Claim & Counter Claim

Accusations in overnight media from The Old Country, led by the passionate but often erratic Ian Botham and equally inflammatory and untrue claims in sections of the print media underline just how passion can be wrongly applied in sport. Don't misunderstand me, passion is an integral part of sport and when someone loves their sport with such fervour, the ginger will often rise beyond the reasonable. However, at those times, it pays to temper ones confidence in those known transgressors of "the line".

The former English cricket hero Ian Botham is one of those serial bluff and blow response men whose access to the media was assured by the duel achievement of being a fabulous cricketer and a human headline. He has strong views - passion driven - and is happy to express them often. His allegations overnight that Phil Hughes was a cheat are worse than poppycock and it was extremely pleasing to see that the little bloke's quickest and strongest defender was none other than Alastair Cook - a further mark of the man and another reason why he'll be a fine captain of England when his time comes. The tall, elegant left hander has been in the heated part of the Ashes battle all summer, the latest St George to slay the Australian dragon - and the battle has been verbally and physically intense. Despite that, he immediately dismissed Botham's claims and supported Hughes.

Claims in today's SMH by Andrew Wu regarding the Ian Bell issue are equally ridiculous and smack strongly of bad sportsmanship. To call a player a cheat over an incident involving a possible feather can only be explained through ignorance. Mr Wu can have no personal experience of batting if he doesn't know that it is entirely possible to get such a slight edge to a ball, particularly on the inside of the blade, and be completely unaware you have hit it. That being the case, as Bell's reaction seemed obvious, the rules gave Bell a recourse which he rightly took. If the available technology was unable to clearly define the edge, then my point is clearly made. For the record, the reason why the sound technology "Snicko" is not used by the ICC in determining such decisions is because it has proved to be unreliable.

Wu's claim that "a large contingent of the 40,000-strong crowd appeared to disagree with Cook, giving Ian Bell more jeers than cheers as he walked off the field after completing his maiden Ashes Test century" is journalistic invention. Standing like the rest of the huge crowd, I joined in the extremely generous applause which carried Bell to and into the pavilion. If there were jeers, they must have been confined to the cynical, propagandist press box where Australian pressmen sifted through the dust of another Australian performance looking for splinters with which to make any post a winner.

Neither Bell or Hughes are cheats and Australia has been soundly beaten to the point of a thrashing by a highly skilled, professional and thoroughly sportsman like opponent. Instead of talking behind hands about Australian inadequacy, it is time for those hands to be applauding England. Sport is as much about how the game is played as the result. Rising from recent times in international cricket where bitterness, aggression,argument and institutionalised cheating have become the tainted currency, England have refreshed the game with an injection of spirit direct from the DNA of old soldiers long gone but revered again. It is the stuff of Flintoff crouching with Lee at Birmingham in 2005 and despite the manner in which England have taught us these lessons again this summer, our media still insists on peddling their untrustworthy wares to a disappointed fan base.

It was a grand day of Test cricket. That's all Mr Botham and Mr Wu needed to say.