ndian players are not lily-livered poltroons who cringe at blue language on the field
India's Ravindra Jadeja plays a shot, during day five of the first Test between England and India at Trent Bridge cricket ground, Nottingham, England, Sunday, July 13, 2014. (Photo: Associated Press)
Cricket, known for genteelness, occasionally tends to get into a spat over player behaviour, appearing to threaten the very foundation of friendships and camaraderie. The latest instance of trading of serious charges (Level 2-3) against England’s James Anderson and India’s Ravindra Jadeja surfaces at an awkward time, as the “Big Three” — India, England and Australia — have virtually taken over the reins of the game.
While these charges will be sifted in due time, history suggests teams have got away with aggravated behaviour against Asian sides, particularly India, without attracting the wrath of ICC match referees, who are quick to penalise teams they feel must be educated about decorous behaviour. What we are now seeing is venting of pent-up feelings against an England player regarded as a serial offender who has often been warned by his home board to take anger management lessons seriously.
Indian players are not lily-livered poltroons who cringe at blue language on the field, and are known to give back as good as they get in on-field slanging (or “sledging” — an invented verb form of sledgehammer). But it’s true they have suffered far more in the past from the sanctions of authority for code of conduct breaches than the more voluble players of Anglo-Saxon descent. It may transpire that both players might be stood down for a while to cool off, but it is also true the wheel has come full circle and India is now the powerhouse of the game, and can expect equitable treatment.
( Source : dc )
Next Story
