering bitterness. “There was no doubt he was out, we all knew,” he remarked. “At that stage of South Africa’s development as a team, it was quite critical.”

Not everyone, however, saw the incident through the same lens. Australian wicketkeeper Ian Healy staunchly defended the decision, arguing that Waugh’s bat had struck the stumps well after the stroke had been completed. “I was of the opinion it was the right decision,” he said, adding that Cronje’s furious reaction was unbecoming of a leader. “A team management letter from the South Africans was the only apology. We thought at the time that it was a bit soft.”

Mark Taylor, Australia’s captain, was equally firm in his belief. “I thought the umpire made the correct decision,” he said, before acknowledging the inevitable divide in opinion. “Ask Hansie, and he’ll probably say something completely different.”

A Legacy of What-Ifs

For all the controversy surrounding the hit-wicket ruling, it was not the only moment that cost South Africa the match. The ten missed catches—three of them by Bacher alone—were a far greater self-inflicted wound. Waugh, reprieved multiple times, carried his bat for an unbeaten 115, ensuring Australia held on for a series-clinching draw.

Yet, for South Africans, the wound remains. The 1997-98 Adelaide Test is not merely remembered as Dave Richardson’s farewell or a hard-fought stalemate. It is recalled with a lingering sense of injustice—a belief that fate, and the third umpire, robbed them of a famous victory.

For Australians, however, it remains another example of their team’s resilience, another chapter in their legacy of survival against all odds. Two nations, one decision, and a Test match that refuses to be forgotten.

Thank You 

Faisal Caesar