India A’s first unofficial Test against Australia A ended in both controversy and clarity, as they were cleared of ball-tampering charges following a dispute on Day 4 of the match in Mackay, Queensland. The game, which ended in a comfortable seven-wicket victory for Australia A, was temporarily overshadowed by an argument involving India A wicketkeeper Ishan Kishan and umpire Shawn Craig regarding the match ball’s condition.

As play was set to resume on Sunday at Great Barrier Reef Arena, umpires noticed scratch marks on the ball, leading to its replacement before play. Craig reportedly addressed the players, stating, "You scratch it, we change the ball. This is not a discussion." Kishan voiced his frustration over the decision, calling it a "very stupid decision," which sparked further tensions. Craig responded sternly, noting, "That’s inappropriate behaviour. It is because of your actions we changed the ball," and indicated Kishan could be penalized for dissent.

Following the exchange, speculation about ball-tampering spread, prompting Cricket Australia (CA) to issue an official statement to clarify the incident. CA confirmed that the ball was replaced solely due to natural deterioration as per Law 41.3.4, not due to any deliberate tampering by India A players. CA further stated that both team captains and managers were informed of the decision, confirming that "no further action" would be taken.

Australia A captain Nathan McSweeney, who scored an unbeaten 88 to anchor his team to victory, noted in a post-match press conference that he was not aware of any specific details around the ball’s condition. His knock, alongside a crucial fifty from Beau Webster, sealed the match for Australia A, giving them a 1-0 lead in the two-match series. The second unofficial Test will commence on November 7 at the Melbourne Cricket Ground.

With tensions simmering, the incident raised questions about how such allegations are handled, with Article 2.15 of the CA Code of Conduct outlining penalties for altering the ball’s condition. While no action was taken this time, the controversy highlighted the need for clarity and calm in on-field conduct to avoid escalating misunderstandings.