They say – “Cricket is a gentlemen’s game. Every member of a team or a board, whether on the field or off the field, has a moral obligation to behave in such a way that it doesn't stigmatize the very image of the cricket. It is expected and customary to be played within the moral spirit.” In fact, over the period of years, from the classical times of Sir Don Bradman to the modern era of Sir Ravindra Jadeja, the application of these customs hasn't adversely affected the joviality of the fans at all. Quite contrary, fans still truly acknowledge the fact that – The game is enjoyed a lot when no or little controversy is associated with it, and the pleasure of watching it flourishes exponentially even more when played within the confined jurisdiction.
Image Courtesy : www.google.com

However, the ongoing Investec test series between England and India is trying exceptionally well to break the morally bound shackles and to prove fans wrong. The series is getting a huge propaganda, not because of the India’s yet another struggle on foreign pitches, but because of the notoriety associated with it. There were 2 such instances that happened which makes us to think whether - Are there any such customs and obligations in existence under the ICC’s constitution? And even if they are, have they been followed with some accountability and liability by both the players and members of Board Committee? If we try to focus on these matters for a little longer, we will come to know that – Yes, there are these so called obligations and laws penned down on the papers, but the ICC has not been able to materialize and formulate them properly for bringing the justice out of it when actual situations arise, at least not in these 2 cases. Now, if we try to isolate both the instances and figure out the cause and effects related to them individually, we will unanimously agree that though both the cases are quite different from each other yet the final outcome for both is same and i.e. the win of immorality over morality in cricket.

The first case where the spat between James Anderson and Ravindra Jadeja is highly eye catching. If we ponder over it for a little longer, we will come to know that the case is not itself unique. If we try to compare James Anderson with other sledging maestros of all times and the likes of Ricky Pointing, Glen McGrath, Shoaib Akhtar, etc. we may be encouraged to ignore the whole scenario sensing it as a common thing for cricket. But, then what makes the case to be cynosure and stands alone from the rest of all? The thing is – Though sledging has been the heresy from long past, but it didn't make someone like Jadeja to land up in a place where this controversy had. We all know that the sole creator of this drama was England’s bowling spearhead James Anderson; but still, in spite of appointing a judicial commissioner to solve the impasse, the ICC match referee David Boon had fined 50 % of his match fee to Indian slow left-arm orthodox spinner Jadeja (along with right-arm fast-medium Anderson). To some extent, we can understand why Anderson got forfeited, but it doesn't make a sense why Jadeja has to bear the repercussion. The instance of Indian captain Mr. Cool advocating in favor of Jadeja fully visualizes the situation. As we all know that MSD generally tries to be away from such controversies as far as possible and never favors the culprits, but if he has to come to bolster for Jadeja, then we can think about the gravity of the situation. The disgusting thing about the scenario is the shameless attitude of the ICC’s board of directors. In spite of putting so many proofs supporting Jadeja in front of them, still they had the audacity to impose a penance on him. From this we can understand that the flaw wasn't resided actually within England’s Bowler-cum-batsman Anderson since, in these times sledging is considered as a “Plan B” by most of the teams; in fact anomaly lies within the attitude of the ICC’s board of members. In that case, we can’t expect more modesty from players like Anderson than this as they will be surely encouraged to replicate the scenario next time if the situation demands for their teams.
If first case makes you think that what the worst can be expected in cricket then I guess you haven’t heard about the second case at all. The first instance if you think is a blotch on cricket then the second case, surely adulterates the image of both cricket and any humanitarian. In this case, the person or rather a player who got victimized is England’s right-arm off-break spinner Moeen Ali. We all know that the whole world is currently grappling with the situations of budding wars where Boko Haram (“Western education is forbidden) – A military Islamist movement based in Nigeria and recognized as a terrorist organization by U.S. causing problems for its civilians( As per the latest report of 2014 presented by U.N., nearly 300 school girls were kidnapped by it from one of the boarding schools)  , ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) – A Jihadist group better known as “Al – Qaeda” in Iraq is giving tough times to both Iraq and Syria forcing their citizens to accept their caliphate, and the most disgusting of all is the Hamas – A militant Palestinian Islamic movement situated in Gaza and built for the purpose of destruction of Israel and creation of Islamic state in Palestine, (Where missiles and bombs pelted by Israel on Gaza’s territory) creating imbroglio for U.N which is trying so desperately to bring the ceasefire between Israel and Gaza (Palestine). 

All of these, in totality, have massacred tens of thousands people and disturbed the lives of thousands of millions of people and only God on earth knows how much it has affected the economy of the world considering the monetary crisis the world is currently going through. The worst thing is – even when one is trying to raise one’s voice to let others have an idea of what problem the world is currently facing; they are asked to be quiet, and even if someone tries to be bold and ignore them, they are getting fined. During the second test match, it was observed that Moeen Ali was wearing a wristband. Got shocked…!!! Why would someone get fined or rather banned just because of wearing a wristband? In fact, the problem was not with the wristband; the issue was with the message quoted on it - “Save Gaza”… “Free Palestine”. Considering the situation, he would have been the epitome for promoting the humanitarian cause. 

However, the ICC board has banned him from wearing the same for any further matches. The mere reason the Board had given was – “As per the equipment and clothing regulations of the ICC, no one (Not even an Umpire) is permitted to display a message related to any political, religious or racial activities on the field; however one is free to express one’s views on such when one is away from the cricket field”. Really!!! Being either on the cricket field or off the field restrains someone from not conveying the humanitarian message!!! I guess the reason that ICC had murmured in front of us is quite icky and baseless. Rather than following his footsteps and if possible cobbling the regulation, they had completely amputated his will and faith. If the same trend continues in the near future, no player will come in front of all to stand against any epidemic debacles like above.

Both the aforementioned instances, if we see are not good for cricket’s further cause. Who knows if it continues in such a way, then everyone will start watching cricket merely just for an entertainment and not from a passion and moral perspective. The situation highly demands the amendment not just in the ICC’s constitution, but rather in their behavior and approach as well (In fact, a logical reasoning will do a good), and if it is not done hastily, then I guess it won’t be that long when we see the morality of cricket getting drowned under the torrent of immorality. If it goes like this then it will not be an insult of just cricket but of any morality associated to it, and it won't be a gentlemen's game anymore.

-- THE END --