Stuart Broad is a cheat. No argument can deny that fact. After cutting a ball to first slip in the first Ashes Test, Broad refused to walk. He failed in his duty of care to the game, his supporters and his legacy.
Broad is not alone in cheating. He joins hundreds of other cricketers in infamy, those who refused to walk.
No more cheating
Walking is honourable, and there is no point getting into a historical or hysterical argument about which country’s players are worse. Throughout history, players from all countries have cheated.
Had Broad walked, Australia might’ve won the Test, which makes his audacious act even more galling. He will be remembered as the man who cheated Australia out of the first Test.
Those obdurate Test cricket disciples might point their fingers at the umpire Aleem Dar, who for reasons known only to him, didn’t see the deviation or hear the clack as the ball thwacked into Broad’s bat.
But Dar is only partly to blame. Had Australia not wasted their referrals on ridiculous appeals, then Broad’s clunk to first slip would’ve been overturned.
Those simple facts don’t change the unalterable, that Broad stared down his opponents and refused to walk when he’d edged to first slip.
Umpires occasionally make bad decisions. Cricketers fondly refer to these errors as swings and roundabouts. Cop a bad decision this time, get a good one next time.
That resigned attitude must be relegated to the past, because history is littered with cheats who have put one over the umpire. Some of those cheats have gone on to get a hundred, take five wickets or turn the balance of a Test.
In 1975, Michael Holding cried tears of rage when Ian Chappell refused to walk after edging to the keeper. In a 1992 world cup game, Geoff Marsh edged Alan Donald’s first ball to the keeper and was given not out.
Marsh refused to walk, despite the evidence that suggested he had almost middled the ball.
In 1999, Justin Langer refused to walk after edging to the keeper off Wasim Ackram. The umpire’s wrong decision turned the Hobart Test in Australia’s favour.
Few batsmen in history have walked. There was no shame in it. Now there is.
During a World Cup semi final against Sri Lanka, Adam Gilchrist bottom-edged the ball into his pad then into the wicket keeper’s gloves. He was given not out, but chose to walk.
His thoughts at the time, contained in the passage taken from his autobiography below, show the turmoil.
I don’t recall what my exact thoughts were, but somewhere in the back of my mind, all that history from the Ashes series was swirling around. Michael Vaughan, Nasser Hussain and other batsmen, both in my team and against us, who had stood their ground in those “close” catching incidents were definitely a factor in what happened in the following seconds.
I had spent all summer wondering if it was possible to take ownership of these incidents and still be successful. I had wondered what I would do. I was about to find out.
The voice in my head was emphatic.
Go. Walk. And I did.
Legacy is all about respect. Gilchrist is remembered as the man who walked. He is not vilified for it. Rather, the respect bestowed on Gilchrist is immeasurable. He might’ve appealed when unsure about edges as a keeper, but he took ownership of the one facet of the game under his control.
He walked when he was caught.
His teammate, Andrew Symonds, obviously didn’t pay attention to Gilchrist’s honour or example. In 2008, in a Test against India, Symonds hammered the ball to the keeper and stayed put when given not out.
He went on to make a big hundred. As well as he played, that hundred is corrupted.
Symonds should’ve walked, as Marsh, Chappell, Langer and every other batsman who cheated should have.
Stuart Broad may be a fine bowler, but he can’t be trusted. If England’s captain, Alistair Cook, doesn’t chastise the errant fast bowler, then he’s a captain that can’t be trusted.
That Aleem Dar made a mistake doesn’t make what Broad did right. He has tainted his legacy, no matter how he performs across the rest of his career.
These incidents can no longer be written off as part of the game. It is no longer acceptable for Test cricketers to flout the rules because the umpire makes a mistake. There is too much evidence.
Myriad cameras and replays highlight the outrage. The third umpire must be given power to overrule the umpires. Otherwise, get rid of the referral system.
Broad, Test victory aside, must be having second thoughts about his decision not to walk. He will be reminded about it for the rest of his life.
Had he walked, he would’ve been respected, as Gilchrist was, for playing cricket in the spirit of the game rather than in the spirit of Bodyline, or putting sticky, lolly saliva on the ball or using athletic, young fielders as the substitute.
Get the advantage anyway you can, as long as it is within the rules.
During the first Test, Stuart Broad gave England the winning edge. It was without hint of sportsmanship, and that is a disgrace.
As Gilchrist found out, a cricketer can walk and still be successful.
Test cricketers must take heed from Broad and walk when they’re caught. It isn’t gamesmanship. It never was. It is cheating, as it always has been.
Pride Cup results
|
102 |
Adam G (8) |
|
99 |
Kristine (8), Matt (8), Russ (8) |
|
98 |
Anne (8) |
|
96 |
Wayne (8), Stevo (8), Sandra (8) |
|
94 |
Andy (8) |
|
93 |
The Pole (8), Adam L (8) |
|
91 |
Matt B (9) |
|
87 |
James F (7), Dallas (7) |
|
85 |
Jim (8) |
