Perspective makes the world go round. Different interpretations of situations leads to different opinions and outcomes. More often than not, the two foremost opinions make the most sense.
Take the American debt crisis. The USA has a large spending deficit (some $13 trillion or so) which needs trimming. However, the perspectives of the Republicans and the Democrats lead to different preferred outcomes. The GOP wanted huge spending cuts which make sense as to fight a debt, you spend less. On the other hand, the Democrats wanted less drastic spending cuts as they reasoned that would leave a vacuum in the public sector that may well lead to further economic problems later down the line. Both sensible policies which were each watered down to a compromise.
Naturally, this leads me on to cricket and the latest Test between England and India at Trent Bridge.
The decision by MS Dhoni, the Indian captain, to reprieve Ian Bell after he was run out in bizarre fashion has been lauded by both newspapers and TV coverage; showcasing the unique sporting nature of cricket and the ‘Spirit of Cricket’ notion.
For the unaware of the event, Bell, having thought he had hit the final ball before the tea break for four, walked towards the pavilion, only to see Dhoni whip off the bails of the stumps, meaning Bell was run out. However, as was fairly clear, Bell leaving his crease had been a misunderstanding (although a somewhat ditzy moment for the batsman) and Dhoni withdrew his appeal for the wicket after the tea interval, leaving Bell to resume batting. As veteran Indian batsman Rahul Dravid put it “it didn’t feel right”.
The aftermath of the event clearly benefitted England with Bell going on to get a further twenty runs and provide the base to allow Eoin Morgan, Matt Prior, Tim Bresnan and Stuart Broad to meat out more batting punishment against the Indian bowlers to give England an unassailable lead and crush the Indian bodies and minds in the process. Finally, the resultant England victory means that they are more than likely to supplant India as the foremost Test-playing nation come the end of the series.
Here’s where the question of perspectives comes in. If the roles had been reversed with England calling back an Indian batsman and the decision contributing in large part to the loss of the Test and our place as No. 1 in the word, would the media have been so gushing in its praise of Andrew Strauss? Or would they deride him as weak and use the eternal comparison to the Australia of Steve Waugh (mental disintegration and all that) and whether they would have acted the same?
Shane Warne wrote this morning about the Australian-like attitude of this England team and the need to be mentally tough and demanding to command the No.1 spot in Test cricket for an extended period of time and the withdrawal of the appeal by Dhoni can be seen as a lack of this attitude in the Indian team which hastens their descent from the summit.
As Steve James put it in the Telegraph, the notional ‘Spirit of Cricket’ is just that, a notion and the aim of the game is to win. However, perspectives regarding the spirit of the game are seen differently by different sporting cultures and different media cultures (indeed, double standards) which dictate the unwritten conventions of the game. Where these conventions lie is a matter of debate and context surrounding the incident.
Perhaps if England had been the generous party and it had led to a crushing defeat, maybe the reaction would have been different.
No comments:
Post a Comment