Dhoni upholds "Spirit of the Game"

Indian captain recalls Ian Bell after he was given run out

The Indian tour to England was saved from running into a major controversy when management of both teams decided to go by the spirit of the game rather than the laws of cricket. Ian Bell was given run out on the stroke of Tea in a bizarre manner when he walked off thinking the ball had crossed the ropes. He left the field fuming in the backdrop of crowd booing the umpires and the Indian team. But Indian captain MS Dhoni, in consultation with his teammates, decided to withdraw the appeal on the request of England management.

England were edging ahead just before tea on the third afternoon, with Ian Bell, batting fabulously on 137, and Eoin Morgan pushing them towards a 200 run lead with six wickets remaining. Morgan hit the last ball before Tea towards deep square leg boundary where Praveen Kumar fumbled awkwardly. At first it seemed the ball had crossed over for four, as Bell after taking few steps towards non-striker’s end was stopped by Eoin Morgan. The had collected three runs and thinking that the ball had gone for four, Ian Bell continued to walk towards the pavilion, accompanied by Morgan.

Praveen, who had collected the ball after the tumble, sent in the throw which was collected by Abhinav Mukund. Seeing the batsmen out of the crease, Mukund promptly broke the stumps. Indians appealed and the umpire Asad Rauf, after confirming again from Dhoni whether he had appealed, went upstairs for the third umpire’s verdict to confirm whether the ball was stopped cleanly at the boundary by Praveen.

As the umpire asked for review, Bell and Morgan were stopped from crossing the rope. Bell looking bemused, uttered ‘He called over’, as he waited for the decision. After about 8 minutes the decision came in favour of India. As the Indians left the field, the crowd hooted. Asad Rauf had called ‘over’ only after the bails had been broken, so according to the rules, Ian Bell was run out.

The time during the Tea break was not dull at all. There was heated discussion on TV channels as well as behind doors whether Indians had acted contrary to the spirit of the game. The spectators too were uneasy about the decision as were the English players. India commentators unanimously were of the opinion that Dhoni’s appeal was perfectly within the laws of the game, and the game should move on. Some of the English pundits suggested that Dhoni should reverse the decision for the sake of the sanctity of the game. The gentleman’s game was heading towards another storm.

It was clear that Ian Bell had acted in an immature manner by walking towards the boundary without waiting for the umpire’s call. The ball was not dead as umpire had not called ‘over’. The bowler, Ishant Sharma, was heard asking Asad Rauf whether it is ‘over’ and Tea, only when Mukund had removed the bails. The first few steps that Bell took also raised the possibility that he actually intended to go for the fourth run, but aborted before walking away after seeing Morgan raise his hands. The wicket could have given India just the perfect opportunity to claw back into the match.

The play resumed after Tea amid roars of booing from crowd as the umpires walked in. Some spectators even shouted ‘cheat’. The hooting turned into loud cheers when Ian Bell appeared alongside Eoin Morgan, the cheers continued as Indians entered the field. This meant something had happened behind doors during the interval that allowed Bell to continue his innings. The speculations continued although it was clear Dhoni had withdrawn his appeal.

After a while it was announced that during the interval Andrew Strauss and Andy flower went to Indian dressing room to request MS Dhoni to take his appeal back in line with game’s spirit. Dhoni turned to his teammates who unanimously agreed to recall Bell. The English Cricket Board thanked Indian Team and requested the crowd to show their appreciation. The Trent Bridge erupted into a loud round of applause on hearing the announcement.

Ian Bell admitted his naivety while thanking the Indian Team after the day’s play. While talking to Star Cricket, he said: "From Praveen's body language, it looked like that had gone for four. Probably naïve on my behalf, but taking into account the spirit of cricket and everything, this was probably the right decision. It wasn't until we reached the boundary rope, when the umpires asked us to wait, that I knew something was on. It's fantastic the way India have gone about this. The captains and coaches got together, and were asked if the decision would stand. Duncan Fletcher and MS Dhoni went back to discuss it with the team and came back to us, and I got the nod."

Rahul Dravid, while describing Indian version, said: "In the laws of the game, if you follow them strictly, that was out, but it didn't feel right in the spirit of the game," he said. "There was a team discussion during the tea interval, Dhoni and Fletcher convened the meeting, and Dhoni led it. There was a feeling of unanimity that we should reinstate Bell because the spirit of the game was important, and that getting him out in that way would contravened the spirit ... If this had happened to our guys we would not have been happy about it. So all of that was discussed."

According to cricinfo, ECB chief executive David Collier said: "On behalf of the ECB I wish to express the England and Wales Cricket Board's grateful thanks the BCCI and the India team." ICC chief executive Haroon Lorgat too acknowledged the Teams’ spirit by saying: "The initial appeal and umpire decision may have been acceptable to the letter of the law; the decision by India captain M S Dhoni and his team -as well as the Team India coaching staff - to withdraw the appeal shows great maturity. To see players and officials uphold the Great Spirit of cricket, which has underpinned the game for more than a century, is very special."

The decision by Dhoni may have given England a vital reprieve as they ended the day 374 runs ahead, but it surely has raised his profile as a player manifolds. In an era where ICC had to introduce Decision Review System (DRS) to minimize contentious decisions as well as to stop players from cheating, rarely we see Spirit of Cricket being upheld. Cricket was once a gentlemen’s game. There is even a phrase which shows how cricket was viewed in those times. When someone indulged in foul play or acted contrary to the norms, it was said: ‘its not cricket’. But the game has gone down on the moral scale as much as it has evolved. We rarely see a batsman walking after edging behind or refusing to appeal in circumstances such as this. We even see players arguing with the umpires, even backed at times by cricket boards.

It is not the first time a player has been recalled after being given out. Tony Greig recalled Alvin Kallicharran in 1973-74 at Port of Spain, when batsman had walked off thinking it was stumps triggering crowd trouble. The appeal was taken back after a conference between two tem managements and umpires.

In ICC Champions Trophy in 1999 in Johannesburg, Angelo Mathews was recalled by Andrew Strauss as he was run out after colliding with Graham Onions. He was apparently trying to repay what Collingwood had done to New Zealand a year earlier at the Oval in an ODI. Grant Elliot was given out after he had collided with Sidebottom.

Imran Khan did that twice. Against the West Indies in the 1987-88 tour, he recalled Desmond Haynes who was batting on 85 at Port-of-spain. He was adjudged LBW off Saleem Jaffer but Imran withdrew the appeal when Haynes indicated he had hit the ball. He went on to make 142.

A year later in Lahore, India were chasing 150 in 37 overs, when Kris Srikkanth was recalled by Imran. At 66 for 3 with Srikkanth on 31, Waqar Younis had him LBW. While going off, Srikkanth shook his head pointing to his bat that he had hit. Imran asked him to go back, only for him to be dismissed next ball caught behind.

The example set by Dhoni should go a long way in bringing the game back to its old days when the white outfit expressed the values with which the game of cricket was played.