Oh cricket! what sins are committed

in thy nameOh cricket! what sins are committed in thy name with the advent of the 'cowboy game' and the mockery that is cricket the Twenty20 format.

The Englishmen who introduced this wonderful game first called it Test cricket and that is how this time honoured game was continued to be played according to the rules and in the best of spirits.

The game continued that way for decades, but suddenly with the established game becoming a bore with meaningless draws after five days, spectators began to shy away and the game lost its appeal.

The ICC instead of putting their cricketing brains together and finding ways and means to make Test cricket attractive by getting the teams to provide the sparks that would bring back the spectators, some bright spark tossed in what was called 50 over cricket.

While that was expected and it brought back not only the spectators to watch the bash but also the flooding of dollars not only to the players, but to the Cricket Boards the International Cricket Council and everyone connected with the game it also brought with it the evils.

The evils being that anything goes, with the spirit of the game being forgotten, winning or losing is not what mattered but how one played the game going with the wind, with winning at all cost being the thing, cheating and even underarm bowling.

Today Twenty20 cricket has put Test cricket almost out of the radar and it would not be long before the 50-over game suffers the same fate. Some Smart Alec was toying with the idea of reducing the 50-over game to 40 over per side.

Teams prefer to play more of the limited over games. That is because of the big money that floats around. No one will begrudge that as long as the time honoured game of Test cricket is not tossed into the limbo of the forgotten.

Now to the sins that are being committed in the name of the game for the big, big money. Take the third game in the on going seven-match one-day series between Australia and India in India.

Firstly the game was to be played on a turf wicket. Now if anybody could call that a turf wicket he needs to have his head examined. There was not a blade of grass on it. Then how could it be called a turf wicket?

Then when the game began to unfold and towards the end of it what one saw of the wicket was an utter disgrace. It looked as though devil dancers had played on that wicket and it looked a horror.

Then when the dew factor set in, the game looked a comedy and its purpose was lost. The batting side made merry what with the bowlers having to bowl with a greasy ball, the fielders unable to catch it, and also fielders slipping and leaving themselves open to serious injury which could have ended their livelihood.

When the bowlers were struggling to grip the slippery ball, not one TV commentator thought it fit or had the courage to question the purpose of this game being played in such atrocious conditions.

Former Australian off spinner Bruce Yardley who is on the TV commentator panel recalled that when Sri Lanka won the 1995/96 World Cup in Lahore in Pakistan, the conditions that existed were similar with the Aussies being at the receiving end.

So by this it would be seen that to hell with what the game is all about, let us demean, embarrass, insult and degrade and commit every sacrilege on this sacred game because the filthy lucre is flooding in and to hell with everything else.

It is time that the International Cricket Council stepped down from their air conditioned cabins in Dubai and introduced some sense into the game and show that they are not only interested in the dollars.

Indian TV commentators Sunil Gavaskar, Ravi Shastri, Harsha Bhogle and Sanjay Manjrekar were fearless and forthright in their commenting and earned the respect of all lovers of the game.

But of late Gavaskar and Bhogle seem to have lost direction and surprisingly become biased. When Yuvraj seemed plumb LBW to Nathan Hauritz attempting to sweep a ball and the umpire ruled him not out, Gavaskar went out of the way to hold a brief for the umpire.

It came as a shock to the writer and to the millions watching to hear Gavaskar batting for the umpire and not sympathizing with the bowler.

Gavaskar was held in high esteem. He should not lose that esteem by being biased.

Thankfully Shastri is still continuing in the form of old and is never afraid to call a spade a spade and not some other implement. The need of the hour are commentators who will describe the action out in the middle without fear or favour.

Matter of national honour

The umpire referral rule which came into effect on October 1, 2009 will be law for the first time in international Test cricket in the forthcoming Sri Lanka - India Test series beginning soon.

This new rule which has turned well established cricket paradigms on their head in the sense of allowing players to challenge on-field umpires' decisions in respect to dismissal of batsmen, is also a subject of controversy concerning its origin.

A Sri Lanka lawyer, Senaka Weeraratne, with supporting evidence has claimed credit for authorship of the rule and in a letter addressed to Nishantha Ranatunga, Secretary, Sri Lanka Cricket Interim Committee dated July 14, 2009 has requested the SLC to intercede with the ICC on his behalf.

Recent media publicity on this topic has now converted it into a matter of national honour and pride. Default on the part of Sri Lanka in claiming credit for authorship of this rule may well result in credit being given to someone else.

That would be unfortunate from Sri Lanka's point of view. Ideas do not fall from the sky. They arise in the minds of human beings. This is something that the ICC will have to come to terms with.

Sri Lanka Cricket - SLC - which is the only body in Sri Lanka which has the locus standi to raise issue with the ICC, has yet to acknowledge in writing the receipt of the letter from Weeraratne. No indication has been given to him that the matter is under consideration by SLC.