{"id":184689,"date":"2017-11-23T00:06:57","date_gmt":"2017-11-22T18:36:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/?p=184689"},"modified":"2017-11-26T15:09:45","modified_gmt":"2017-11-26T09:39:45","slug":"against-verbal-assaults-within-cricket-field","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/against-verbal-assaults-within-cricket-field\/","title":{"rendered":"Against Verbal Assaults Within Cricket Field"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Michael Roberts<\/a> –<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Dr. Michael Roberts<\/p><\/div>\n

Verbal intimidation within the boundary ropes of the cricket field has been tolerated far, far too long by the cricketing authorities (ICC and MCC). This disease has been sustained by weak umpiring from personnel of all nationalities and by clever cover-jobs from eminent cricketers of all nationalities manning the TV commentary teams (including Sunil Gavaskar, Harsha Bhogle<\/a>, Simon Doull, Russel Arnold<\/a> and Matthew Hayden and Murali Karthik in the present series in India).<\/p>\n

One step in this glossing over has been the widespread reference to verbal intimidation by the term \u201csledging\u201d (or \u201csledges\u201d) \u2013 sometimes backed up by amusing tales of clever \u201csledges\u201d of the bantering sort. However, such examples and the incidence of banter are at one end of the scale. They are not of the same order as those incidents of intimidation that are of a type that would often spark fights when expressed\u00a0in a pub or on the street \u2026. And could therefore count as \u201cassault\u201d in a court of law.<\/p>\n

Such actions, whether pre-planned or arising from an event on the field (as with the recent intimidation of Niroshan Dickwella), sully the \u201cspirit of cricket\u201d and would appal such gentlemen as Colin Cowdrey. It is in this spirit that I condemn all the personnel concerned in this cover-job and do so in terms that I have sustained since the late 1980s (see below).<\/p>\n

My argument is simple: these actions seek to disturb a batsman\u2019s equanimity and to generate indiscretions which produce a dismissal. They are not sportsmanlike. Verbal digs accompanied the barrage of bouncers directed at Phil Hughes by Doug Bollinger in one over after lunch during a Sheffield Shield match in Sydney on the 25th November 2014. They were, in effect, part of a package<\/a> seeking to send a talented batsman who had accumulated 63 runs back to the pavilion. Perchance, one ball hit Hughes on the neck and became a \u201cking-hit.\u201d So, Hughes went to the pavilion. On a stretcher. And ended up as a corpse. That was not Bollinger\u2019s intent; but he was an instrument in a deliberate NSW programme of intimidation with bouncers and verbals as one package.[1]<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

So, let me elaborate my argument by presenting the ESPN written commentary on the Mohammed Shami over (over 15 in the innings) which generated THE DICKWELLA INCIDENT<\/strong> on 20th<\/sup> November.<\/p>\n

14.3<\/strong><\/p>\n

Mohammed Shami to Dickwella, (no ball) SIX, what the weird shots! He\u2019s basically skipped across outside off, and ends up behind the stumps when he scoops the ball away over the backward square leg boundary<\/strong>. And it appears Dickwella plays it only after he noted there were three fielders behind square on the leg side. He knows that will mean a no-ball \u2013<\/strong> which began on a good length outside off and ended up in exactly the strangest place possible<\/p>\n

There\u2019s a bit of chatter building, bringing the umpires into play. Ashwin comes up to chat with Dickwella. Then walks off. Then Umpire Llong intervenes and that makes Kohli go up and talk to him.<\/strong><\/p>\n

There are missing dimensions in this summary account. Ashwin walked from mid-on to speak to Dickwella and though his body language cannot be called threatening, it was hardly amiable.<\/p>\n

When the umpires and Kohli joined Dickwella mid-pitch (as Ashwin withdrew), Kohli spoke in the manner stern and a camera shot indicates him tapping Dickwella on the chest lightly.<\/p>\n

From a sitting room couch afar I read the actions of these Indian cricketers as forms of intimidation. When, a few balls later, Mohammed Shami walked up to Dickwella and stared at him from a foot distance[2]<\/strong><\/a> the combined effect \u2013 and thus intention \u2013 was\/is clear: several Indian cricketers were reprimanding Dickwella for his audacity and seeking to disturb his equilibrium with the intention of prizing out his wicket.<\/p>\n

The ESPN account of Over 18 is as follows:<\/p>\n

0= Mohammed Shami to Dickwella, no run, outside edge<\/strong> which bounces short of first slip. But who cares about that. Shami walks right up to the batsman in his follow through and gives the batsman a piece of his mind<\/strong><\/p>\n

18.2 = Shami begins running in to bowl, but Dickwella isn’t ready. Shami doesn’t like that. He absolutely hates Dickwella putting his head down and waving his hand to make him stay back. That brings both of them into a long-distance love spat. Tempers flaring everywhere.<\/p>\n

The Deep Truth<\/strong><\/p>\n

Those beyond the ropes and watchers on screen do not know what was said. But the umpires would have heard the exchanges. HOWEVER,<\/p>\n