Not cricket?

GAMESMANSHIP has always been part and parcel of sport.

From Nick Kyrios’s underarm serve at Wimbledon this year to Michael Shumacher crashing into Damon Hill to win the F1 title in 1994, sports stars have never been shy about gaining an advantage, no matter how much it’s frowned upon.

But when India bowler Deepti Sharma ran out England’s Charlie Dean or ‘Mankaded’ her as it’s known – when a player is stumped by the bowler for leaving their crease at the non-striker’s end – it wasn’t referred to as gamesmanship.

Instead, she was accused by critics, including former Pakistan bowler Mohammad Asif, of being a ‘cheat’.

The commentator and broadcaster Piers Morgan described her action as an ‘absolutely pathetic way to ‘win a cricket match’ and said that ‘the whole India team should be ashamed of themselves’.

Meanwhile, England captain Heather Knight accused Sharma of ‘lying’ for claiming that India’s players had given Dean warnings before running her out. Is the Mankad dismissal illegal? No. So why the uproar? Maybe it’s down to resentment at the fact that India is the global powerhouse of the sport.

Almost the entire financial health of cricket is dependent on India, whose board is aided by having the lion’s share of the International Cricket Council’s current cycle surplus from 2015-2023.

The BCCI [Board of Control for Cricket in India] receives $371 million [£347m], well ahead of next best England ($127m/£119m), while associate members – made up of 94 nations – receive a relatively paltry $180m [£168m] between them.

And then there is the juggernaut that is the Indian Premier League (IPL), which has a brand value of $7 billion [£6.5bn]. Two new franchises alone sold for an eye-watering $1.7bn [£1.6bn] last year.

It seems that other cricketing nations, such as England, don’t like the fact that they have to rely on India to ensure the success of the game around the world.