World of Cricket Blogs

The Spirit of Cricket – What does it mean? Does any team or player adhere to it?

By Incrediblesanga For WOC
21st August 2010

The Spirit of Cricket is a phrase that has been thrown around rather generously in the last few days as a result of an incident that occurred towards the end of the India vs. Sri Lanka first round match in the ongoing Tri-series in Dambulla last Monday. This incident has already been analysed and over analysed by the over-zealous and Bollywoodesque Indian media that operates more on fiction and sensationalism rather than facts.

But just to refresh our minds, at the end of the first round match between India and Sri Lanka in the micromax cup with India needing one to win and Sehwag needing one to reach his hundred, Dilshan was heard giving instructions to Randiv or more precisely letting Randiv know of an option he had when he said “If you want you can bowl a no ball” which was primarily to deny Sehwag his hundred. Randiv did bowl a no ball which Sehwag hit for a six but was denied the hundred due to a ridiculous rule which says that with one run to win the match ends with the no ball. The players shook hands and walked off the field and seconds later when Sehwag was interviewed this was his take on the issue -:

” Shewag says…”fair enough”..It happens in cricket. The other team doesn’t want anybody to score a hundred against them. They tried their best. Doesn’t matter to me, 99 or 100.

An hour later though at the post match press conference, this was Sehwag’s take on the issue -:

“They (Sri Lanka) should have shown sportsman’s spirit,” Sehwag said. “It was done deliberately. If there is a player on 99, it does not mean you bowl a no-ball. That has no place in cricket.”

Fair enough Sehwag but could you please clarify whether kicking the ball deliberately over the boundary line during the tense closing moments of the 2nd Test between India and South Africa earlier this year, to deny Hashim Amla (who was in the midst of an incredible rear-guard effort to save a Test with the last man Morkel) the strike for the next over and that too when there was only around two mandatory overs left in the game, has a place in cricket? Was that your way of exhibiting “sportsman’s spirit” when Hashim Amla (and Morkel) was playing the innings of his life with the result of the Test match, the series and the Test rankings among other things, at stake?

Sehwag, much to the pleasure of hardcore Indian cricket fans, in an apparent reference to the Randiv incident, tweeted as follows the day after the incident -:

“Worry n fear just make u frazzled n unsettled. And the truth is that win or lose , life still goes on.”

“If we play with energy poise and unselfishness, we will be playing the game the right way.”

So I would like to ask Virender Sehwag; Was it not your selfishness and fear of losing the Test series to South Africa and with it your team’s Number 1 ranking in Test cricket that made you frazzled and unsettled and made you play the game the wrong way by kicking the ball over the boundary line deliberately to deny Hashim Amla the chance to retain the strike in his desperate yet heroic bid to save the Test for his team and Country??? Pity Sehwag is not around to give me an answer. One has to be careful when pointing fingers at others.

The above is an incident that transpired about six months before the Randiv no-ball incident. The umpires were quick to award Amla the single and the boundary. However, what Sehwag did was a clear breach of the same spirit of cricket that Randiv allegedly contravened when he denied Sehwag his 100 by deliberately bowling a no-ball. Did the Indian media go to town about Sehwag’s ‘cricketing crime’ and accuse Captain Dhoni and / or bowler Tendulkar of being the mastermind behind this act or did the BCCI take any action against Sehwag or did Sehwag at least have the decency to apologise to Amla and the South African team?

None of the above happened and the issue was not even talked about.

But this is not the first time the Indians have supported, protected and covered up the disgraceful acts of one of their players. They did it when Tendulkar was caught ball tampering and then did it again when Harbhajan Singh racially abused Andrew Symonds, an issue that Tendulkar was once again in the thick of when he gave contradictory statements to defend his team-mate which made Adam Gilchrist say the following -:

Gilchrist in his autobiography has said that Tendulkar was a sore loser and questioned his honesty in the ‘Monkeygate’ issue, reported the daily ‘The Age’.

Coming back to the Randiv no ball, what made Sehwag take a U turn on the issue is something that I do not want to speculate but is not hard to understand. Sehwag’s contradictory comments at the post match press conference is what made this relatively harmless act by Randiv become a national event at least in India. I have always respected Sehwag as a cricketer but the way he responded to this incident especially with his second contradictory statement was very unlike the Viru that we all love and admire. His first reaction where he dismissed the incident as no big deal was typical Sehwag. I mean this is a guy who scores hundreds like eating bread and butter so why would he be bothered about missing out on one?

The BCCI’s position as the financial power house in cricket on whom most cricket boards (especially Sri Lanka cricket) around the world depends on to survive most likely drove the officials at Sri Lanka Cricket into a series of brainless acts which started with the SLC apologizing to Sehwag, the Indian team and the BCCI for this incident when no apology whatsoever was required from them. Their second brainless act was to call for an enquiry into this incident when no such enquiry was necessary. If at all the SLC officials should have had a quite word with Captain Sangakkara, Randiv and Dilshan after the series ended. Their third brainless act was to ban Randiv for one match despite the fact that the umpires or the match referee took no action whatsoever against Randiv.

This issue should have ended when Randiv apologized to Viru and when Captain Sangakkara had a word with MS Dhoni and the Indian coach Gary Kirsten. If the on field umpires had felt that Randiv had done something wrong they would have reported him to the match referee and the match referee in turn would have taken appropriate action, neither of which happened obviously because Randiv did not do anything wrong. In fact in this controversial match there was a moment when a player did breach the code of conduct and should have been penalized and this was when Rohit Sharma who was given out LBW by Asad Rauf (off an inside edge) stood his ground pointing his bat (not for the first time) to the umpire. This is an example of a player blatantly showing dissent to the umpires and is without a doubt a punishable offense. However, Sharma was not even reported and instead all the attention was on Randiv.

So at the end, the Randiv no ball issue was completely blown out of proportion as a result of Sehwag’s contradictory second statement, SLC’s desperate need to please the BCCI and of course India’s joke of a media looking to give a Bollywood twist to any story despite having no facts to support any of their claims. Players too have a responsibility to keep what happens on the field, on the field as was seen during the incident between Kumar Sangakkara and Nathan McCullum yesterday. Both had plenty to say to each other and there was a bit of pushing and shoving as well. But at the end both players had a chat after the match, followed by a beer and the issue was done and dusted. Cricketers need to grow up and deal with on-field events like the way Sangakkara and McCullum did yesterday instead of running to the press and crying their eyeballs out and then going on and on about it in the days to follow as well. The umpires are there to take the issue forward should they feel the need to do so and then the match referee will make a call as to whether a player or players were guilty of a breach of the player’s code of conduct. The players themselves as mentioned above must make sure to put the issue behind them and leave what happens on the field of play, on the field itself.

In the Randiv issue it was clear from both, the point of view of the player (Sehwag) concerned and the Indian media that there was a desperate attempt to drag the issue on and also implicate the Sri Lankan skipper Kumar Sangakkara who was their prime target. Perhaps Sangakkara’s decision recently to question the validity of the ICC test rankings of which India currently holds the number one position did not go down well with the BCCI, the Indian media and Indians in general and the Randiv issue presented all of these parties the perfect opportunity to do their part to tarnish the reputation of the Sri Lanka Captain which they tried their painstaking best to do to no avail.

I really do hope that the good relations between the players of the Indian and Sri Lankan teams remain intact despite the ridiculous happenings in the week gone by. It will be interesting to see how the Sri Lankan fans react to the Indian cricketers on Sunday when the Indians play hosts Sri Lanka. Should they choose to be hostile (without going over the top) it will be understandable as that is how fans tend to react when their players are accused and vilified. Who can forget the racial abuse Andrew Symonds copped from the Indian fans after his spat with Harbhajan Singh.

So what then is the spirit of cricket and more importantly does any player or team play within this so-called spirit of cricket and is cricket such a noble and honest game as it is being made out to be? I don’t think the game has ever been played within the spirit of cricket because I don’t think anyone understands what it means. Did Douglas Jardine who devised the plan to knock Bradman’s head off during the infamous bodyline Ashes series and Larwood who executed his Captain’s plan to perfection play the game within the spirit of cricket? Does a batsman who stands his ground when he knows that he was out play the game within the spirit of the cricket? Does a bowler and a fielding unit who appeal for a wicket when they know the batsman was not out play the game within the spirit of cricket? Does a fielding team who purposely send in bounce throws to the keeper from the deep from the first over onwards to deliberately scruff up the ball, play the game within the spirit of cricket? Does a player who takes a catch on the bounce and then claims ignorance about not knowing whether or not it bounced in front of him play the game within the spirit of cricket? Do players and teams that sledge opposition players and indulge in what former Australian Captain Steve Waugh referred to as ‘mental disintegration’, play the game within the spirit of cricket?

There are so many more examples / questions that I could come up with but the bottom line is that the answer to all of the examples / questions above and to the many other similar examples/questions that I have not posted is an emphatic ‘NO’. In addition, in my opinion, every cricketer and team is guilty of one or more of the above mentioned acts that contravene the so called spirit of cricket.

I don’t deny the fact that I was pleased when Sri Lankan won the spirit of cricket fair play award. However, it is imperative that we need to come out of this mind set where we view the game of cricket romantically and religiously and perceive it to be some sort of a noble endeavour where everything is so prim and proper and perfect. Cricket just like any other sport is extremely competitive with a lot at stake (especially today) and players will give it everything to win and at times even go beyond the realms of what is considered acceptable, just in order to win. That is the reality and that is something that we have to understand and accept. In my opinion, the spirit of cricket is nothing more than a myth. As long as the players play the game within the laws of the game, that’s all that matters. Should they cross the line the on-field umpires and the match referee is there to look into it.

Gamesmanship and individual battles within the battle exist in all of sport and cricket is no exception. This is also what makes the game fascinating for us fans to follow and watch. If nothing else, what the Randiv incident showed was that playing for one’s Country means more to a cricketer than any other team or league that he is a part of or participates in. As a journalist aptly put it in the aftermath of the Randiv incident -:

“Few cricketers today have the courage to be dispassionate and call a spade a spade. And even fewer have the temerity to get under the skin of Indian players. Sri Lanka have won the ICC’s Spirit of Cricket award twice before and are unlikely to add to that tally anytime soon, but by having the courage to do what they did at Dambulla, they’ve done the ICC a huge favour. By over-stepping the white line, Randiv and his teammates have told cricket’s governing body that national colours hold precedence over the colour of money.

Thank you, Suraj Randiv”