Sledging and Jelly beans

I could not resist. I had to write. I mean, even when we played a cricket match, when still at school, did we not through jelly beans or sweets or even chewing gums on our opponents to disintegrate them mentally. That would have been ridiculous and would never have been allowed by our coach, a former military guy. He would rather we focus on our skills with the bat and ball rather than learn English for a game of cricket. It was stooping to the lowest of any standards. I wonder if Cook, when he played for his school team, ever did something like this. And honestly, I am not sure what Vaughan was doing when he said he believed his team that no one was "throwing" jelly beans, rather they were left there after a drinks break. In fact his statement was made to look ridiculous in light of Peter Moores' statement the next day, when he acknowledged that jelly beans were indeed "thrown" at Zaheer. He went on to add that the incident was being blown out of proportions and should be forgotten. I beg to differ on that. I don't think the incident has been blown out of proportions and in no way should it be forgotten. It would only take one jelly bean, on a length, for the batsman to get out. Are we saying that I can walk with jelly beans on my person, and then when I jump across the pitch, on a length, to let one fall off around the length area so that it would aid my bowlers get a wicket? Of course, if I was caught, I would plead ignorance to the whole episode when I am summoned by the match referee in his office.

India, on their part, replied back with interest to whatever sledging England had on offer. But does the fact that England were the instigators, absolve India of any wrong-doing? I don't think so. India were as guilty as the English. Yes, they stood up to the sledging and paid back with interest, but I am not one for letting my mouth do the talking. I would much rather let my bat do the talking. I was surprised that Rahul in the post match conference said that he was happy his boys had played tough cricket. I would have been much happier if he had censured Sreesanth a bit more in the press conference. There is no place for body contact in the game of cricket, and Sreesanth should be taken into a corner, and told so in no uncertain terms about the consequences of body contact, if it was to be repeated.

All of the above, brings me to the role of match referees and umpires and their say on what goes on in a cricket field. What I have noticed so far is that umpires rarely come in and have a tough word with the offenders. They let it drift, sometimes to a point where sledging becomes personal. I think that has something to do with the advent of match referees. Ever since match referees were introduced in cricket, umpires seem to think it is one less thing that they have to worry about. I don't think Dave Shepherd or Dickie Bird would have allowed any of the nonsense that took place in last week's game at Trent Bridge. I remember, even in our school playing days, how we would respect the umpire. We would be afraid, if the umpire were to pull us up for being a total idiot on the field. I believe that the umpires should be given more powers for any on-field non-behavior. The best way would be to penalize the offending team by awarding runs to the opposing team. And please, someone, do away with the financial penalties. Who cares about money received from playing a test match anyways?

More than the fear of being penalized all players should realize that they are on the cricket field to play tough cricket, with skill and talent, and not with their mouths. They might be role-models for millions of fans. They are there to preserve the integrity of the sport. And lastly, they should always ask the question - would I speak like this to any one, if my child was around? I am pretty sure, the answer to the question would always be a resounding NO. My advice to all those playing with their mouths - get a perspective - cricket is a sport after all.