The Federal
Jonny Bairstow stumped, Lords, Ashes Test
x
The debate over the Bairstow wicket has ramped up the consistently fierce rivalry between Australia and England during an Ashes Test series with England fans targeting Aussies on the tour. Photo: Twitter/ICC

Ashes: Bairstow dismissal row reeks of England's double standards

R Kaushik
3 July 2023 2:53 PM GMT  (Updated:2023-07-03 14:55:45)

On an evening when another magnificent day’s action in a riveting Ashes Test should have been the talking point, when Ben Stokes ought to have hogged the limelight and when Australia eulogised for their spunk and spirit and poise, it was the dismissal of Jonny Bairstow that was the biggest talking point.

Lord’s is considered the ‘Home of Cricket’, and it headquarters the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC), still regarded as the custodians of the Laws of the Game even though the International Cricket Council (ICC) helms world cricket. It’s beyond ironical that the jingoistic Lord’s crowd, primarily pro-England, chose to give the laws the go-by as it invoked the always-contentious spirit of the game to pillory the Australians as ‘cheats’ for using a legitimate means of dismissal to get rid of the dozy England wicketkeeper-batsman who has no one else to blame but himself.

Also read: Ashes: Stokes’ epic 155 in vain as Australia win Lord’s Test to go 2-0 up

Calls of ‘cheats’ in the Long Room

For those who might not have watched the entire passage of play on a late Sunday (July 2) afternoon in India in the second Ashes Test, here’s how the sequence of events played out. After ducking under a short ball from Cameron Green, Bairstow tapped his foot inside his crease and walked out of his safe zone, ostensibly to punch gloves with his captain at the conclusion of the over. Alex Carey, the wicketkeeper, collected the ball and under-armed it at the stumps in one motion, hitting the target and dislodging the bails. The Australians appealed, the third umpire came into play and Bairstow was ruled out, stumped. As he should have been. The matter should have ended then and there. But what’s an Ashes game with drama? What’s cricket without controversy? And what’s England without moral high ground?

And therefore, everyone and their neighbour waded into the debate. At the ground, populated mainly by home fans, the feeling of disappointment at the separation of the last recognised pair with the target of 371 a distance away soon gave way to outrage and anger, boos ringing around the stadium. At the lunch break, as Australia’s players walked through the Long Room on their way to their dressing room, the so-called cream of the crowd, the members of the MCC, shouted out angrily, with ‘cheats’ the most vocal and widely used word. It was unedifying and unbecoming of anyone, but for the stiff upper-lipped who pride themselves on their fairness and their ability to hold their composure, it was a massive fall from grace, once again exploding the myth of the impartiality of the English spectator and the onus on dignity of the MCC member. That three members have been suspended and an investigation launched is minimal window-dressing. How will the MCC live this disgraceful episode down?

Also read: Ashes: MCC suspends 3 members after Lord’s Long Room incident with Australian players

Back to what happened on the field. Bairstow’s departure ushered Stuart Broad in, and the serial offender with a prickly temper took his anger out on the Aussies with a slew of taunts and insults that seemed rich coming from him. The son of ICC match referee Chris Broad, the former England opener who once smashed the stumps after being bowled in the Bicentenary Test against Australia at the SCG in January 1988, Broad Jr has gotten away lightly despite several infractions in the past. In July 2013, he was caught at slip by Michael Clarke off Ashton Agar in the first Ashes Test in Nottingham but refused to walk; incredibly, umpire Aleem Dar ruled him not out and the Aussies had blown their two reviews. Broad made 65 and helped Ian Bell add 138 for the seventh wicket with England in a huge hole, an alliance that set up the hosts’ 14-run win.

At that time, Broad had said, “I could name you 18 or 19 players who played in an Ashes series who nicked and didn’t walk. It’s a really interesting debate and something that got blown out so out of proportion maybe because the Australians were frustrated they had wasted two referrals.”

Also read: Ashes: Australia edge England in last-day thriller to win 1st Test

As explanations/excuses go, that is both bizarre and puerile. Broad was defending his decision to not walk despite edging to slip, which is out by any customised rule even in a game of gully cricket; Bairstow was legally out at Lord’s on Sunday, yet the English line of thinking is that Australia should have withdrawn the appeal because it was not in the spirit of the game.

When England asked Dhoni to withdraw run-out appeal

Stokes stoked the fire later in the evening by insisting that if the shoe was on the other foot, he as England captain wouldn’t have taken a wicket by the same means as the Australians had done, loosely drawing on the spirit of the game conundrum. Of course, England in a different avatar, under Paul Collingwood, didn’t think twice before running out Kiwi Grant Elliott in a One-Day International several years back after the batsman had collided with bowler Ryan Sidebottom and lay sprawled in the middle of the pitch. Nor did they shy away from appealing to Mahendra Singh Dhoni through their captain Andrew Strauss and coach Andy Flower to withdraw the run-out appeal against Ian Bell in the Nottingham Test in 2011 when the batsman had presumed the ball had gone for four and walked off to the dressing room for tea even though the umpire hadn’t signalled the boundary and Abhinav Mukund close in collected the throw from the deep and broke the stumps. Seems like England play by one set of rules when it suits them, and then clamber up the moral high horse when it’s their turn to face the music.

Also read: Ashes: Nathan Lyon ruled out of series due to calf injury

Why is it that if the laws of the game endorse a dismissal, the same can be debated by falling back on its ‘spirit’? Who is the custodian of this said ‘spirit’, who decides where it applies, when, and to whom? How is it fair to blame the bowler for running out the non-striker looking to steal the extra yard by backing up too far, thus contravening the law? Or to blame Carey and the Aussies because Bairstow couldn’t be bothered to ascertain whether the ball was ‘dead’ before bounding out of his ground, and not for the first time in that same over?

For all of Stokes’ brilliance in another Ashes hundred to savour and for all their bluster and brouhaha, England have lost plenty of neutral fans with their impudence, ignorance and false indignity. Australia aren’t exactly pure as the driven snow, as history will testify, but if you fault them for playing by the rules as they did on this occasion, you know whose mistake that is.

Alex CareyAshes seriesAustraliaBen StokesCricketEnglandJonny BairstowLord's Cricket GroundPat CumminsStuart BroadStuart Broad
R Kaushik
About the AuthorR Kaushik
    Read More
    Next Story

    Top Stories

    X