The Game Is In The Player's Hands

Stuart Broad's non-walk, when he hit the cover off the ball in the 1st Ashes Test at Trent Bridge has caused some controversy. 

Ex-players, current team mates and Anglophiles generally, have used the "he isn't the only one to cheat' defence... as if that is any type of defence against cheating.

It does seem unfair to focus exclusively on Broad here, which is maybe what those who seek to defend cheating allude to. Broad isn't the first (and will not be the last) to stand there when he knows he is out and cheats the umpire and the opposition by not walking off. The additional defence "That is the umpire's job" isn't really the point at play here.

Cricket is having a tough time of match and spot fixing right now. The game is suffering from those who choose the cheat and manipulate parts of the match. Players are suspected of cheating by scratching the cricket ball to affect it's condition so reverse swing can be achieved. There are those who deliberately go out to cheat, and there are those who simply cheat in the heat of the moment - such as claiming a catch when they knew it didn't carry.

It seems to be that players are now absolving themselves from any responsibility in cricket by leaving it all up the umpires, TV cameras or whether they 'get caught' doing something they shouldn't.

Cricket is under the severest of scrutiny. 

There is a simple way to assist with this. The answer is not to cheat. 

Playing in a recent match, one of out fielders took a perfectly good diving forward catch at cover point, inches from the turf. the local umpire said he couldn't see if it was taken cleanly, and the square leg umpire didn't see. So the batsman, who was half walking off, stood there and was given not out. The fielder could have been asked "did you catch that cleanly?" by the batsman, who would have accepted the catch as fair and walked off.

To those grandees of the game defending cheating I say this: it will only stop if there is a consequence of KNOWINGLY cheating. The shame of it is that punishments would have to be threatened in the first place - as you would think that any player wouldn't con another, or a whole team, or even a whole match, to start with.

Manipulating parts of the game to affect the outcome by cheating, would be a very good place to start a deterrent. Whatever has gone before is not a defence. It is how the game is played moving forward.

Just as with diving in football, cheating in cricket is an unacceptable face of the game that should be brought to book in some way.

Because if the players are not going to protect the integrity of their sport, if they are not going to speak up and say it is not right to cheat, and if those around the game think it is acceptable to cheat because others do, then like with match fixing and ball tampering, it will become 'part of the game' that is accepted.

Players and coaches hold the key. It isn't about the umpires on such morality.