“A pretty poor act’ – was Captain Cook talking about the incident on their batting display

By
Admin
-
160

By now all you readers must have read, heard various opinions, the law relating to it and watched the footage of the recent ‘Mankad incident’ surrounding Sachithra Senanayaka and Jos Butler in the 5th ODI at the Edgbaston.

For those who had been entangled in the controversy and do not know the final result, Sri Lanka won quite comfortably by 6 wickets with 10 balls remaining and with it the series 3-2.

 ‘Law of Cricket’ or ‘Spirit of Cricket’?

During the day I read many an article about this incident and the words which highlighted were ‘Spirit of Cricket’ and ‘Laws of Cricket.’ The Spirit of Cricket was initiated by Ted Dexter and Lord Colin Cowdrey in addition to the Laws of Cricket to remind players about their responsibility towards the game to be played in a true sportsmanlike manner. This was included in the Code of Laws and a preamble on the Spirit of Cricket stated,

“Cricket is a game that owes much of its unique appeal to the fact that it should be played not only within its Laws but also within the Spirit of the Game. Any action which is seen to abuse this Spirit causes injury to the game itself”.               

It goes on to specify the roles and responsibilities (not laws) of the various parties involved in the game. So from what I understood from this is, though Laws of Cricket and Spirit of Cricket go hand in hand they are two different things. This is what many pundits have mixed up about the Mankad incident. They go on to say this is a matter of Spirit of Cricket where in fact it is a Law of Cricket.  

It was within the Laws of Cricket what Sachithra did in ‘mankadding’ Butler, but in the Spirit of Cricket he did warn him (even if he didn’t have to),not once but twice before he made his action where Butler failed to adhere to the Spirit. It is not against the ethos of the game. In the Laws of Cricket it does state that a batsman should be in his crease when the bowler bowls and nowhere in the Spirit of Cricket allows a batsman to take a few steps to backup before the bowler bowls.

Hypocrisy Galore

We all know cricket is a batsman game, with the laws, powerplays and now the Spirit of Cricket. What would you do then? Why does the Spirit of Cricket refuse to accept a simple Law of Cricket?

Therein rests the hypocrisy of the Spirit of Cricket itself. A bowler is a millimeter in front of the crease and it is a no ball which is compounded with a free hit. Unfair advantage to the bowler, but when a batsman takes not just one but a couple of steps before the bowler bowls it is well within rules, it is backing up. In that instance doesn’t the batsman go against the so called ‘Spirit’ by not following the law? When the bowler takes matters into his own hands and run outs the batsman, only then the ‘Spirit’ cries out foul, where in fact the bowler is well within the law to do so.

 

If a bowler cannot overstep by even a millimeter then the batsman should not also be allowed to wander about before the bowler bowls. If it happens the umpires shouldn’t ask the captain whether he wants to retract the decision because it is the batsman not the bowler who has gone against the ‘Spirit’.

There is a saying, ‘People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones’ which clearly the Englishmen haven’t heard. The same people who brought the ‘Spirit of Cricket’ don’t abide by it. The ‘Spirit of Cricket’ is blind when their batsman clearly takes an edge and doesn’t walk; wastes time unnecessarily to save matches, the infamous jelly bean incident in 2007. Need I go on?

In the same match Joe Root was given out caught behind upon review where it clearly showed the ball not grace but hit smack bang on the glove. Still Root waited for the decision from the review, knowing all too well that he hit it and had no chance of survival.

 

Hiding behind the Mankad

 

Remember the ‘cricketing gods’ incident in 2011 at Lord’s? Just like that this time England have hidden from their failings behind the ‘Mankad’ controversy. They need to look into their batting which lacks power at the beginning which is a much needed asset in the modern game. When Captain Cook said it was a ‘a pretty poor act’ you couldn’t help but wonder if he was talking about the controversy or England’s batting display, such was their poor showing in the series. The best player to do that is Alex Hales, who was on county duty.

 

I was reading Michael Vaughan’s column on The Telegraph and thought how a former England captain can be so naïve.

‘I know he was out of his crease but Jos Buttler was not trying to steal a single. He was only a few inches out of his ground.’ 

If he was not trying to take/steal a single what was he doing in the middle? Only a few inches out of his ground can add up to a few inches inside the crease in a run out incident in case you didn’t know.

 

Then what would you call it?

Ah that perfect response!

Vaughan goes further back saying,

‘Two years ago Kumar Sangakkara delivered the Spirit of Cricket lecture at Lord’s but there was not much sign of that at Edgbaston on Tuesday.’

A man blind with hypocrisy.

‘What I saw is a bowler, Senanayake, who feels aggrieved about having his action reported.’

Can a man stoop so low to prove a point? You act according to the laws of cricket and this is what you get from someone who claims to be a ‘pundit’.

 

What they said

“We should have got him out and then Angelo called him back to play. I am not blaming Angelo or Sachithra, but that is what I would have done. Our warning to Buttler a couple of times may not go down in the record books, but if we recalled him, then it would be recorded and showed that we had properly warned him.” – Arjuna Ranatunga (So what about the law already in the record books?)

“At the end of the day I think as long as the player’s warned it’s obviously in the rules so you can make whatever decision you want. Will an Australian player do it? I think I’d be silly to stand here and say, ‘No, it will never happen under my captaincy’. If something like that does happen under my captaincy I look forward to dealing with it at the time. At the end of the day it’s in the rules.” – Michael Clarke (In the true spirit of an Australian cricketer)

“I was pretty disappointed with it to be honest with you. You don’t know what you’d do if you were put in that situation, the heat of the moment, until you are. I’d hope I wouldn’t do it,” – Alastair Cook (Unlike Vaughan who said he wouldn’t without being put in the same shoes, Cook was honest)

“We always try to play in the right spirit, but if the other team is not playing in the right spirit and not going with the law, then unfortunately we had to take the law into our hands. It was the third time. It is fair enough, I think. We all need to play by the rules. If the other sides are not going by the rules, then they’re not playing by the spirit, so what can you do?” – Mahela Jayawardena (True that!)

 

Just for laughs …

 

And finally a cheeky one from Rusty the Man!

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR