12. England v South Africa at Lord's, London. July, 1994.
South Africa won by 356 runs.
In 1994 England and South Africa walked out for their first Test encounter since a draw at The Oval in 1965. In the era of South African isolation, English sport, and English cricket in particular, seemed to enter most unwillingly into the boycott. This was evidenced by the D'Oliveira Affair in 1968 and erupted later in a couple of rather dishonourable rebel tours in the eighties under Graham Gooch and later Mike Gatting. Some members of the press who had lamented and worked against the absence of South Africa from international cricket for all those years greeted their return as a vindication of their great crusade.
And so, an entirely white South African team was welcomed to headquarters to end a long hypothetical argument about who would win should the two sides ever actually play. The series is remembered for Devon Malcolm's 'You're History' spell of bowling at the Oval, to draw the series level. But in the Proteas' first game at Lord's for 29 years, it was England, who looked rusty. Captain Kepler Wessels made a hundred for South Africa and Alan Donald and Fanie de Villiers took eight wickets to give them a first innings lead of 177. Having extended this to 457, Brian McMillan and Craig Matthews then bowled England out for 99 on a good batting pitch. England lost the last seven wickets for 25. South Africa were a dauntingly tough side.
It's surprising that such an emphatic trouncing in a historic game isn't better known. But of course, the series of 1994, other than Malcolm's heroics, is also remembered for the 'dirt in the pocket' incident when Mike Atherton was picked up by tv cameras apparently smearing the contents of a pocket over one side of the ball. It was the Saturday of the Lord's Test and England were sliding inexorably to a big four day defeat.
Ball tampering to the end of reverse swing had been a contentious subject in England for years, most particularly in 1992 when Pakistan beat England with most of the press either accusing Pakistan of cheating, or heavily implying it. Atherton told Peter Burge, the match referee, that he had nothing in the pocket, and took some clean trousers with him to prove it. But he later admitted this wasn't the truth. Whether what Atherton did was actually cheating or not, it was incredibly naive and has arguably done long term damage to the image of the England team, and to the reputation of Atherton himself.
It was one thing to have a bad side, but it felt unexpected that a team that played poor quality cricket and so seldom met with success might actually be cheating while it was losing... Atherton was fined by his own board, and made to apologise to the victorious South African team, which looked like an admission of guilt. In 2001, when Sachin Tendulkar was accused of ball tampering, it was match referee Mike Denness who was ruined. Mike Atherton saved his job (former rebel tourist Geoff Boycott was particularly outspoken that Atherton must go!), but was isolated by the TCCB, and only through humbling himself by apologising to everyone concerned; making it a sort of Suez moment for English cricket. There was an astonishing emotional purge of disapproval as the (deluded) English public felt the moral ascendency stolen away form them. It was a far bigger humiliation than even a 356 run defeat could ever be.
At least the MCC staff hadn't forgotten their onerous responsibility to the moral imperative and mandatory tradition. Archbishop Desmond Tutu came to the ground without a jacket and was refused admission to the pavilion.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63649.html
I always say that everybody's right.