Shocking petulance must be stamped out
It was depressing to see, at the start of the India innings yesterday, that England’s ethical grasp of cricket had plumbed depths similar to their practical grasp, which had led to their being bowled out for 112.
When Ben Stokes claimed to have caught Shubman Gill off Stuart Broad, and the third umpire deemed that the ball had touched the ground, the reaction of fielder, bowler and, worst of all, Joe Root as captain in disputing that decision was shocking and unnecessary. There was nothing the on-field umpire, Anil Chaudhary, could have done to overrule the decision of Chettithody Shamshuddin, so this display of petulance was pointless as well.
It was the not the first instance of poor player behaviour in this series – Virat Kohli was equally boorish in his actions towards the officials in the second Test in Chennai – but that should not excuse it.
In fact, this sort of incident has largely died out for two reasons: neutral umpires (which have been deemed unpractical at present because of the pandemic) and the elaborate review system that has ensured most bad umpiring decisions are overturned. One can only speculate that there is a sense among players that umpires allied with the home team might take decisions favourable to them. However, watching the constant replays of Stokes trying to take the ball in the slips suggests very strongly that the batsman was right to be given the benefit of the doubt.
We have come a long way since the spectacle of Mike Gatting berating the appalling Shakoor Rana at Faisalabad on the 1987-88 tour of Pakistan – both in the conduct of captains and the quality of umpiring. And the reality is that umpires have been neutered, not just in terms of their national allegiances, but by technology. One starts to think that on-field officials are pretty unnecessary in international matches, since technology is now capable of taking every decision for which we used to rely on human beings – lbws, catches, stumpings, run-out or no-balls. If their only function is going to be to provide a punchbag for stroppy players who decide they know better, then the sooner they are removed the better, and computers can take over and be available for an argument with the players afterwards.
The match referee, Javagal Srinath, will not make it known until the end of the match whether he has taken any action against any player because of this charmless incident and, if so, what their punishment is. I hope he will think carefully about this dispute, for
from what we could see on television, both Stokes and Root merit some rebuke, and possibly Broad too, though he seemed the most restrained of the trio.
As for Root, his intervention to do anything other than calm his players down, and to remind them to abide by the laws of the game and the regulations applying in Test matches, should be considered unacceptable. Srinath should inquire properly into what was said to whom; and if it was in any way disputatious, he should throw the book at the players concerned.
It was bad enough when players did this before technology could verify what had happened. To do it now that it can is boorish at best, and downright outrageous at worst.