The ‘Spirit of Cricket’ is a myth. And on Sunday, churlish England proved it – The New York Times

Global Sports
Members of the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) — the sport’s rulemakers and self-appointed custodians — probably thought they were being helpful when, 25 years ago, they introduced a preamble to the laws they oversee, highlighting the ‘Spirit of Cricket’.
It talks of respect being central to that spirit. Play hard and play fair. Accept the umpire’s decision. Create a positive atmosphere through your conduct and encourage others to do likewise. Show self-discipline and congratulate the opposition on their success.
Advertisement
Cricket is unique in this regard. There is no Spirit of Football in the United Kingdom. No Spirit of Baseball nor Spirit of Basketball in the United States. Cricket likes to consider itself morally above other sports. The phrase ‘it’s just not cricket’, a denunciation of skulduggery, has been part of the English language since it was used in the 1851 book The Cricket Field by James Pycroft.
Of course, the reality is rather different. Cricket has never been morally superior. That has been true since WG Grace, cricket’s first famous figure in the 1800s, was said to have replaced the bails on his stumps after being bowled, observing, “It’s a bit windy today.”
Cricket has a rich history of controversy that is always growing, whether in the English moral outrage at Australia’s Alex Carey running out Jonny Bairstow in the Ashes at Lord’s in 2023, or Sri Lanka’s Angelo Mathews being ‘timed out’ for not arriving quickly enough to begin his innings against Bangladesh four months later.
India captain Shubman Gill was the latest to invoke the Spirit of Cricket when he claimed England’s opening batters were 90 seconds late to begin their innings on the third evening of the third Test, claiming they were trying to run down the clock before the close of play.
“It was not what I would think comes within the spirit of the game,” said Gill, who had earlier in that Test at Lord’s spent eight minutes on the outfield holding up play receiving an unauthorised massage for his sore back.
But if the Spirit of Cricket was broken at Lord’s, then it was shattered on Sunday, at the end of India’s remarkable rearguard in the fourth Test at Old Trafford, when England captain Ben Stokes reacted angrily to the refusal of Ravindra Jadeja to shake hands on a draw with 15 overs left and no chance of a win for either side.
Advertisement
India wanted to continue until both Jadeja and Washington Sundar had reached centuries, cricket’s all-important milestone. Stokes, for his part, felt that the result was everything and it was time to rest up, given the fifth Test was beginning just four days later at The Oval.
What followed was high farce, with Stokes turning to the joke bowling of Harry Brook to usher in both landmarks and call a halt to proceedings.
England’s frustrated players threw some spiky sledging India’s way — Stokes was heard asking Jadeja whether he really wanted to get a hundred off “Harry Brook or Ben Duckett (another non-bowler)” — but the most barbed comments came afterwards, from Indian and Australian media commentators.
It’s fair to say the England players were not impressed with Ravindra Jadeja’s century 😬
India refused to end the Test early, and only accepted the proposal once Jadeja and Washington Sundar reached their centuries. #BBCCricket #ENGvIND pic.twitter.com/Kd0IYhfxm0
— Test Match Special (@bbctms) July 27, 2025

 
Former India batter Sanjay Manjrekar led the charge, telling TV channel JioHotstar: “OK, he’s unhappy that the players haven’t walked off, he’ll have to manage his overs carefully with the main bowlers exhausted.
“But throwing lollipops in the air and showing a bit of grumpiness out there, that was Ben Stokes behaving like a spoiled kid.”
Australian observers, who never miss the chance to stick the boot into England, especially in an Ashes year, were beside themselves. Headlines such as, “Spare us the whinging, England. The only thing embarrassing was your tantrum”, “Moral hypocrites England decide tons are anti-cricket” and “Spirit of what? How pompous England exposed Bazball’s great double standard”, summed up the mood, while veteran commentator Jim Maxwell called Brook “cocky and arrogant” and suggested he “needs counselling”.
Advertisement
So, did England act against this nebulous Spirit of Cricket? Are they too quick to try to take the moral high ground in the name of ‘Bazball’ entertainment? Are they, as Australia believe, a little too pious in their pronouncements on what is good for the game?
There is no question India were perfectly entitled to bat on, with 15 overs left of a long five-day contest, rather than call it a day when — following the laws — Stokes was allowed to suggest it.
At that stage, at 5.20pm on Sunday, Jadeja was on 89 and Washington on 80, and they had repelled everything England had thrown at them. They had earned the right for Washington, in particular, to try to reach his maiden Test hundred, a special landmark for any player.
If India really wanted to rub England’s noses into the dirt and try to gain another advantage before the final Test, they could have batted on for the remaining overs and put more work into the legs of shattered bowlers.
Stokes was equally entitled to turn to part-time bowling once it became clear no positive result could be reached — but he and his side were churlish in their reaction and did their best to spoil the moment for Washington and India, both with their comments and Brook’s bowling.
At the centre of this latest flare-up is something of a culture clash. Indian cricket has traditionally cherished individual achievements more than any other nation while the whole Stokes-Brendon McCullum philosophy is based on putting the team first and being selfless.
Stokes probably would have walked off had the situation been reversed, as he intimated on Sunday when he said: “There would have been no less satisfaction walking off with 80 not out than 100 not out.”
There was context to England’s reaction. They have bowled 894.2 overs in this series — more than in the first four Tests of any series since 1951 — and were out on their feet after enduring another unsatisfactory pitch, which was more subcontinental than English in its character.
Advertisement
They were exhausted and tetchy and the captain, who added a shoulder problem to his array of injuries, had given everything.
Stokes and England did shake hands with Jadeja, Washington and all the India players and management when play finally finished. The whole affair has added another layer of interest and intrigue to what has been one of the great Test series.
Yes, England could have reacted better. There was a similar situation at the end of the 1984 Test between West Indies and Australia when Allan Border was on 98 not out towards the end and a draw could have been declared.
Viv Richards, Border’s opposite captaincy number, was purported to have said, “AB, get your hundred and let’s get out of here.” Which is exactly what happened.
That would have been the way to end the fourth Old Trafford Test. Instead, we were served another example of why there really is no ‘Spirit of Cricket’, whatever the MCC say.
Click here to read more cricket stories on The Athletic, and follow Global Sports on The Athletic app via the Discover tab.
(Top photo: Clive Mason/Getty Images)
Paul Newman grew up in East London supporting Essex as they became the dominant force in county cricket and idolising Graham Gooch. He covered the club for his local paper, the Waltham Forest Guardian, before moving into national newspapers, culminating in an 18-year stint as cricket correspondent for the Daily Mail and Mail Online. He has also worked for the Daily and Sunday Telegraphs and has collaborated on cricket books with Nasser Hussain, Alastair Cook, Stuart Broad and Kevin Pietersen. Follow Paul on X @Paul_Newman66

source