Cricket concerns August 18, 2010

Out of proportion

I wonder if I am desperately out of sync with this but I am quite bemused by the colour Suraj Randiv's century-denying no-ball to Virender Sehwag has acquired
705

I wonder if I am desperately out of sync with this but I am quite bemused by the colour Suraj Randiv's century-denying no-ball to Virender Sehwag has acquired. Having been persuaded out for dinner with the family, I missed the last half hour of the match and caught Sehwag's six on a shop window around which a crowd had gathered. The crowd rejoiced as Sehwag raised his bat and I walked on.

It was only after logging on at home that I realised Sehwag had been stranded on 99. When I watched the replay it felt schoolboyishly petty. The overstepping looked deliberate and, coming after the four byes conceded three balls previously, it seemed the Sri Lankans had a design to deny Sehwag a well-earned hundred. Overall, it felt mean-spirited. It was immediately apparent that there would be a few headlines about it next day.

But even making allowances for the media's ability to exaggerate, there's a touch of ridiculousness about the way the matter has played out. The forthright manner in which Sehwag expressed his disappointment was characteristic of him; you expected him to move on quickly. And when it turned out that Randiv had come over to say sorry, the matter should have ended there.

Instead, it took a turn for the ridiculous. Whispers emerged about the complicity of Kumar Sangakkara in the crime - after all, the four byes had slipped through his gloves - and the Sri Lanka captain was forced to protest his innocence. Some newspapers devoted a whole page to the incident, summoning the ICC and MCC for explanations. There was even a reference to Monkeygate somewhere in there.

The most bizarre play, though, came from the Sri Lankan cricket board. It apologised for the breach of spirit and, more, it announced an enquiry into the incident. Little fazes Sehwag but it's not unreasonable to assume that even he might find this a bit embarrassing. Centuries matter, but cricketers move on swiftly after the missed ones.

By issuing a public apology, the Sri Lankan board merely belittled the concept. At worst, Randiv's no-ball was petty; at best, it was naughty. But he broke no law; he didn't even contravene the ICC code of conduct as it is laid out. He can be accused of breaching the spirit of the game, but the spirit of cricket is a fuzzy concept. Batsmen rarely walk when they know they are out, fielders do their worst to cheat a favorable decision out of the umpires; and wives and girlfriends are sometimes brought into the equation to rile an opponent. If Sehwag was owed an apology it was from the bowler.

The bowler apologised, the batsman accepted; where do the rest of us come in?

Sambit Bal is the editor of ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Abraham on August 29, 2010, 16:22 GMT

    A warm welcome to the latest recruits to the INB, the 'intentional no-ball brigade'. The current membership stands at three - Randiv, Asif and Amir. More will join.

  • memoriesofpast on August 27, 2010, 9:44 GMT

    The spirit of the game has already been disputed since the incidents like the underarm ball in 1981 one-dayer at MCG between Aus and their neighbour Kiwis, the use of aluminium bat by Dennis Lillee and Lillee again trying to come in the running path of batsman Javed Miandad and attempting to kick Javed in the Perth test of 1981. Australian cricket board and their captain at that time used all their strength to reduce the punishment for Lillee. Even after that underarm ball incident, no punishment was given to Greg chapell and Trevor Chapell and neither did both of them feel like giving a public apology-so why are they banning Randiv or asking an explaination from SL team? They did not even make such an issue of that underarm ball incident-is it because two non-white skinned neighbours are involved ?Do they want to spoil relations between India and neighbour SL? Because the Chappell brothers were allowed to escape,other teams chose to take inspiration from them- so simple.

  • kp on August 27, 2010, 6:53 GMT

    @Raghu - please learn to read and quote correctly. Sambit has written it correctly; can't say the same about you though! Read it again.

  • Safwan Ghani on August 26, 2010, 3:12 GMT

    We should remember the match between India and South Africa last year. Sehwag intentionally kick the ball to the boundary and not let Hashim Amla to come to strike and complete his century. Is it not against the spirit of cricket?

  • joshioz on August 24, 2010, 3:10 GMT

    Sambit, one could argue that Randiv's (and the Lankan team's) unsporting tactics brought the game to disrepute by denying Sehwag a well deserved century. I hope it also promts a review of the rules where the runs scored off the last deliver, whether a no ball or not, are recognised in the final tally.

  • Ruwantha on August 22, 2010, 15:34 GMT

    This is what SLC did years ago with Ajith de Silva, Bandula Warnapura and the rest... over reacted. I don't say they should have not been punished, they should, but the punishment should be of propotion to the mistake.

    Suraj did not commit a crime, nor did he break the rules. A baller has the right to ball a no-ball and he used it! It gave India one run, even an extra ball had the match not end; plus he apologised... the matter should have ended at that.

  • lion on August 22, 2010, 14:53 GMT

    Most of the Indians seem to be forgetting the near past. How the Indian crowds stopped matches in 96 world cup. How the Indians behaved in matches and how some Indian players behave after taking wickets. When Harbajan called Symonds they defended him and blamed the Aussies. They think just because they control cricket "economically" they can control other countries too. It is a common secret how Lalith Modi forces Lankan officials to cancel a England tour and allow players to participate in IPL. Also you might not know that few people were arrested during a match in this series, just because Yuvraj told police that they shouted at him. That is how Sri Lanka respect foreign players. So for all the Indians, dont make comments as you are the innocent and see what Randiv did was something that had never happened and as a serious crime.

  • Akhilesh Pendharkar on August 22, 2010, 7:41 GMT

    Give me one good reason for so many comments to this article if the matter was not worthy of anyones notice.

  • cricket_fan_1 on August 22, 2010, 4:26 GMT

    I completely agree, the SLC board has been brave rather than weak. It has sent out message to other arrogant boards and has led by example.

  • cricket_fan_1 on August 22, 2010, 4:22 GMT

    Anything involving Indian Team and BCCI gets the most attention from everyone. Keep it up guys. All the teams do mean things. Aussies Top the list for that, at least in the past 20 years.

  • Abraham on August 29, 2010, 16:22 GMT

    A warm welcome to the latest recruits to the INB, the 'intentional no-ball brigade'. The current membership stands at three - Randiv, Asif and Amir. More will join.

  • memoriesofpast on August 27, 2010, 9:44 GMT

    The spirit of the game has already been disputed since the incidents like the underarm ball in 1981 one-dayer at MCG between Aus and their neighbour Kiwis, the use of aluminium bat by Dennis Lillee and Lillee again trying to come in the running path of batsman Javed Miandad and attempting to kick Javed in the Perth test of 1981. Australian cricket board and their captain at that time used all their strength to reduce the punishment for Lillee. Even after that underarm ball incident, no punishment was given to Greg chapell and Trevor Chapell and neither did both of them feel like giving a public apology-so why are they banning Randiv or asking an explaination from SL team? They did not even make such an issue of that underarm ball incident-is it because two non-white skinned neighbours are involved ?Do they want to spoil relations between India and neighbour SL? Because the Chappell brothers were allowed to escape,other teams chose to take inspiration from them- so simple.

  • kp on August 27, 2010, 6:53 GMT

    @Raghu - please learn to read and quote correctly. Sambit has written it correctly; can't say the same about you though! Read it again.

  • Safwan Ghani on August 26, 2010, 3:12 GMT

    We should remember the match between India and South Africa last year. Sehwag intentionally kick the ball to the boundary and not let Hashim Amla to come to strike and complete his century. Is it not against the spirit of cricket?

  • joshioz on August 24, 2010, 3:10 GMT

    Sambit, one could argue that Randiv's (and the Lankan team's) unsporting tactics brought the game to disrepute by denying Sehwag a well deserved century. I hope it also promts a review of the rules where the runs scored off the last deliver, whether a no ball or not, are recognised in the final tally.

  • Ruwantha on August 22, 2010, 15:34 GMT

    This is what SLC did years ago with Ajith de Silva, Bandula Warnapura and the rest... over reacted. I don't say they should have not been punished, they should, but the punishment should be of propotion to the mistake.

    Suraj did not commit a crime, nor did he break the rules. A baller has the right to ball a no-ball and he used it! It gave India one run, even an extra ball had the match not end; plus he apologised... the matter should have ended at that.

  • lion on August 22, 2010, 14:53 GMT

    Most of the Indians seem to be forgetting the near past. How the Indian crowds stopped matches in 96 world cup. How the Indians behaved in matches and how some Indian players behave after taking wickets. When Harbajan called Symonds they defended him and blamed the Aussies. They think just because they control cricket "economically" they can control other countries too. It is a common secret how Lalith Modi forces Lankan officials to cancel a England tour and allow players to participate in IPL. Also you might not know that few people were arrested during a match in this series, just because Yuvraj told police that they shouted at him. That is how Sri Lanka respect foreign players. So for all the Indians, dont make comments as you are the innocent and see what Randiv did was something that had never happened and as a serious crime.

  • Akhilesh Pendharkar on August 22, 2010, 7:41 GMT

    Give me one good reason for so many comments to this article if the matter was not worthy of anyones notice.

  • cricket_fan_1 on August 22, 2010, 4:26 GMT

    I completely agree, the SLC board has been brave rather than weak. It has sent out message to other arrogant boards and has led by example.

  • cricket_fan_1 on August 22, 2010, 4:22 GMT

    Anything involving Indian Team and BCCI gets the most attention from everyone. Keep it up guys. All the teams do mean things. Aussies Top the list for that, at least in the past 20 years.

  • Arjun on August 22, 2010, 2:48 GMT

    Lets say a batsman is on 199 and there is one ball to either equal Sachin's record or even go past it to make a new record..and the bowler bowls a deliberate no ball or a wide to end the match..well then I guess most people wont accept just an apology. You call yourself a professional cricketer, then better be one..I believe one match ban is justified..but Randiv acted only on Dilshan's advice..woo hoo..hard to believe isn't it..

  • dilina on August 21, 2010, 6:59 GMT

    the thing is this. for the sake of spirit of the game and without making the matter escalate it would have been appropriate to close the matter at the apology it was escalated by the sehwag's tweet which made it took a wrong turn all of us knows that due to the money power of the Indian board SLC's hands are tied & to avoid un-pleasantry they issued a match ban and fined dilshan this gesture was taken totally to unnecessary length's by Indian media which have handed back the advantage to sri lanka team now comes to Sunday's match with a vengeance & i personally like to see the fire in our boys for the rest of the series. India knows that we are the only worthy opponent they can find to exercise their money power and if the board intervened in this incident & stopped it in the beginning it would not have escalated to this extent in the future , if and when an unethical issue arises every team will use this incident as a yardstick to evaluate the repercussions

  • imme on August 21, 2010, 6:30 GMT

    Surely it proves that people in the boards knows nothing oabout cricket. All the care about is money, Veru's hundred would only be good from marketing point of view. Did Randiv break any rule ? No, I remember Trever Chapple bowling underarm to deny victory to NZ, what action was taken ? Few thing, 1. If randiv was an Indian player or Aussie player nothing would have happend. 2. Spirit of cricket ? When Indian board doesn't give Bangladesh any test series that's where the spirit is kicked. What action is taken against Indian board ? 3. People don't play to allow others to score hundred for nothing, Well cricket is played by some non-veg too.

  • Trash on August 21, 2010, 5:03 GMT

    Sambit,

    Lets extend your theory: Lets say Ishant sharma hitwicketed himself and denied Murali from getting to 800 mark, then apologise later. How would that be? Should Murali and SL fans move on?

    I hope you understand that by patronising Randiv's 'naughty' no-ball, flood-gates to more such immoral but legal ways to deny opponents' achievements can be invented. And this incident is perhaps more debased than the infamous underarm ball or other such incidents because this time the team 'cheated' not for the sake of a win but to deny their opponents.

    Perhaps a board like Pakistan or Australia may not have apologised. But SLC promptly apologised and punished the erring players(though I think the punishment was very light). Perhaps you see SLC's prompt action as exhibition of weakness...perhaps a surrender. But I see SLC's action as the true strength. SLC's action justifies the reason SL has been awarded the spirit of cricket for past 3 years.

  • Mohamed Z. Rahaman on August 21, 2010, 1:14 GMT

    Upon further review....RANDIV WAS RIGHT if he did indeed bowled a no ball deliberately. Why is no one speaking about the two previous deliveries that were dot balls? Was Sehwag deliberately waiting for the right delivery to hit a six or big four as he often does to get to 100? Now, does that that not make you go, hmmmm?

  • Observer on August 21, 2010, 0:59 GMT

    I really don't know why there is such a public outcry for such a stupid little thing. The match was boring and lousy and the same applies to a majority of matches between India and SL. Why don;t people address real issues. Cricket is quickly becoming a boring and lousy sport.

  • prabha_kar on August 20, 2010, 22:12 GMT

    Well said....

    Just imagine if India would have done the same to avoid Murali his 800th wicket? What would have been the public response?

    I think this more about sporting issue and should be addressed for the good of future of the game.

  • Roy on August 20, 2010, 21:13 GMT

    Ask yourselves this. If the scores were level with Virender on 89 runs instead of 99, would Randiv would have bowled that no-ball? Even if Viru had 93 runs to his name at that point, I'm willing to wager Randiv wouldn't have minded conceding a sixer with that delivery. It was deliberate !!!! Dilshan, especially, has revealed what a dirty character he is !!!!

  • Bigwonder on August 20, 2010, 18:22 GMT

    Someone mentioned earlier in their post about Pointing and Gentlemen in one sentence.

    I think its against the law of nature, cricket and all other possible laws to include those two words in one sentence.

  • Appu on August 20, 2010, 18:20 GMT

    Dis-Agree with the article.

    I was thinking about Malinga, Welegedara who were deliberately not taking wickets to allow Muralitharan to get to 800 wickets.

  • Mahinda Wijesingha on August 20, 2010, 18:04 GMT

    I am Sri Lankan and I don't understand the fuss.

    Why can't everyone see the simple politics?

    Sri Lanka needs BCCI for $$$$$. Without India, the board would be bankrupt and the game in our country would be in dumps. Why fight with someone who is paying for our cricketers?

    Sanga should watch his mouth. We are India's mistress. Just move on and live with that.

    Why complain when they pay us our salary? If you are a prostitute, at least behave like one.

  • Missaka on August 20, 2010, 16:54 GMT

    Absurd.....one guy is saying Sewag kicking a ball to the boundary to win a game is ok.....what an absurd comment...to hell with spirit to win the game....right??? that is what you mean....haha....what are you people talking about....sledging a cricketer about his family and personal problems are ok...its the true spirit....throwing an opponent off his game by denying him a hundred is a sin ...people are quite unbelievable....cricket is cricket...it can be brutal as long as its within the rules...we dont cry about sledging...we dont cry about somebody kicking ball to the boundary...problems with Indians are, all they care about is the stats and records of their idols....simply advice - stop obsessing about stats and obsess of team success and staying at the top....to hell with individual stats ...he will live and he will score plenty more....at least he knows he won't get them easy from the other team

  • sahan on August 20, 2010, 15:59 GMT

    game is a game.

    fast bowlers use bouncers to threatening batsman completely knowing it will harm the batsman.

    so what is the point of highlighting an overstepping.

  • Balwant Pattni on August 20, 2010, 15:58 GMT

    Absolutely, well written article

  • guhanv on August 20, 2010, 15:25 GMT

    I agree with Sambit. Randiv broke no law and in many aspects did the right thing for the his Team. By giving a no ball, he has already sacrificed his statistics and that's the penalty the law gives. No more should be given, for if there is a culprit it is the law itself.

    In these days of statistics, what counts long after the match is over are the number of runs scored and centuries against teams, at venues, and so on. Randiv's actions may be questioned on its ethics when there is a 100 at stake, but in the bigger picture he was still playing for his country.

    As you say Sehwag had his say, as we expect him to, Randiv gave his apology and the matter should have ended there. These two behaved honorably.

    Now we can wait for a batsman on 88, who gets a no-ball and a six and the match is won, but he can claim that a free-hit ball is due as well, for him to get his 100. And so it will go on as we lose focus on competitions and team results and focus on individual achievements. - GV

  • P.Jaiswal on August 20, 2010, 14:16 GMT

    As per the rule, Sehwag should get the runs. Seems like the scorer made an error and ICC should intervene in this matter. Law 24(No Ball), Clause 13. Runs resulting from a No ball - how scored The one run penalty for a No ball shall be scored as a No ball extra. If other penalty runs have been awarded to either side, these shall be scored as in Law 42.17 (Penalty runs). Any runs completed by the batsmen or a boundary allowance shall be credited to the striker if the ball has been struck by the bat; otherwise they also shall be scored as No ball extras. Apart from any award of a 5 run penalty, all runs resulting from a No ball, whether as No ball extras or credited to the striker, shall be debited against the bowler.

  • naveen on August 20, 2010, 14:14 GMT

    if i had been in randiv's place i would have given a straight wide on the leg side leading to a boundary. come on there is batman who is pelting you to every cornor of the park and seriously do u want to give him hundred when u can deny it. media just made it as if a biggest crime in the cricketing field

  • johnny dias on August 20, 2010, 13:49 GMT

    Sambit Bal should make sure and write correctly. He is wrong in every aspect about that over and Randhiv. He is a bowler just in his prime who should have shown some courage in trying a different length, line or some spin but, not be coward and be unsporting. Such behaviour should not be tolerated and dealt with severely.

  • Murali on August 20, 2010, 12:10 GMT

    Brilliant...very welll said...bowler did it..batsman forgives him...who are we? rest of us should shut up....

  • VS DURGAM on August 20, 2010, 11:15 GMT

    Is sledging not breaching of spirit of the game? More attention to be paid for sledging than this type of silly acts.

  • Anonymous on August 20, 2010, 9:44 GMT

    Perfectly said Sambit. I totally agree with you. Since this incident happened, so many thoughts popped-up in my mind like “why Indian fans, media & Sehwag are dwelling on this” etc. I was expecting one of you should write this on crickinfo saying it was unnecessary. Finally I really thank you for what you have noticed and came up with a good article. Thanks a lot Sambit. And adding more to it, if same thing had happened with Sachin(instead of Sehwag) Indian media and few anti-Sachin fans would have said..."Sachin is selfish". When Sachin was denied a century in Cuttuk, he didn’t say anything in public or blame anyone and issue wasn’t blown out of proportion. Hope Sehwag would learn from Sachin “what to & how to speak” and how to be consistent in batting.

  • venkatesh on August 20, 2010, 9:41 GMT

    Eventhough, Match is over, Series is still Alive! It will increase Indian run rate. But this series, run rate not going to help India.

    Consider, Srilanka qualified for the final. India need to 1 run to win the match and 6 runs to qualify for final otherwize NZ will qualify. At that time, batsman hitting a 6 on a no ball (bowled desperately or not) and What you all will say?

    India Unlucky or NZ Lucky or SL done a good job to avoid IND for the final (Final Match - Pitch will assist spinners more).

    So, this is not yet over unless ICC look into this.

  • crickeyt on August 20, 2010, 9:38 GMT

    Come on people from SL, you cannot accept BCCI's money on the one hand while on the other, lecture Indians on real or imagined pressure from BCCI!

    And stop laying on poor Sehwag about this. He only said it as he saw it, he did not ask the SLC to ban Randiv. What do you expect him to say - it is okay, I am happy that the SL team has a chronic habit of being petty when opposition players are reaching landmarks?

  • KSR on August 20, 2010, 9:03 GMT

    Being a Sehwag fan, I am a little disappointed about the noball, but it is no big deal. Hasn't Sehwag got out in such situations in the past? The important thing is that India won.

    If I were the SLC, I would certainly have punished both Randiv and Dishan, maybe even Sangakkara, not for breaching the spirit of the game OR for denying Viru a well-deserved hundred, but for the plain reason that they did not fight till the end and gave up, showing lack of commitment.

    Also, it was fairly stupid from Randiv to bowl a deliberate no-ball. If Sehwag had "got out" instead of hitting a six, wouldn't Randiv had regretted it?

  • amar on August 20, 2010, 8:47 GMT

    balanced editorial , but this is not the sportsman spirit.this incident would be black stain on suraj's carrier.if he had the guts he would has bold him on the very ball instead of delivering noball.

  • hbakra on August 20, 2010, 8:03 GMT

    These are professionals. If a century is important to a batsman so are bowling stats to a bowler. The last ball may not have been in the spirit of the game. But the media outcry and the BCCI and SL board reaction is ludicrous. A century merely for stats sake is meaningless. Fortunately, Sehwag has enthralled us with many glorius knocks with many more to come. On occasion, he also throws his wicket away exasperatedly, with or without Randiv's help !

  • Emil4ESPN on August 20, 2010, 7:45 GMT

    Cricket is a gentlemens game.Every sports has its own game spirit. In my point of view non of the team will allow a opponent to score a 100 aginst them.The no ball bowled by Randiv was not planned couple of overs back. Actually Sri Lanka had a chance to reject Sehwag's century by bowling a no ball or by putting a wide delivery.@ the sametime Sehwag also have had his chances to secure his 100 rather than wating for the last run where the scores were level.Present &the pastIndaian cricketers are blaming at Sri Lankan's game spirit.First they should understand how their team playing.Eg:Harbhajan slapped his own team player at IPL.Even though Murali was desparately tryin for his 800 wicket in a dead rubber match India didn't gifted their wicket.Gunguly ride of Sanath at the sharja match by bowling a wide delivery.There was no breech of laws or conduct by Suraj Randiv & they is no reason to band him & SLC has no need to appologise for BCCI.SLC could have done thier inquiry after the series

  • Sharmi on August 20, 2010, 6:50 GMT

    It’s nothing to do with cricket or cricketers for that matter, it’s about the HAVE bullying the don’t HAVE’s. Cricket sadly has become a Money Power game, let’s just turn the table here and think, if it happened to any other team batsman by an Indian team, will anyone even bother to talk about…

  • Andrew on August 20, 2010, 5:29 GMT

    The silliest part of this debacle is the way people have interpreted it as an anti-IND conspiracy on the part of the lawmakers! One called it a "rule connived by ICC." The Laws pre-date the ICC by some time! The match is over when the winning runs are scored. That Law will not change, for a number of good reasons.

    For the first time in my life, I support the BCCI on this issue. It warranted a complaint.

    That now cleared up, I thought the punishment was excessive. Not just the guy that did it, but the guy who mentioned the idea?? That's a new one. Randiv should have been charged with conduct contrary to the spirit, his apology noted and he lose his match fee - the other guy reprimanded. Not suspensions - not for that.

    Had it been done with Murali on 799, or some equivalent with Bradman on 6996, imagine the reaction! We need to stamp out this kind of stuff but not by imposing ridiculous penalties.

  • JMT FERNANDO on August 20, 2010, 4:31 GMT

    Of course Randiv & Dilshan were spoil sport. But why punish them so harshly when they have not broken any rules? In fact when Shewag was questioned when he was coming out of the ground, he played it down by saying: "No fielding side would like a batsman to score a century" and walked into the dressing room. Then why this fuss? There are several other instances where greater guns have spoilt the sprit of the game eg. Ian Chappel requesting his younger brother Trevor to bowl under-arm the last ball of a 50 over match against New Zealand; Adam Gilchrist wearing a squash ball under his glove while batting; Shewag himself kicking a ball out of the ground in order to prevent in-form Amila from facing the bowler in a match against S.A. Were those unsporty actions of "Sportsmen" punished by their respective Boards. Then why punish only our guys for their "unsporty" behaviour ? Shame SLC! Restore their match-fees. Instead, clamour to award Shewag his well deserved century.

  • JMT FERNANDO on August 20, 2010, 4:10 GMT

    Of course Randiv & Dilshan were spoil sport. But why punish them so harshly when they have not broken any rules? In fact when Shewag was questioned when he was coming out of the ground, he played it down by saying: "No fielding side would like a batsman to score a century" and walked into the dressing room. Then why this fuss? There are several other instances where greater guns have spoilt the sprit of the game eg. Ian Chappel requesting his younger brother Trevor to bowl under-arm the last ball of a 50 over match against New Zealand; Adam Gilchrist wearing a squash ball under his glove while batting; Shewag himself kicking a ball out of the ground in order to prevent in-form Amila from facing the bowler in a match against S.A. Were those unsporty actions of "Sportsmen" punished by their respective Boards. Then why punish only our guys for their "unsporty" behaviour ? Shame SLC! Restore their match-fees. Instead, clamour to award Shewag his well deserved century.

  • Jess on August 20, 2010, 3:45 GMT

    Scenario one: Sehwag was on 99 Randhiv bowled a Noball deliberately to prevent Sehwag from getting to his so called "well deserved" century.

    Scenario two: So many batsmen mostly Indians and Aussies do NOT WALK DELIBERATELY when they nick the bowl and it is caught! Thus DENYING THE BOWLER A WELL DESERVED WICKET!

    Randhiv gets punished but none of those batsmen who do NOT walk ever get punished later once replays are properly analyzed like in this case. Conclusion: Personal records like 100s are more important than WICKETS! Or maybe the party suffered has to be INDIAN! Fair? I think NOT!

  • Krishna on August 20, 2010, 2:35 GMT

    I dont think the incident was blown out of proportion. The inquiry should look into the aspect if it had anything to do with fancy betting about Sehwag reaching a hundred or not or which way the winning runs would come.

  • Vinay on August 20, 2010, 2:22 GMT

    I think this has to do with the fact that it's UNSPORTSMAN Like behavoir and goes against ethics and spirit of the game, I think Sri Lankan board wasn't coaxed into action by the BCCI, It was a appropriate response to what was a petty deliberate act to steal Sehwag's Glory, However, I agree w/ Ian Chappell, Sehwag is dominating the Sri Lankan's bowler's psyche and he need not bother w/ their cheap and petty acts.

  • Adeel on August 20, 2010, 1:44 GMT

    SLC is in need of support and its highly appreciated if that would be from the richest cricket boards. That remains the only reason for SLC's quick action and probably a not required punishment for the poor guy and a not required an apology at that scale. He didnt do any crime yet got punished. Players have done much worst than that and has gotten away with that.

  • Radhik Colombage on August 20, 2010, 1:40 GMT

    I agree 100%....this beat up is ridiculous. Yeah it was petty by Randiv, but at the end of the day he apologised. He's a young kid and made a mistake. Everyone should just move on. There is never a case of headlines and suspensions when a batsmen refuses to walk, or if an umpire gives a dodgy decision, why make such a big deal about it?

  • Changaiz on August 20, 2010, 1:33 GMT

    I think apology was enough just not against the rules so wats the big deal. Stop playing for records all the time that is also against the spirit of cricket.

  • CricinfoFan on August 20, 2010, 0:36 GMT

    these indians are nothing but emotional fools...first they make fun of themselves by cursing their own cricketers in t20 worldcup....and then again.....they should stop watching star plus serials :D

  • Des on August 20, 2010, 0:35 GMT

    Gurpreet: "Just imagine if India would have done the same to avoid Murali his 800th wicket? What would have been the public response?"

    I agree - What if the last Indian batsman would have been out hit wicket to a bowler other than Murali?

  • Des on August 20, 2010, 0:35 GMT

    Gurpreet: "Just imagine if India would have done the same to avoid Murali his 800th wicket? What would have been the public response?"

    I agree - What if the last Indian batsman would have been out hit wicket to a bowler other than Murali?

  • BCI on August 20, 2010, 0:21 GMT

    This is harassment of a player by a board and of a board by another board. BCCI, shame on you!!

    Sri Lankan cricket fans, we apologize to you!!

  • Hari on August 19, 2010, 23:29 GMT

    SL,Should really have tried to get some wickets,instead of giving last six runs easily.How about getting sehwag out and couple tail at the end.

    May be Iam too positive,still it works If your an australian or in Kumble's team.

    I still wondering how can Dishan helped Randiv to do that after all they play for same team in IPL.

  • Venkat on August 19, 2010, 22:25 GMT

    Hi There is no doubt that Randiv deliberately bowled the no-ball. What if Sanga and Randiv were invloved in betting /match-fixing ? The ICC should investigate this. Imagine Sachin on 199 and this No-ball! This is a pattern with SLC. I would say the Sri Lankans 'Cheats' have let down the their country and its image. Sorry Sanga you have lost my respect.

  • Manhattan on August 19, 2010, 21:57 GMT

    Randiv definitely acted cheap, but we asll should not forget that Sehwag acted cheaper. All of us say that he is casual in meetings as well as his batting. But would either Sachin, Dravid or Laxman spoken like that?? he was the first to say that Randiv was deliberate and then all these hullaboos followed. Sachin never complained after 194, Dravid after Sydney test . Sehwag is simply a foul mouth and flat track bully and thinks too much of himself. I can still remember his comment" I was the one who could have won the match" when Inda was chasing a big total. After few months his form fell and he got dropped.

  • Elayaraja Muthuswamy on August 19, 2010, 21:10 GMT

    The no-ball bowled intentionally by Randiv to deny a hundred to Sehwag is very unsportive even though it is not illegal. Although, cricket is a gentleman's sport there are not many people who play it that way.

    There are a lot of people who wait for the umpires decision even though the know there was a thin edge.

    During the recent India Vs SA test series, Sehwag himself has kicked the ball to the boundary to deny strike to Amla. Is this a sportive behavior?

    During an Indo-Pak test game at Kotla, after the fall of 8th wicket Srinath and company bowled well outside off stump intentionally not to pick up a wicket.

    There are a number of exmaples of fielders (Aussies) claiming catches when they know well that the ball has been grounded.

    It will be better to play the game with the right spirit. Individal records and winning by any means should not be the primary goal.

  • Rhydhun on August 19, 2010, 21:06 GMT

    And yes i was a very happy man after losing that game bcoz i lost my guilt too. Till date I still hate the wicketkeeper for wat he did.

  • Rhydhun on August 19, 2010, 21:04 GMT

    I dont think its blown out of proportion. Its a good lesson for future players to follow. Players like Suraj Randiv, Dilshan and Sangakkara have tarnished the game. Sri Lanka lost the game and much worse respect of their fans. I myself am a huge fan of Dilshan and Sangakkara.

    Its a shame that a team resorts to such tactics to stop a player from scoring hundred. Its strangely coincidental that I faced a similar situation when bowling against a team, I managed to get batsman's nudge, but our wicketkeeper purposely dropped a simple catch and told me let these two players continue they are struggling to score runs. The next player was Sehwag of opposition's team and he didnt want him to play. I felt disgraced bcoz if you want to prove you are the best you better face the best and prove it.

    Well eventually the Batsman purposely stumped himself out and the Sehwag of their team scored 23 runs of 10 balls and yes our team lost the match despite bundling them out for 92 runs.

  • jayantha weerasinghe on August 19, 2010, 21:03 GMT

    I am not a Sri lankan, not an Indian either.But I watched cricket for more than 50 years.No balls,wides,short balls,full tosses are part of the game.Denying batsman runs is also part of the game as long as it is with in the rules. Mr.Sewag if you do not like the rules please find a different job.Or you can join the cry baby club with Mr. Srishanth. Sri lankan players please tender your apology to Mr. sewag every time you take his wicket or deny him a run.

  • Viola on August 19, 2010, 20:49 GMT

    Some posters on this blog have pointed out that the Indians are free to adopt similar tactics in the final, and lose, preferably to SL. OK, let's see another scenario. The test match is headed for a draw surely, and Sangakkara is batting on 90 towards the end of a dull day 5. The opposition sends down a series of wides until the game is called. How's that for humor?

  • Viola on August 19, 2010, 20:47 GMT

    OK, to those who point out that Randiv/Dilshan have pushed SL's NRR an iota in their favor by denying five more runs: shall we condone a team that has already qualified for the next round, from throwing a match to manipulate their future opponent? Why doesn't SL try this in the next World Cup?

    Let's now give Dilshan the benefit of the doubt, and accept that he and Sangakkara were unaware that runs off the bat would not count. The best-case scenario (from their perspective) is a no-ball that Sehwag misses. However, this very act increases India's score by 1 and maintains the same number of deliveries sent down. So the NRR still moves fractionally in favor of India. The argument of limiting the NRR damage is thus flawed.

    Randiv already sent down two dot balls. Would SL not have been better served by a few more such dot balls to prolong the inevitable and reduce the NRR gap?!

  • saurabh jha on August 19, 2010, 19:10 GMT

    Just the number of responses to this article explains how connected cricket lovers are with this issue. Media is smart to encash on them and they did so, successfully. As of Sehwag, he surely deserved a ton - no doubt - but the manner in which it was denied was a serious matter of concern. A senior team member instigating his young bowler for the same. The spin bowler bowls with back foot touching the front crease - good enough for Boycott's mom to figure out what was going on and hence spirit of cricket straightaway comes in place and was well exercised by SLC. Extent of punishment can always be questioned but we all sitting on the fence can very easily collect data and start comparing with monkeygate or Sehwag kicking the ball to boundary or Dada or Tendlya being denied a century albeit each in different circumstances. But the truth lies in handling an individual case and set examples without comparing it with what happened in the past else it will keep coming up time and again.

  • deen on August 19, 2010, 18:59 GMT

    I am a Sri Lankan and I neither agree with Sambit nor lot of the comments made by fans. Randiv and Dilshan deserve this punishment as their action is delebrate and we don't like an incident of this calibre repeated forthwith. This is nothing to do with how rich the BCCI is and the question whether the SLC has bowed down to please their masters. This is utter rubbish and when your players are guilty by bringing down the spirit of the game, whom should you wait for? 99% of the Sri Lankan cricket fans agree whole heartedly with the SLC for the punishment met out to Dilshan and Randiv. Howcome, you could say these guys have played cricket at the apex level when you cannot tolerate a century from your opponent. We as a nation are not so cheap to the level of what one or two individual does in the playing field. I owe an apology to Shewag for what Randiv has done and non of these cricketers should be given any responsibility hence forth.

  • Atif Mahmud on August 19, 2010, 18:26 GMT

    Sir,

    With all due respect, I, personally support the buzz about this incident. Just put yourself in Viru's shoes. Working so hard, hitting a six and to find the boelwr overstepping. I think the action hurt Viru too- not only the frustration of a missed hundred. Viru might have forgven Randiv, but I still think it was a cheap thing to do.

  • Anonymous on August 19, 2010, 17:53 GMT

    Cricket is one of the few games of statistics. Why else on earth would you care about Sachin's 100 100s or who is trying to catch up or averages? You don't see this in Soccer or Tennis or any other sport.

    It allows for a fascinating contest between individuals within a team game, just like baseball does. To be only fair, the runs need awarded to the batsman. When a batsman runs to the other end in the quest of making the only run required while the ball has limped its way to the boundary, the batsman and the team are awarded 4 and not just the single. Chasing 280 a team can make up to 285. So why should this be different?

    Because its an instinctive game, an umpire cannot declare the game dead once no-balled and take the bails off as if the contest is over. Then why not treat the game alive until the ball is dead?

    Its not Randiv's fault but the rules of cricket. Instead of commending SL for taking action, ICC should loo at itself. SRT's 96 at cuttack is not an appropriate comparison

  • avi on August 19, 2010, 17:46 GMT

    wouldn't anyone do the same thing that Randiv did? I would bowl 5 wides if I knew we would lose the match and the batsman would score a century ...it is perfectly within the rules of the game

    this is just BCCI being a cry baby

  • Rama Iyer on August 19, 2010, 17:39 GMT

    Sambit although a nicely written article you seem to always have something against the Indian players. If a Indian player had done this you would have written a article describing it as if Cricket is dying a horrible death.

  • SM on August 19, 2010, 17:26 GMT

    The Sri Lankan team was set to get a bad reputation for unfair play, and quite deservedly so. The SLC board's timely action affirmed that they value fair play and protected the team from such a reputation.

  • kamal on August 19, 2010, 16:33 GMT

    Sri lanka Cricket board penalised Randiv with 1 match suspension for unsporting spirit and let Dilshan and Sangakara with mild penalty and warning. Don't you think Randiv was just a scapegoat and more severe penalty should have been handed to the captain and the senior player 'Dilshan'. As one instructed him loudly from cover point and captain didn't refrain or object and thus gave his approval. Furthermore he was part of the same tactics just 6 months back when he instructed malinga to bowl super wide delivery to prevent sachin tendulkar's century at Cuttack. I think major fault lied with skipper and senior player. Young randiv was just a pawn used by them.

  • Duv on August 19, 2010, 16:27 GMT

    Dilshan must be punished. There is nothing wrong with shewag's incident against southafrica because they wanted a wicket to win.. so he did 4 his team.. but here there is no chance of winning the game 4 SL but they dint want shewag 2 get 100. ths s uncharacheristic of SL players as ths is not the first time they did like ths.If u r a brave cricketer u should have taken shewag's wicket. VERY POOR CRICKET FROM SRILANKA.

  • Anonymous on August 19, 2010, 16:27 GMT

    Dilshan must be punished. There is nothing wrong with shewag's incident against southafrica because they wanted a wicket to win.. so he did 4 his team.. but here there is no chance of winning the game 4 SL but they dint want shewag 2 get 100. ths s uncharacheristic of SL players as ths is not the first time they did like ths.If u r a brave cricketer u should have taken shewag's wicket. VERY POOR CRICKET FROM SRILANKA.

  • Saif Qazi on August 19, 2010, 16:03 GMT

    if ne1 cud do a favour of recallin wat happened a few months back wen Sehwag did the same sort of a thin by kickin the ball to the boundary, i wud say, deliberately to avoid the set regular batsman from takin the strike. does nebdy remember that? that was against the spirit, bt did anythin happen at that stage? nuthin.. absolutely nuthin!! boundary was overturnd n 5runs penalty was handed to the team. Randiv's act was against the spirit, wat followed was jus nonsense from every1, as Sambit puts it, blown outta proportion. n for Sehwag, thoh he has accepted the apology bt he did express his displeasure at wat Randiv did. so for Sehwag, wat goes around cums around. he shudnt had complained in the 1st place.. cheers:)

  • Dudley Hemachandra on August 19, 2010, 15:52 GMT

    All the comments regarding this matter is educational. People make mistake. They should learn from the mistakes. We'll give some time to Randiv. He'll be ok in the near future. We should have a good relationship with all the nations who plays cricket. There are some differneces among the players attitudes. There are many incidents happens during past times mathes all over the world. Also these things happens, when you are under pressure. For the spirit of the game, everybody should take the responsibilty for what they do.

  • Crick on August 19, 2010, 15:35 GMT

    Well said Sambit......!!!

  • Vineesh Vedsen on August 19, 2010, 15:30 GMT

    For all those who say that issue blown out of proportion, had India done this, then we would have seen their reaction.

    We Indians in general would continue to be cowards and not stand up for ourselves. We also like people who are cowards and suffer at the hands of rivals.

  • swet on August 19, 2010, 15:26 GMT

    Exactely, If somebody commits crime should be punished..so that crime doesn't happen again.....that's the law.....and should be followed strictely.

  • Amjad Afridi on August 19, 2010, 15:11 GMT

    i just have a question. please do help me out with this.because its hard for me to understand after what happened and whats still going on with the banning players.i have played cricket for a country called Qatar ( national level. under 19 and senior team).but enever in my 11 years of playing time i heard about any complains that a bolwer cannot bowl a no-ball or wide or legbyes when a batsman is on 99? why is that illegal?or is it illegal?didn the australlain bowl an UNDER ARM last ball if we look back? so what is the fuss about it or is it really illegal?

  • SaxAndViolins on August 19, 2010, 15:11 GMT

    Among recent events, I cannot think of a more unsporting decision than Murali's pre-determined call to retire after the first test. Come on, if he had it in him to get the 8 needed to reach a selfish, personal milestone, the least he could have done was to stick around and win the series for the team. Under helpful local conditions, no less. I bet that he would have reneged and played the second test (and the third, if needed) if he had not gotten to 800 in the first.

  • RCB_till_I_die on August 19, 2010, 14:17 GMT

    Mate...well written...but spare a thought for the kids watching the game...Would you like if your kid did what Randiv did ? No doubt there are a few cheats out there but those out on the field need to set an example for the next generation. A one match ban meted out sound right to me !

  • Terry Jones of Australia on August 19, 2010, 14:12 GMT

    After reading the article I think that India once again have abused their power over another cricket country to belittle and degrade the value of cricket. Srilanka should not have appoligised for a legatimate action. I have seen many teams INCLUDING INDIA do this on many occasions. Indian Cricket Board need to grow up and stop being big brother ruling with an iron fist over other countries. There is 105 cricket countries, lets make them all full members to stop this absurdity.

  • Asit Kumar Mohapatra on August 19, 2010, 13:48 GMT

    Its okay that the incident has been blown out of proportion but at the same a well deserved hundred for Sehwag was denied intentionally.Laws must come into force for such unspirited acts in cricket.A century is not an easy job and you do not get the century very often.Given the playing conditions and the situation that century would have a brilliant one and of par excellence.That can be judged from the strike rate.SLC has done a commendable job of giving Randiv a one match ban and please do not underplay such centuries.

  • Itchy on August 19, 2010, 13:47 GMT

    @Alok: Someone else may have made this comment (I'm not reading all 450 comments to confirm!) but Stuart Broad did not get off SCOT FREE as you suggested - he was fined which is in line with similar offences committed by others.

  • Karthik on August 19, 2010, 13:44 GMT

    I feel that the actions taken by SLC are not enough to punish the players involved. They should've banned Randiv and Dilshan for the whole series. Even Sanga should be a part of the ban.

    Anyone who spoils the spirit of cricket need to be dealt seriously by their board coz it brings bad name to their country.

  • ACE330 on August 19, 2010, 13:39 GMT

    Kudos to the Sri Lanka Board. They are attempting to correct what is a historical bad sportsmanship by some of their players. Incidents of this nature happened against Sourav Ganguly and Sachin Tendulkar before and now with Sehwag. Sangakkara cannot escape responsibility. The 4 byes was indeed part of this same deception.

    The entire team should have forfeited match fees not just Dilshan and Mohamad.

  • Prof. S. Das on August 19, 2010, 13:28 GMT

    I do not agree with Samit, on his views. If the ban was not in place, every other day there you would be a mischievous act (which you cannot predict, like the result of a cricket test match), and a public apology would come in place from the team management to move over to plan the next such heinous move. Every human makes a mistake – but deliberate acts planned by a few team members is not a mistake. Randiv is not doing a similar thing for the first time.

  • ss on August 19, 2010, 13:21 GMT

    Sambit, got ur pov. Now, WAITING FR MURALIDARAN'S COMMENTS ON THE ISSUE. WHY IS HE QUIET? :-P

  • Missaka on August 19, 2010, 13:17 GMT

    Lol....true is was wrong in a way to do that...To those who are making remarks at Murali 800th wicket ..India was loosing the game . If India preferred denying Murali his 800th wicket and loosing a Test match ..be my guest...better yet you can pull it off in a world cup final against Sri lanka (if fate allows it), when someone else is nearing a milestone..lol Although this is not in the spirit of the game...at least we can some people playing competitive cricket...why should the batsmen stay when clearly out.....haha...i don't remember anybody talking about Gilchrist using a squash ball to get a unfair advantage in the 2007 WC Final???? so grow up...and get on with the cricket

  • Shivram on August 19, 2010, 13:17 GMT

    I smell Submit was attracted by popularity he would gain from Sri lankan fan after writing this.

  • Lasantha on August 19, 2010, 13:15 GMT

    Being a Sri Lankan I was proud to see how Sri Lanka handled this matter. It is important for us to see our players playing the game in the correct spirit. Other Boards who defend their players for everything have something to learn from this.

  • Viola on August 19, 2010, 13:11 GMT

    I am sorry, but I do not see the relevance of Sehwag's boundary-kick against SA. If this is unsporting conduct, then a batsman who runs only a single off the last ball to retain strike (when two runs was easily possible) is equally guilty. I have seen only one other poster bring this point up, and I think it bears repeating.

    And what is this nonsense about Dravid being unsporting for declaring the innings with Tendulkar on 194? Again, relevance?

    The comments on this incident are largely of the knee-jerk variety. Sad that the fans are so trigger-happy as to not think things through before posting.

  • Anonymous on August 19, 2010, 13:08 GMT

    Why are only the cricketers being punished ??? Why not have a more professional team to revamp the Laws of cricket?

  • Vilander on August 19, 2010, 12:57 GMT

    Sehwag would not have wanted that 100 so badly that he would have wanted to cost gullible Randhiv and cunning dilshan their math fee and this humiliation. Havgin said this, hope Randhiv develops a rivalary with Sehwag and pune/kochi picks up dilshan to pit against DDD in IPL emuhaaahaha!

  • Yakub on August 19, 2010, 12:44 GMT

    Sambit Bal, this is a professional sport which involves $$$$$. It is not some little school cricket match where a dilibrate no ball is forgotten and we all move on to having our lunch. It has happend now and it can happen again tomorrow. It was a deliberate action in professional sport which cannot be taken lightly. If you were playing and in Shewag's position, you would be crying out as well as players play to score hundreds not get out on 99 and forgive and forget. Shweag was actually very easy going about this issue as some people would react angrily before even getting of the ground.

  • ashraf hassan on August 19, 2010, 12:44 GMT

    Randiv diserve what he got. He should have banned for 5 matches. Sangakara and Dilshan also should have punished. This is not the first time they are doing nasty things. They denied the centuary of Tendulkar by bowling a wide. Malinga was the culprit in the company of Sangakara. Had we taken the matter then, this would not have repeated. That incident did not blown up, because Tendulkar did not have the courge to talk. Why we should show sportmeanship to these craps. we should have denied Murli his 800 wicket and shown what induvidual achievment means to him. It is interesting to see how dishan play in the company of Shewag and Malinga with Tendular in the IPL.

  • Ramesh on August 19, 2010, 12:29 GMT

    i think this issue is really blown out of proportions. The action taken on Randhiv is not right. Though being a hardcore fan of Sehwag I still think it should have stopped as soon as the apology was made. Hope these things will not happen in future.

  • cricket fan on August 19, 2010, 12:21 GMT

    The only reason SLC went overboard (in suspending Randiv) is because of its financial dependency on the BCCI. If they were equally wealthy, things would have ended at an apology. Sri Lanka aren't a team of bad sporstmen. No batsman of any team is entitled to his fifty, his hundred, his double hundred or his fifteen minutes of fame. I think Viru forgot about that. By complaining, he showed that he felt he was entitled to his 100. Batsmen have been not-out on 98 and 99 and have not complained in the same way because cricket is a team sport, and team achievements are more important. Viru dragged the Indian team through this controversy because of his quest for personal glory! He should have said - alright, he's apologized, good man, sneaky trick - Randiv, let's get on with the game. Viru is older and wiser, and should have set an example by moving on! Instead, he egged on the press. Sportsmanship is a two-way street, Viru!

  • AC on August 19, 2010, 12:20 GMT

    I have one question which no one has answered satisfactorily. So a no ball was bowled. Why then, did this no ball count as a delivery to the batsman, as balls faced? The other problem with cricket is that the umpires have no clout. By this I mean that they have no discetion at their disposal. In say soccer, the referee makes a decision on the field of play based on his judgement. In rugby, a penalty try is awarded, if it is ruled (by a TV referee) if a try was deliberately prevented. Maybe in these instances, the umpire, if they believe a no ball is deliberate, should award a penalty run in favour of the batsman? All sports need to be dynamic and react to changes in the game, whether as a result of new technology or players behaviour. Afterall, under arm bowling was banned as a result of a legal delivery! Was it blown out of proportion? No. Has this been blown out of proportion? Not if it leads to changes in the way of offering fair play!

  • Francis, Kuwait on August 19, 2010, 12:18 GMT

    It is not what u say and what I say, the game of cricket is known as a gentleman's game. Well if Randhiv bowled a NO BALL and Sehwag failed to get his hundred... this incident has gone into the books of history and made Sehwag more famous than he would have been if he had scored his 13th century.......

    Best thing for cricket is both parties put the issue on the backburner and get on with cricket... Let's enjoy some good game.... But it should be a lesson for others who venture into such situations.

  • Vikas Kumar on August 19, 2010, 12:10 GMT

    For all the right reasons or the wrong ones ... the SLC has emerged victorious from this petty, school-field incident. They have shown their willingness to look into the incident and push the demand for fair play even stronger. I doubt if many would have been complaining if it was one of our Indian players doing the same "dishonourable" thing. Sehwag had enough time to score his century. MS Dhoni had enough time to realise that Sehwag was close to a century. But our MSD, the gentleman he is, chose to hog most of the strike for the last overs. I could say that MSD is slowly building up a reputation of denying fellow Indian players the strike when needed the most or when they happen to be close to a milestone. The rule was not changed for this match alone. So if Dilshan (185 matches) knew the rule and egged Randiv to use it, players such as Sehwag (225 matches and counting) should have known it better. Standard law states Ignorantia juris non excusat. So what are we arguing about?

  • Aditya on August 19, 2010, 12:07 GMT

    Is it just me or are cricketers ridiculously obsessed with centuries? I cannot think of any other even mildly popular spectator sport where getting to a milestone is given as much importance on such a regular basis

  • Raghavan on August 19, 2010, 12:05 GMT

    Can Sambit explain to be how the underarm bowling by Trevor Chappel was illegal at that time? He bowled it to a number 11 batsman who had no hope of hitting him for a six. It was unsporting and so it was condemned.

    What Randiv did was equally unsporting. He was advised to be advised to be unsportive by a senior member of the team. Legality is not in question here. Enough for SLC to be ashamed and apologetic. Sambit is trying to present another view to be noticed.

  • Dasith on August 19, 2010, 12:04 GMT

    Here is a differant side to the story. If Sehwag can kick the ball to the boundary to keep a batsman on strike and help his team; why can't Randiv help his team by not letting India get more than the required runs to win. The fact that India only scored the amount required and not more will reduce their NRR as oppose to Sehwag getting their by a six. (a 5 run differance) It would be funny if SL get into the final because of a 0.05 differance in NRR because it would be Randiv and Dilshan who SLC would have to thank.

  • Srini on August 19, 2010, 12:00 GMT

    When batsman doesn't walk he is denying bowler a wicket, and a wicket is much much more valuable than a run. Is every batsman owe an apology to bowler for not walking ? If there is something within the laws, it is permissible. And all these actions are deliberate.

  • Headbandnenator on August 19, 2010, 11:57 GMT

    In situations where the batsmen are running, and (say) a single is needed, you clearly cannot run a second one to add to the striker's tally once the winning total has been achieved. Equally, if the one needed is completed before the ball crosses the boundary, well tough, I guess, you get one not three, but the law is understandable. No balls for front foot or height infringements are a different matter, though.

    When Gower chucked deliberately to Martin Crowe in 1983, the upshot was that he kept the four runs he hit. This is sensible, as with the no ball law in place as it is, changes to most shot choices are not dictated by the call of no-ball. On this basis I fail to see why the law has been changed.

    Change the law back, I think, and this won't happen again.

  • sujata on August 19, 2010, 11:56 GMT

    Imagine if you are the batsman. Think of the excitement of scoring a 100. It's been a gruelling day. Everyone's on the edge of their seat. Some moments in cricket are relived and remembered for a long time. This is one of those. But then an opposition batsman and bowler decide it would be more fun to deny him the 100, y'now, just for kicks. Just because they can't digest his happiness. That is not cricket, period!

  • shreeeks on August 19, 2010, 11:44 GMT

    Agreed. How does one prove that it was deliberate? Very subjective and there cannot be a law and Randiv dint break any rule. Like the Aussies, he stretched it to the limit. "Petty on his part". He apologized later. Things got out of proportion with BCCI almost forcing SLC to act. SLC should have warned the player, end of story, but it acted tough. "Spineless". BCCI always latches on to minor issues and uses it weight. "Thats petty as well". People crying foul at BCCI do it because a cricketing board from 3rd world country is virtually ruling Intl cricket. "Not good".

    Outside all this, Randiv deserved to be punished for going against the spirit of a Gentlemen's game. And his punishment sets a precedence. "Good"

  • Francis, Kuwait on August 19, 2010, 11:43 GMT

    It is not what u say and what I say, the game of cricket is known as a gentleman's game. Well if Randhiv bowled a NO BALL and Sehwag failed to get his hundred... this incident has gone into the books of history and made Sehwag more famous than he would have been if he had scored his 13th century.......

    Best thing for cricket is both parties put the issue on the backburner and get on with cricket... Let's enjoy some good game.... But it should be a lesson for others who venture into such situations.

  • Tharaka on August 19, 2010, 11:41 GMT

    These Indians think that they r the lords in cricket. No action has been taken against Sharma for showing the bat to the umpire and that is breach of conduct. She wag, decepline ur team before talking abt the spirit

  • saurabh on August 19, 2010, 11:34 GMT

    Dear writer,

    I want to point out your attention to Body-Line series, even that was not illegal in terms of law book, or the famous under-arm bowling during chappel. so what you meant to say is that if something is not written in law book then its ok? You sound like a sick kid who just wants to write this for cheap publicity.

  • Victor Dossan on August 19, 2010, 11:28 GMT

    I totally agree with Sambit Bal. The action taken was totally unnecessary. It shows the weakness of the Sri Lankan Board acting like a slave to please the master.

  • Udaya on August 19, 2010, 11:27 GMT

    Randiv / Dilshan did very nasty activity in the field. This is very disappointed to all Indians. So please don't give any SL players to play in IPL. This message is for IPL selectors.

  • a medical student & a cricketer on August 19, 2010, 11:23 GMT

    agree to the article, poor randiv

  • winstan on August 19, 2010, 11:20 GMT

    Nobody gives you a hundred, you need to go get it.

    Randhiv's method off preventing it, although crude, was well within the laws of the game, and was about preventing a century being scored against his team, similar to a goalie trying to maintain a clean sheet.

    SLC's reaction was clearly to keep the BCCI happy, sigh... enough said there.

    But i have to say that i am most disappointed with Sangakkara, for letting two of his team mates take the fall for something that he also seemed aware of and endorsed at that moment.

    Looks like he is trying to compensate for his inability to win cricket matches, by focusing on fair play awards and eloquent interviews.

    Sanga is tactically a mess and does not seem to empower his players in the way his predecessor did. Wish Mahela was still captain.

  • faheer on August 19, 2010, 11:20 GMT

    i agree with u,but shewag shouldn't have done that,as suraj was a young cricketer and if the Indians are to speak about the spirit of the game,hve they forgotten that incident? in which shewag purposefully kicked the ball in the test against south Africa to deny Hashim Amla being on strike,isn't that a breach of the law?

  • Satakopan on August 19, 2010, 11:16 GMT

    Well written article. The whole issue is blown out of propotition. Anyhow, centuries doesn't matter to Sehwag. He can get it in the next game. May be it is a ploy to generate some interest into the 'one more' series ith Srilanka

  • Vasudevan on August 19, 2010, 11:14 GMT

    Truly, it is nice to see a simple take on the matter. What happened was perhaps not right, perhaps NOT CRICKET, but it was overhyped by the media. Randiv denied Sehwag, apologized later, you are right it should have ended there, I suppose the media needed a break from CWG or was it the other way round ?

  • nilsinilla on August 19, 2010, 11:05 GMT

    I totally agree with Sambit.Once Randiv had apologized Shewag the matter would ve been closed.But unfortunately the media likes to wind everyone up.Randiv did not break the rules of the game which may be different to the spirit of the game.

    There wasn't any need for the SLC to react the way they did.It seems that SLC is bankrupt and they only seems to be getting their income from the BCCI.This can be evident from the fact that, India is the only major team that have toured Sri Lanka to play too many pointless series against each other since 2008. When was the last time any other major test playing nation such as AUS or SA has toured Lanka?

    So my advise to SLC is that don't bend your back unnecessarily for your commercial purposes.If no one else other than India are not willing to tour Lanka then spend all your resources to the development of the game in this country.Then we may be able to attract other nations playing in here.

  • Cricket lover on August 19, 2010, 11:04 GMT

    Dude, you appologize when you do something wrong by mistake. Over here it was a deliberate action to not to let Shewag get to his century and if you don't take actions against such things then they are bond to happen again and again.

  • geoff on August 19, 2010, 10:46 GMT

    Cricket is supposed to be a " Gentleman's Game"! Not very gentleman like behavior from Randiv and Dilshan, but then again, their coach being an Australian, they learn from the best in the business..... get the drift?

  • P De Vas Gunawardena on August 19, 2010, 10:43 GMT

    It was a good tactic by Randiv & probably Dilshan. This shows that both these players had the presence of mind. No doubt Schewag played well and deserved that hundred. But what had been done as a Sri Lankan I would accept as a timely move. Sri Lanka Cricket had blown the incident out of proportion. There are far more important things administrators of SLC could do improve the game.

  • Siddharth on August 19, 2010, 10:28 GMT

    Sambit, excellent article. Unfortunately in today's 21st century any sort of controversy, be it as small as it maybe will bring big delight to the print and electronic media! These turn into sensational stories that at the end of the day contribute to the bottom line; it's shameful but then again the world is losing some of its morals. What's even more ironic is that the BCCI has said the matter is over; they didn't want to use this as an opportunity to create another storm because their puppets, the SLC, are being financed by them!

  • Aravind on August 19, 2010, 10:19 GMT

    Sambit,I agree it all went little overboard, but wat Randiv did is not good for d game. If you guys feel dat BCCI bossed over SLC to push the ban decision, I think they have used their power correctly. Indians are d crowd pullers and best in d business y shud we hv to be embarrassed by all cricketers 4m different countries(Indians always paid the price for the mistakes which they didn't do, hppnd on numerous occasions).Randiv desires this and also sanga should have to be banned too,he is a captain and keeper too. I am quite sure sanga made d poor guy to go for it! I think Randiv apologizing Sehwag is because of d pressure 4m SLC and not because he regretted the incident. Be it Srilank or any cricketers,spirit of d game should be maintained,if not follow it with dis type of decision.Stopping a batsman to get a century from 95 by bowling byes,a big no ball,come on Randiv u need to grow up 4m school level of cricket.Randiv play with ur talent (You have loads of it)and nt by being wicked!

  • R MAHADEV on August 19, 2010, 10:12 GMT

    Too much has been said into this episode. Best is to get on with the game. Nobody is perfect.

  • Somesh Marepallu on August 19, 2010, 10:10 GMT

    I disagree with Sambit. If a bowler bowls a no-ball deliberately with intent, how different is it than a batsman giving up his wicket deliberately? If a batsman did it, you would cry foul - calling the match a sham, and spectators being robbed of fair play. There is a role for ICC - the spirit of the game has been violated. I am sure if you look into ICC's archiac rules book, the word "sledging" or anything similar to it wont figure - but we all frown on it esp. the way which Australia made a science of it.

    Sambit always seems too utopian in his articles - maybe he in his grand utopian ways can trivialise this - but who's he to decide it for all of us

  • Gillbart on August 19, 2010, 10:05 GMT

    1. When a fielder DELIBERATELY pushes the ball beyond the boundary, the bowling team is penalised by awarding the batting team with 5 runs whether the batting team wins or not by then. One solid example for this is the second test match against South Africa in Calcutta, 2010.

    2. Randiv has DELIBERATELY over-stepped the crease inorderto increase the batting team's score by one run so that the match would get over. Considering the act of DELIBERACY, in my opinion, the bowling team should get penalised by awarding the batting team with as many runs that are scored by the batsman.

    3. After all, when a bowler no-balls, it is included in the number of balls faced by the batsman. When a no-ball is included in the tally of number of balls, the number of runs scored is also supposed to be included.

    4. True, the match has been won before the six, but the ball is still NOT yet dead.

    I therefore request the ICC to look into it & do justice by adding those 6 runs to Sehwag's score.

  • Vidhyesh on August 19, 2010, 10:03 GMT

    I agree it was blown out of proportion.. But as it stands , although we are in the age of the professionals, the very traditions of the game must be intact.. A gentleman's game.. you play to win but you must lose graciously.. no one likes to lose I agree but if the no ball is deliberate, then its rather appalling.. why have the rules remained as such? but how can you impose a rule on an essential value, one needs to have, of the game?

  • T.Suresh Kumar on August 19, 2010, 10:00 GMT

    You are partial towards SL..if its otherway round, then you would not have commented like this..u better go and be in SL ..Randiv should be banned for life...

  • Sandeep on August 19, 2010, 9:59 GMT

    This shows how incapable the media is. Is this the first time Indian team has been at the receiving end? Or is this the first time any team has tried to look beyond the laws. One can dig out many such controversies every time Australia plays a match. They have done everything to spoil the spirit of the same & make mockery of the ICC code of conduct. Randiv's no ball is nothing compared to what happened to India in Sydney when 8 ridiculous decisions were made against them. India would have made history if they had won that game. What difference has this no ball made to Indian team? Just goes to show how weak our media is. Had this no ball been bowled by an australian bowler, our own media would have popularized it as "Aussie attitude".

  • Vid on August 19, 2010, 9:59 GMT

    When Murali was on 799, and India was 9 wickets down in the second innings, what if any of the Indian batsman had deliberately got out to the bowler at the end to deny Murali his 800th wicket.

    What happened was wrong and the SL players deserve from slack for it !! They have been silent violators of the spirit for too long. Time they got pulled up

  • Kumar R on August 19, 2010, 9:56 GMT

    Sambit a great point ,but don't get befuddled if one day india bans our own player because of denying sachin a century when india needed 1 to win & the batsman opposite to sachin hit 4 runs and india won.they will say it was deliberate and the indian batsman would be punished and may never the game again.

    it is how we indians follow the game.it has really gone overboard.since we are the financial powerhouse we think we can make eveything can happen.

    i have seen many times pakistani bowl wides when india need a run to win.we dont worry about that but we are worried since a century has been denied .it once again show how we play for records rather than games.

    but at the same moment i would like to applaud slc for taking such an action.poor what can they do ,they want to schedule another series with india in the same year.

  • vas on August 19, 2010, 9:56 GMT

    100 takes long time to achieve and the batsmen get most of their 100s in the latter part of the innings. If Randiv incident is allowed to go unpunished other bowlers will do the same in similar circumstances.Where will it end? They will start throwing wides and no balls when the batsman reaches 95,94......90? SLC done the right thing giving Randivi one match ban.

  • Masthan Ahamed S on August 19, 2010, 9:50 GMT

    The article is exactly correct. Our Indian media is not reacting its reacting overly. We have to appreciate Srilankan Cricket Board for their nice way of actions even no one from India complaint the same. Nowadays News channels are not doing their business, they doing investigations & more importantly if that channel beleive 1 is wrong, they will be on that same way till the shows end. even in discussions also they wil stick to that. Its completely adamant. 1 has to remeber, that Our Nation India and the government has given lot of freedom to Media, But they using like they are the leaders. I just wanna say Give News not decisions took by you already in the room.

    Thanks!!! hope any 1 will accept my view.

  • jairaj on August 19, 2010, 9:50 GMT

    sambit, sorry for my comments asking if you ever were on 99, on hindsight it was in the heat of the moment and in very poor taste. sincere apologies.

  • thianavi on August 19, 2010, 9:44 GMT

    This is well written article. Thanks!

  • Dan on August 19, 2010, 9:37 GMT

    Sambit these issues are small and petty but they are also issues that the fundamental to what cricket should be about. As an Australian I do not support the Australian team because of the way they play the game - ie they will break the spirit of the game and stretch the rules to breaking point just to win.

    Cricket is one of the few games in the world where winning isn't everything. The fact there can be draws (and ties) in test cricket sums up the fundamental truth of cricket that it is how the game is played that is important not necessarily the result.

    Batsmen should walk when they edge it. Fielders should not appeal when they don't catch it cleanly. Keepers should only appeal when they think it is out. In this context the SL players conduct was against the spirit of the game and the strong response from the SL authorities is to be applauded.

  • Ashutosh Kumar Singh on August 19, 2010, 9:36 GMT

    I want to ask ICC to change the rule.If ball is counted then run should be credited in the account of batsman. If so ICC is wrong in making the rules and the rule should be got back immediately.

  • Alok on August 19, 2010, 9:31 GMT

    I think losing with grace is an important part of the spirit of cricket and these days fines mean nothing, so SLC was probably justified on that account. I think Stuart Broad should also have been banned for his ball-throwing incident but he gets off scot free ALL THE TIME!

    Blaming the laws is a red herring here. Sri Lanka knew the laws very well and even if the law was slightly different, Randiv would have been told to bowl 4 wides out of Sehwag's reach. The point here being this deliberately petty behaviour does no one any favour and the sooner it stops the better.

  • knack of flying on August 19, 2010, 9:30 GMT

    Yeah,right ... Next time onwards, Sehwag should gift a century to the Lankans, (Purposely get out on 99) since, Gandhiji said, when somebody slaps you on one cheek, you should present the other.

  • veeresh on August 19, 2010, 9:26 GMT

    evarage... sambit! comments are very good!! poor randiv!!!!

  • Sri on August 19, 2010, 9:13 GMT

    I am not sure that Sehwag or BCCI really blew this out of proportion. I am sure that the players concerned were completely satisfied once there were apologies, but no one expected the SLC to take such stringent action against Randiv and Dilshan - maybe the "spirit of the game" award matters that much to SLC and it found it a good idea to make this incident an example. If so, kudos to the SLC. As an Indian, I feel that match suspensions and withheld fees were not warranted for a incident such as this, but if this is a warning to professional cricketers all over, it is not that big a price to pay!

  • Dr. Arun Dua on August 19, 2010, 8:55 GMT

    Do not agree with Sambit that it has been given out of proportion importance.It is indeed a serious matter with very poor spirit shown by Sri Lanka's Randiv,Dilshan and Sangkarra. Senior pro Dilshan has gone free cheaply,as he has suggested Randiv to such a Bowl.If such things are happening regularly but not caught due to insufficient data, such caught thing should rightly be projected as serious to deter.

  • rahul on August 19, 2010, 8:54 GMT

    shewag i think had forget the incident when he itself played against the spirit of the game it was the incident of the second testmatch between S.A&india in2010 series when the last pair amla and morkel was playing and there was just 4-5 overs left in a testmatch and india need just 1 wicket to win amla had pushed the last ball of over for single towards shewag but shewag pushed that ball towards the boundry with his leg in order to deny amla to retain strike for the next single but the umpire criticised that effort of shewag and considered runs as 4 run and also make sure that amla retain the strike for the next over

  • Sandeep on August 19, 2010, 8:43 GMT

    what I feel is that even Dilshan should have said sorry to sehwag because dilshan is the person who gave Randiv the idea to bowl a no ball. Dilshan didnt say sorry! Shhh!! Nowadays players stoop this low to get their way!!

  • Ajay on August 19, 2010, 8:39 GMT

    I agree that the batsmen don't walk even when they know that they are out; bowlers appeal even when they know the batsman is not out. But all this has been happening for years and unfortunately nobody protested when it happened for the first time. Also, the subjectivity comes in as at times even the batsmen don't know if they are out or the bowlers don't know if the batsman is out or not.

    But the recent Randiv's incidence is a clear instance of deliberate denial of century to Sehwag against the spirit of the game and has happened for the first time and it should be treated the way it has been by the SL Board. This will make sure that it doesn't happen in the future.

    Allowing another new mistake would not correct all the previous mistakes happening in the game. It would just add another mistake.

  • Kris on August 19, 2010, 8:34 GMT

    It's not Sehwag, as we know him, it is not the boards. I do not think BCCI will give SLC money to do this kind of stuff. This smells marketing. The England - Pakistan test matches have generated more interest than this triangular. The tournament needed something to boost the numbers. I am thinking, the ad slots for the next SL - India game will be a bit more expensive?

  • ram sharma on August 19, 2010, 8:32 GMT

    Randiv didnot break the law,it is legitimate to bowl a no ball,whats wrong with that?completing sahwags century is not his responsibility!!!!i will say its over reaction from media and SLC board.....very unfortunate indeed!!!!!!!

  • straightedge on August 19, 2010, 8:32 GMT

    It was the right thing to punish Randiv for his actions. He is a bright young cricketer and is sure to go a long way in his career. But if he got a reprieve here, this might have been the beginning of worse things in the future when he will not be shy of repeating such actions and it is also a message for all other young cricketers in the world. Hopefully he will learn from this incident and become a better sportsman. Some have mentioned about Sehwag kicked the ball to boundary against SA.Well dats true but dat was for team reasons india needed to get th last man morkel on strike for full over. the lankans doesnt seem to like what Sehwag has been achieving in his career. Well, for the record, we Indians felt as happy as you when Murali got his 800

  • Ananda on August 19, 2010, 8:29 GMT

    1. Remember Indians' behaviour in Australia and the BCCI behaviour in defending these players, bullying Cricket Australia. 2. Remember Harbajan slapping his partner in crime Sreesanth ? 3. Remember Sehwag kicking the ball to the boundary, denying Amla of strike ? .... .... The list goes on. SLC has taken decisive action so quickly.

  • kunal kant on August 19, 2010, 8:26 GMT

    ya, the article is nicely poised ,but things are not like this in practical, if somebody made the mistake either by mistake or deliberately;he must be punished!saying sorry after committing mistake is not a final solution.in future these things may lead as a trend. and if the test cricket playing countries will behave like this then who will think about the goodwill of cricket..at least to the one-day, which is already in trouble because of t-20. so these things shouldn't be ignored.

  • dumindu on August 19, 2010, 8:24 GMT

    i guess by these standards a batsman should go & apologize for not walking when he knew he was out because he denied the bowler a wicket didn't he? it was a breach of spirit of cricket but not the law hence randiv shouldn't have been punished. Indians are the ones to complain when they are 1 of the most arrogant teams in world cricket today with no spirit of cricket in themselves.

  • Sourav Kumar on August 19, 2010, 8:16 GMT

    I can think of one thing based on how important to respect the seniors to survive in a team. If Dilshan did request to ball a no ball, poor Randiv would have had no choice? (this can be seen on his facial impressions). So why did SLC only punishing Randiv? why not Dilshan??? I think Randiv was compelled to follow Dili's instructions

  • pradeep on August 19, 2010, 8:15 GMT

    But I salute you Sambit at your talent for writing such pieces. I wish I could articulate at 10% rate.

    Enjoyed how you put it.

  • yashy on August 19, 2010, 8:14 GMT

    See Indian fans and players are really unpredictable,when their team were loosing matches and the times their players were out of form this same fans were really criticized themselves and pointed out each player and hammered their reputations.when indian team winning matches their fans were over joyed and admire them like nothing,but when they are loosing same fans criticized them,this is so funny,now they are crying over shewag missing century,how poor they are..I dont need to remember attitude of ''Srishanth''..it was disgusting,remember IPL season 1,same team mates had a fight,one was started to crying,(mumbai Indians),if indian team was lost the matche on that day,wow we could have seen indian fan comments here..but we srilankans never criticized our players even though we won or lost,..even ''shewag'' also couldnt bare his missing century,coz he wanted it so badly..coz he is not a gentlemen cricket,if he is gentlemen there wouldnt have any argument...this is the way of cricket,

  • dicarry on August 19, 2010, 8:12 GMT

    Samit Bal, I can't agree with you. Sri lankans have been at this for some time. Some harsh measures will certainly make them and other teams, including India, to think twice before making such un sportsman-like moves. How different is this from the underarm bowling instruction by Chappel? The results are similar.. denying a Win or denying a personal milestone. If you still believe that this is a gentleman's game unlike football etc, then such incidents should be treated with some harshness. Actually I would have liked to see Dilshan, the senior player, getting a one match ban and the young bowler let off with a fine. k s sreeharsha asks 'what if there was a need for one run for victory and the batsman run the run but a no ball was declared. Does that constiture a draw?' I don't get this, that one run from no ball makes it a win, doesn't it Sreeharsha?

  • ramanujam sridhar on August 19, 2010, 8:10 GMT

    Nice piece Sambit. I agree with one of the readers who reminds us that cricket is a team sport and the Indian fixation with individual records is perhaps apparent by Sehawag"s angry reaction.But what was worse was the needless capitulation of the SriLankan board. Yes what ranadiv did was unacceptable. But a one match ban? Even as Stuart Broad hurls the ball at a Pakistani batsman and just loses fifty per cent of his match fee! I"d like him to do that against ricky Ponting next winter. I still yearn for the old days when this would have been easily resolved by going over to the opponents change room after the game for a drink. Yes players will do crazy things in the heat of the moment. I read about Steve Harmison wishing he had gone up to Ponting to check about his welfare after hurting him with his bouncer. Players will be players. They don"t need the media to blow things out of proportion and fans to impart nationalistic hues to acts done injudiciously Let sleeping dogs lie! sridhar

  • GIRISH REKNAR on August 19, 2010, 8:09 GMT

    Hi All

    I GUESS IT IS THE LOVE FOR SEHWAG than anything else... However, in SPORTS there should not be such thing called SPIRIT because it is FUN to be mean, atleast for us the audience.

    On the other hand, SEHWAG is a HONEST man who speaks his mind and UPSET about it which is understandable.

    End of the day, I prefer FEISTY MEAN sports like all other sports like soccer, hockey etc...

  • Kishan Murari on August 19, 2010, 8:07 GMT

    There is a difference between what Sehwag did against South Africa and what Randiv did. Sehwag kicked the ball to the boundary to get the other batsman on strike, which was to help his team win the match. It is just like a batsman may hit the ball close to the boundary but refuse to take a run to preserve strike. Did Randiv's action help his team in any way? Would Randiv have bowled that no-ball if the batsman facing was not so close to a century?

  • Arun on August 19, 2010, 8:04 GMT

    I am baffled by Sambit Bal's comments. I wonder what is Cricinfo's main objective? Deliberately done and instigated by a fellow cricketer - Everyone should keep quiet and accept the formality sake apology. Hello Mr Sambit, do you think Mr. No Ball really felt for his conduct. I think there should be a code of conduct for Cricinfo editors too. I know this comment won't be published either. if you guys are really open and give respect to public opinions, publish my comment.

  • I D Raju on August 19, 2010, 8:01 GMT

    Well- The matter needs to be buried and one need's to move on. These are incidents that do occur even at professional level. The matter needs to be put to rest.

  • mahen on August 19, 2010, 8:01 GMT

    How many times Sehwag stayed at the crease simply because the umpire did not rule him out after getting caught or when there is plump LBW? Well if go back to so the history once can find a lot, BCCI chickening out with regard to review of umpiring decisions, all these also attribute to disrespect to sprite of the game. I am not justifying Randiv's action, but in my opinion he has played his game within the rules and regulations set by the game, there were many bowlers bowl to the leg side to prevent batsmen scoring a hundred, there were instances teams end up losing matches to ensure a weaker side for the final, and like this we can go on and on. However, this episode brought out the level of hypocrisy among fans, media, and cricket boards. As far as the incident was concerned, only now the sprite of the game has gone to sadly to dogs.

  • P Subrmani on August 19, 2010, 7:59 GMT

    I agree that this no ball business has been blown out of proportion but certain things need to be pointed out. Randiv is a youngster who is indeed making a mark at the highest level. It is highly unlikely that he would have done what he did suo moto.There is nothing that he would have lost if Sehwag got a hundered because he had batted,bowled and fielded exceptionally well. While the SLC has done much to assuage Indian feelings, it must be said that in penalising Randiv and castigating Dilshan, they seem to be wanting to gloss over the role of Sangakarra in all this. The Ahmedabad Test between India and Sri Lanka in 2009 was headed for a draw.Tendulkar was heading towards a well deserved century. Sangakarra seemed pretty unhappy about it though and it was there for all to see. I am only bringing out the normal attitude of Kumar Sangakarra. In Dambulla he seems to have run true to type. I feel he was behind this sorry no ball episode. It could not have happened otherwise.

  • Simon on August 19, 2010, 7:55 GMT

    suspension is over the top. even stuart broad didn't get suspended, if that had been dilhara throwing the ball at an indian, no doubt he would be suspended. and i very much doubt the 4 byes was a spiteful move by sanga, he really isn't a cheat

  • Mfareeduddin on August 19, 2010, 7:51 GMT

    One of the finest article I came across in some time where cricket is being considered over contraversies

  • sreekanth on August 19, 2010, 7:49 GMT

    Mr Sambit,The spirit of the game is of paramount importance and Randiv deserves one match suspesion.I hope you watch the match before you comment.

  • anuj on August 19, 2010, 7:35 GMT

    sportsmanship is important, but this sort of behaviour where the match was deliberately thrown (the winning run was gifted to India, even if victory was a formality) has other serious implications - match fixing and betting are a scourge and am sure there would have been bets on Sehwag making a century/ scoring a six to get there or even the match finishing in a particular over. Randiv is probably too new to realise all this, but in future rules must be in place to ensure no manipulation.

  • Jegan on August 19, 2010, 7:35 GMT

    Thanks evryone for suporting shevag....

  • Vamsi Krishna on August 19, 2010, 7:06 GMT

    Don't think that media has exagerrated this issue more than the needed. The issue has come up live hence it took that importance, if it was a thought of your or mine without it being happened on ground it would not have been in the news. Such incidents give us to think about the spirit of the game and even the ICC to change the things which can be avoided before they happen.Even we have the players who started walking out if they are caught behind the stumps, winning and losing is the ultimate thing which happens on any given day, however the circumstances which come up are the things which get reflected in our thoughts and mind. At the end of the day few days later we may forget who the bowler who did this and who the bats men was but not the incident. Hope this will a eye opener to the players too in a gentle men game not to do the same going forward.

  • siva on August 19, 2010, 7:05 GMT

    its a great decision to leave randiv , mr randiv you will not forget the no-ball which is going to change your entire life ,you will not be spared even by our ishant hereafter. you will lose your place becoz of your poot attitude.

  • satya on August 19, 2010, 7:03 GMT

    The bottom line one should learn is "DONT TAKE MEDIA SERIOUSLY".

    If both BCCI and SLC came up with a statement saying the issue is over when Randiv said his apology then things wouldn't have turned this bad for the young man. Anyway, the blame should be on ICC for putting such petty rules. or naughty rules ;)

  • Kris on August 19, 2010, 7:02 GMT

    Some people are asking why Shewag was slow in scoring a century without knowing facts about the match. The required un was only 171 and India was loosing wicket on another side. When Shewag was in 99 India required 5 runs and not 1. But Sangakara failed (intentionally?) to collect one ball which resulted in 4 byes. Many times Sri Lankans have done this to other batsmen. Once Jayasuria collected the ball with his left hand and hit the stumps with his right hand to run out Tendulkar. Umpire also did not ask for third umpire decision. In the recent test matches and one-days how many appeals were made by Sri Lankans with Marlon Brando expressions.

  • subsrao on August 19, 2010, 7:01 GMT

    Yes Mr Bal you have some genuinine points but only thing - the media hyped it. Not Sehwag or the Indian Team Management. Cricket is a gentlemans's game and it is the responsiblity of the respective Boards to ensure that it stays so. So I feel what SLC has done is the right thing to do. They should be applauded for it rather than critisize it. Not many Boards would have done it.

  • Chintaka on August 19, 2010, 7:01 GMT

    Being a Sri Lankan i'm ok with what SLC has dished out so incidents like this will not re-occour even though not braking any laws of the game. If I was SLC I would have punished the Captain and no one else.

    Also, Sanga, stop your gab and start playing cricket. We are not Australian for god sake to get under the skin of oponents!! Specially oponents who assist us in our hour of need when our baord is bankrupt

  • satya on August 19, 2010, 7:00 GMT

    The bottom line one should learn is "DONT TAKE MEDIA SERIOUSLY".

    If both BCCI and SLC came up with a statement saying the issue is over when Randiv said his apology then things wouldn't have turned this bad for the young man. Anyway, the blame should be on ICC for putting such petty rules. or naughty rules ;)

  • Ankit Vohra on August 19, 2010, 6:59 GMT

    One wonders if Dilshan has plans to continue with the Delhi Daredevils...with such hospitable behaviour towards his ex-captain and senior teammate!

  • Mustafa Shaikh on August 19, 2010, 6:57 GMT

    Nicely written article, I also personally think that the bowler had already appologised no need of punishing him as there he had not broken any rules. But there should be change in the rule.

  • ha! on August 19, 2010, 6:57 GMT

    Game and its spirit! Wah! What about Sehwag's century? Mr Bal if you are not paid for what you write, and a simple 'sorry' is the answer, will it satisfy you? No. Till you are paid what is due to you. It is easy for others to say, but it was pure 'cheating'. When the batsman's score off a 'no ball' counts, how does it matter whether the scores were level or not.

    As regards the spirit of the game, it was due to the lack of it that gave Anil Kumble his ten wickets, and the way Aravinda was trapped by Srinath, was also not in the spirit of the game.

  • Dilcricker on August 19, 2010, 6:56 GMT

    well said ...

  • Jai on August 19, 2010, 6:53 GMT

    Excellently written article. But I have to disagree with Sambit's opinion. The rule that ' the ball is counted and that the batsman gets no runs if the game has been won' makes no sense. Granted that the not all rules are perfect. But only when things like these come into limelight do officials actually look into changing or atleast arguing the pro's and con's of these rules. What better time to rewrite the rule than now? These are the facts- (1) Sehwag not only deserves a century, he probably got the century. (2) Suraj, Dilshan, and Kumar made a mockery of the game by twisting the rules. (3) The rest is history.

    Its high time the law makers change this weird rule and grant Sehwag a century. Suraj and Dilshan deserve a bigger punishment than the one given to them. Kumar needs a stern warning that as a captain he should keep the integrity of the game, This will deter any future tampering of the laws serve as a lesson to all.

  • Arun Kumar on August 19, 2010, 6:47 GMT

    I remember a test match where shewag kicked a ball to four on the last ball of an over to bring the tailender to strike the next over, not only did the umpire gave 5 runs on that ball and allowed the well set batsman to come to strike the next over but also shewag was fined half his match fee. no body blamed media or ICC for being too harsh on shewag bcos he did not break any rule, it was just the spirit of the game, no Indian player protested the decission.

    so i think it is applicable to all the players Even if they are not from INDIAN team, i feel SLC was correct in banning Randiv for a match

  • S.Rajan on August 19, 2010, 6:46 GMT

    The whole thing was riculus and stupid. Shewag is an ordinary batsman who could not score a single run to complete his century.He had ample chances. The is no rule and condition that he cas to complete the 100 in the fourth ball of that Randiv's over. This is how the Indian media twist and play all the issues to make money. O.K. this guy could not score a 100 so what the sky is falling down. Shamelessly this fellow accusing that baller for what. He deserves to be denied in my opinion.

  • Anonymous on August 19, 2010, 6:46 GMT

    Play Cricket-just move on

  • sri on August 19, 2010, 6:43 GMT

    The Sri Lankan cricket Board getting involved to this overblown extent shows how much they are dependent on the BCCI for handouts in order to survive and continue to enjoy their personal perks !!

  • abdul basheer on August 19, 2010, 6:41 GMT

    well balanced article. i feel the runs scored by the bat should be credited first,then the no ball. this will avoid such scenario in the future.

  • S.Rajan on August 19, 2010, 6:41 GMT

    The whole thing was riculus and stupid. Shewag is an ordinary batsman who could not score a single run to complete his century.He had ample chances. The is no rule and condition that he cas to complete the 100 in the fourth ball of that Randiv's over. This is how the Indian media twist and play all the issues to make money. O.K. this guy could not score a 100 so what the sky is falling down. Shamelessly this fellow accusing that baller for what. He deserves to be denied in my opinion.

  • rob on August 19, 2010, 6:38 GMT

    totally disagree, spirit has been breached intensionally and so clearly that it can be proved. SLC did a great job taking matter in their hand irrespective of Viru accepting apology. Cricket is a gentleman game and lets at-least try to keep it that way. Good job SLC.

  • Anand on August 19, 2010, 6:36 GMT

    Finally, someone has put things in perspective! Exactly my opinion! Get on with the game.

  • Chinthakaw on August 19, 2010, 6:36 GMT

    I think SL board bent over backwards to please the BCCI. BCCI refused to accept UDRS knowing well there batsman dont walk even if they are realy out. Last time when India played in SL there were so many bat pads catches and behind the wicket catches that batsmen knew they were out but they did not walk. In other words bowlers were denied legitimate wickets. Where is the spirit of the game then from Shehwag and company. They refused to accept UDRS knowing jolly well they can get away with it this time in SL, shown by there miraculous escape 1-1 when the best team undoudtedly was Sri Lanka.Sri Lanka deserved to win. No ball issue is a small matter when compared with the refusal to accept UDRS by indian players including the so called 'master' Tendulkar where he was at the receiving end of many decision reveiws during last SL india series using UDRS.

  • D C V Mallik on August 19, 2010, 6:33 GMT

    I disagree with Mr Bal that the matter has been blown out of proportions. I am glad that the Sri Lankan Board acted fast and wisely. Randiv's no-ball has acquired a permanent notorierty and the video-replays of it will rankle the sensibilities of future generations of players for years to come. In cricket the spirit with which the game is played is of paramount importance and it should never be undermined.

  • Mano on August 19, 2010, 6:25 GMT

    As a Srilanakan I am ashamed of what has happened . Sehwag was denied his century by a unethical, unsporting act ....instigated by Dilshan …executed by Randiv. They both have brought disgrace to the Country and to Cricket. The ban is too lenient !

  • kumar on August 19, 2010, 6:25 GMT

    we helped to make a world record for murali ok mind it. don't repeat this again in future.

  • Afnan on August 19, 2010, 6:21 GMT

    Just one question. Where was Sehwag's Spirit of the game against South Africans earlier this year where he kicked the ball to the boundary line just to avoid Hashim Amla the strike. Bloody attention seeker.

  • Joseph Paul Karipurath on August 19, 2010, 6:19 GMT

    I agree fully.

  • asanka on August 19, 2010, 6:17 GMT

    I like to see indian media talking about sreeshant , ishant or praveen for sledging batsmen. Or appolagizing on incident like stoning by indian spectators in 1996 semi final, sewag kicking the ball, tendulkar refusing umpires decesion, Ganguly removing his shirt after the win in Lords. May be SLC think about IPL or future indian tours.

  • SUjith Babu on August 19, 2010, 6:15 GMT

    Ricky Ponting on 99. Harbhajan bowls a deliberate big noball. Ponting hits a sixer and still denied century.Controversy follows. I am sure Sambit Bal would not have felt that the issue was blown out of proportion. You don't have to be more severe on your own to look fair. I am sure that ICC would have changed the law then to count the runs (at least till 5 years ago). I rest my case.

  • Rahul on August 19, 2010, 6:13 GMT

    Shame on Randiv on Dilshan. i dont see why people and sambit bal himself are being so concerned about these poor two. knowing fully well that the game is lost, it was a rather mean and vicious attempt to deny someone the century they rightfully deserved.

    and dont get me wrong, sehwag will score many more 100's. its not about a 100. its about the low filthy attitude.

  • Sridhar on August 19, 2010, 6:10 GMT

    Randiv, you have not done anything wrong. Onlything is you should have bowled that noball in a better way. 1 foot crossing the line brought this debate.

  • Boris on August 19, 2010, 6:08 GMT

    Sambit, you have voiced the exact concern I have had for the entire time this ridiculous 'controversy' has been drawn out and substantiated upon by the media. An apology was given, everything should have ended. However it seems the Indian media, no doubt spurred by Sehwag's child like complaints, decided to analyse the situation inordinately. Perhaps it was a slow news day. But the players now need to get on with whats important. The cricket.

  • SB on August 19, 2010, 6:06 GMT

    Couldn't agree with you more.Overeaction by a bunch of idiots.

  • SS on August 19, 2010, 6:05 GMT

    wow! I'm just amazed at the number of postings supporting both sides that this article has elicited. Proves two things to me: a) cricket fans love to write and b) sambit has written a good article - controvesial enough to generate support on both sides!

  • Ray on August 19, 2010, 6:05 GMT

    Even if you insert a dog's tail in a straight pipe for ### number of years. It is never gonna be straight. Same is with Indian media, Indian players and Indian fans. All hypocrites and whiners... Yes, it was not in the 'right spirit' but it was blown way out of proportion as rightly said by Sambit. Learn to accept apology and move on.

  • Ravi on August 19, 2010, 6:02 GMT

    I think there is a difference between what Sehwag did (kicking the ball to the boundary to deny Amla the strike) and what Randiv did.

    Sehwag did that to give the best chance for India to win as that is the goal here. What Randiv did was to deny Sehwag a chance to get his century by doing such silly stuff. In any case, i agree it was just petty and not such a big thing and definitely has been blown out of proportion by the media.

    Sehwag too should have just left it at that and not make those further comments on his tweets about Srilanka etc etc. It would be pretty embarassing for him now if he gets a duck or india loses cheaply next match.

  • Sajjad M. on August 19, 2010, 5:59 GMT

    So called flag bearer of spirt of cricket

    1. forgotten the time they appealed against steve waugh for ball handing when he was 200 odd n.o.... 2. and who can forget the SL IND semi final in 1996 3. and the Sehwag himself kicking the ball to the boundary....

    i think its easier when youre pointing a finger at someone else....having said tht....randiv shud not have done that..

  • R@$|-| on August 19, 2010, 5:58 GMT

    Well said! We have overshadowed the pettiness of the incident with our over reaction.. Certainly sehwag missing his hundred was bad.. but randiv should only feel ashamed for his act.. its for his conscience and nothing that deserved punishment.. The important thing was INDIA WON.. and sehwag helped us win! Why do our ppl ve to over react to every tiny thing tut happens?! Even sehwag wouldnt have wanted randiv s suspension.. and @Raghu.. Mr.Samit has given his view.. pls open your mind.. :-/

  • Bhayani on August 19, 2010, 5:56 GMT

    This is so ridiculous! Just because India has financial clout, no other country can even tease it. What SriLanka did was within the laws of the game and whatever is within the laws is acceptable. And who the hell are the Indians to talk of the spirit of the game. Has everyone forgotten Harbajhan Singh and Sreesanth's animated gestures or Rohit Sharma sticking around for a good ten seconds even after being given out lbw in the same game. Sri Lankans are good, peace loving people hence they acted swiftly by suspending Randiv for a match but I am curious what would have been India's reaction if the same naughtiness had been carried out by Australia, England or South Africa.

  • Uji on August 19, 2010, 5:53 GMT

    I am a Sri Lankan,and such underhanded tactics are just difficult to bear. What ever the ulterior motive of SLC, and the media hype, hopefully it sends a message to all players and cricket lovers that the spirit of the game is the most important thing. We rejoice in victory and we bear the pain of losing over and over, thats the cycle of sports. But to lose the spirit is to give up on the game as a whole. WE CANT LET THAT HAPPEN

  • Sathya on August 19, 2010, 5:51 GMT

    Feel bad for Suraj Randiv... But why is Sangakkara blaming the Indian board for the punishment meted out by the SLC!? It looked like he was acting when he spoke to Tony Greig during the post-match presentation! And then to accept all this... he seems to have a forked tongue!! He wants to be a part of the cash-rich IPL and then wants to blame the Indian board... not on Sanga!!!

  • Panic on August 19, 2010, 5:48 GMT

    It was not in the spirit of the game. It was akin to Greg Chappel instructing his brother to bowl the underarm delivery against England. BUT a simple sorry and handshake would have been enuff! Punishments don't make gentlemen out of cricketers.

  • SLboardfail on August 19, 2010, 5:47 GMT

    guys I (and pretty much everyone here) have no issue with Sehwag for raising the matter. And if Randiv wanted to apologise, that's fine too. (I'm not sure Sehwag should have publicised it on Twitter but that's another issue if at all).

    I am totally and absolutely disappointed with the SL cricket board for their muddling of this issue. And I'm not the only one to suspect that it has to do with their financial debts (not blaming the BCCI in this either, but whoever pays your debt, you should act with some reason and pride).

    A story - Ian Botham and Viv Richards were very good friends from their time at Somerset. When Ian Botham came over to say hi to Viv Richards during an Eng-WI test match, Richards said something to the effect of now is not the time for pleasantries.. international cricket is serious business.

  • zzzz on August 19, 2010, 5:41 GMT

    "Sehwag raised this matter b'se it was done delibaretly. Dont blame him. He has missed couple of centuries. He has indirectly helped to arrest the cancer of bad behaviour on field."

    And when he kicked the ball into the boundary while fielding (losing runs for India in a recent test match) was he eradicating bad behaviour then too??? I'm not sure how many of the people here would have a problem with that issue though. Ask yourself why.

  • Sudspats on August 19, 2010, 5:37 GMT

    I do agree that things are being blown out of proportion but SLC has done a excelent job. Randiv is a fresh talent should go a good distance in his carrier. SLC is discouraging him to such things and this augur well for his future. A player playing for his country has a responsibility towards the entire country and Randiv's conduct was not good as it looked a well thought plan. It can not be closed only by a apology..... What about the shame it has brought to the entire nation. Remember Gavaskar taking back Chetan Chauhan back in Australia for what he thought was a wrong decission. He was forced back to the field before crossing the boundry line.......

  • Babbu D on August 19, 2010, 5:36 GMT

    Congratulations Sehwag on picking the right battle. When stump evidence and other stuff shows clearly that Sangakkara, Dilshan and Suraj Randiv were involved and knowingly LIED, they should have been banned for atleast the rest of the tournament.

    Instead BCCI, most powerful cricket organization says the matter is closed. SLC would decide on the course of action. Yeah, right !

    Sri Lankan cricketing attitude has been questionable over the years. Seems that Indian gentlemanliness is taken for granted.

    Asoke De Silva - 12th player for opposing teams vs India Ranjan Madugalle - match referee & ready to crack the whip on Indians (Not subjective but check match results and fines and one would understand) Sangakkara - Excess appealing . A bad loser - observe his comments post-match where he very grudgingly acknowledges the other team's better - he talks of the 'spirit of the game'.

    A Sachin may tolerate such stuff but Sehwag has kept up the Indians in high 'spirits'

  • vinod nair on August 19, 2010, 5:30 GMT

    Funnily enough...the problem here is that none of the players knew the rules....even ex cricketers seem to be ignorant on this one. If sehwag has known this was possible he should have knocked the single.....randiv wouldnt have had a clue....dilshan is the miandad of sri lanka:) whats happened is done and dusted..sehwag should keep his trap shut.....isnt there a rule saying that only the captain or manager are allowed to address the press??

  • Sanjaya on August 19, 2010, 5:30 GMT

    once i can remember sanath jayasooriya was bowled out for 199 by abey kuruvila in a test match in colombo. are you all going to fine him also.

    P. S. - to all the batsmen in the world pls make sure every time get to your hundred somehow. coz next time they will fine spectators...

  • Muthu on August 19, 2010, 5:28 GMT

    Sambit Bal, There is a difference between honesty and jealousy or madness or vengence. You confused and asked a meaningless question and also your meaning less article. If you do something deliberate then it will come under scrutinity. very simple. You are a good writer. Just think before you write.

  • Anil on August 19, 2010, 5:27 GMT

    129.4 Tendulkar to Amla, 1 run, More drama! Sehwag kicks the ball away to the boundary! slightly short in length and outside off stump and Amla punched it off the back foot and the ball stops just near the boundary. Now the drama begins! Sehwag who was after the ball leans to kick it away over the boundary! The umpires get on walkie talkie and talk ,. And talk. ..

    This is what they have decided. One run of the shot and five runs as penalty for kicking the ball Much fun!

  • Sanjaya on August 19, 2010, 5:26 GMT

    Dear Mr. Shewag,

    next time when you are on 99, pls try n get that 1 run some how. otherwise poor bowlers will be fined. and stupid Indian media will make lot of money out of it, by selling something out of nothing to stupid Indian public.

  • Saud on August 19, 2010, 5:24 GMT

    I think the issue should not be closed after mere suspensions and fines. The BCCI should call an emergency meeting of the ICC executive board where a resolution is passed to retroactively change the law and grant Sehwag the century. It could happen!

  • Amit MISHRA on August 19, 2010, 5:23 GMT

    I would like to firmly disagree with you Mr. Bal. I think your article was unnecessary and is even contrary to your objective (as expressed) for blowing the issue "Out of Proportion" and the statement "where do the rest of us come in?". If that's what you think why to give the subject another dimension by adding another unnecessary article when the higher powers already settled the issue by handing the ban to Randiv and fine to Dilshan.

    One interesting comparison which I heard from one of the "expert" was that India could have denied Muralitharan's 800th wicket by giving the wicket to some other bowler instead of resisting SL for an hour for last wicket. Do you think that would have been fair also with as it would have been within the laws and would not have breached any conduct.

    In any case, I appreciate SLC's swift action setting good example for all other nations and understandingly so as they had reputation (SL being two time winner of ICC Spirit Award) to save

  • Ben Thomas on August 19, 2010, 5:22 GMT

    This matter has been well & truly blown out of proportions...I am sure even Sehwag is embarassed as to how matters have unfolded.This incident has just gone to prove once again that we are so much worried about stats. SLC board did a commendable job but I think they didnt have to go at such lengths to please the BCCI. The matter should have been closed after Randhiv apologised...but the TRP hungry media just hung on to add spice to this. Even though I am an Indian I am 100% sure that BCCI wouldnt do anything like this if it was done by an Indian bowler

  • Ebbie on August 19, 2010, 5:18 GMT

    Again the India media, fans and even players are acting like spoilt little children who toss the doll out of the cot, if one little thing does not go their way. Lot of people are talking about the spirit of the game. But India and most other countries choose to ignore Ponting's wish to have gentlemen's agreement over fielders claiming.catches. So Indian media and supporters, please stop trying to takethe High moral ground.

  • AG on August 19, 2010, 5:17 GMT

    Aren't we all missing something here. I didn't see the incident but from what I understand Sehwag on 99 hit a six off a no-ball. Law 24 clearly states that runs off the bat are credited to the batsman (and the one for the no ball goes down as an extra). So he should rightly have finished on 105 should he not. It is the scorer who has some explaining to do.

  • Sach on August 19, 2010, 5:12 GMT

    The very first comment by ShenMark sums up things pretty much.

  • mahesh wijetunge on August 19, 2010, 5:12 GMT

    Dear Suraj Randiv, it is most unfortunate what you had to go through because of the unfaithfull,disorganised, power hungry and disgracefull SLC for taking a such a decesion. in a professional sport if you cant be arrogant and optimistic then you a not a professional sportsman. your action was made truly for the sake of the game and to keep the spirit of the game in the country. we support you all the way Randiv and you are a great cricketer to serve for SLC for many years to come. hope you will not get discouraged by indecent proposal made by SLC.

  • Rajneesh Mehra on August 19, 2010, 5:11 GMT

    This incident has surely set some precedents. Be that as it may, if one were to prevent a similar occurrence in future, the umpire(s) should declare such a ball as 'dead' immediately, warn the bowling side with a 'yellow' card and ask the bowler to bowl again. If the 'offence' is repeated, the bowler should be debarred from bowling the ball, the winning team be declared winner and the batsman be given the benefit by crediting the runs against his name. This way, the 'spirit' of sportsmanship can be kept alive, given the fact that the human mind will always find ways of breaking the rules or taking advantage of - as Sangakara says - 'gray' areas!

  • abc on August 19, 2010, 5:06 GMT

    If this is done by an indian the BCCI wil shout and say this is part of the game and directly ICC will kneel down and say yes and the matter will b closed. The whole cricketing nations wants UDRS but indians are afraid coz they dont like fairplay, and ICC has no backbone to make it compulsary.

  • Deepu George on August 19, 2010, 5:05 GMT

    Truly sad display of sportsmanship. Sehwag is an exceptional batsman and deserved his century, without doubt. It is true to say that there is an element of bad blood between SL and India, during the recent series with comments and accusations fired at each other. Let's leave the petty disagreements in the locker room and play the GAME. I truly hope that SL, suprisinly voted `best spirited team' in the world, learns from this mistake and improves. Sri Lanka's true colors have been shown here. This is childish to say the least. Randiv, Dilshan and most likely Sangakarra, shame on you. CHAKE DE INDIA - keep your heads high and win us this series.

  • Cricketer on August 19, 2010, 5:04 GMT

    It is funny to read that people are dragging BCCI, tendulkar, and what not in this incident. So many conspiracy theories !! Good piece of fiction.

  • Rocky on August 19, 2010, 5:02 GMT

    We Asians always think ourselves as lowly and believe mediocrity is our birthright. This should be a lesson to Australia and New Zealand, what is unimaginable to them, this small island nation had the guts to do.

    Sehwag's century was meaningless to SLC. What was important to them is one or more of their players compromising with the spirit of the game. Salute you SLC, and if somebody says you were over the top then tell him that you chose not to be below the bottom.

  • Bhelgarh on August 19, 2010, 5:01 GMT

    Its not blown out of proportion, Mr.Bal. Now everybody is after Indian cricketer's blood. Criticizing them is a fashion. Bowling no ball is not unlawful but not in the game of spirit. Cricket is gentlemen's game and it has its unwritten rules. The no ball was deliberate and could be avoided. SLC apologized and BCCI closed the chapter. I firmly believed that both the Boards acted in matured manner. Sampit Bal you can write better articles than that.

  • Anonymous on August 19, 2010, 4:59 GMT

    i agree with the article, hugely blown out of proportion...now they will ban captains for bringing in the fielders inside the circle when the batsman is on 99 and he runs himself out!!! silly

  • Deepak on August 19, 2010, 4:57 GMT

    Excellent article. Indian board and media are showing off their money power in a filthy manner. Even while playing small time local matches we have resorted to these techniques - why cant a national team do it? Its better that BCCI and the Indian media(specifically 2 channels) show some decency in the way they run their affairs...am sure there was a lot of back room negotiations that killed a smaller board and victimized their players...really sorry for Sanga and his guys...Shame Shame BCCI!

  • venkat on August 19, 2010, 4:55 GMT

    The Indian media is should first look into the behaviour of its players. All of us who have watched Indian cricket can see that player behaviour has deteriorated drastically. And this holds good at domestic cricket (Mumbai karnataka ranji final had boorish behaviour on both sides) and lets not get started on sreesanth, or Virat Kohli wagging his middle finger during an IPL game. The Srilankan board has gone too far too quickly. The no ball was in poor taste but once Randiv apologised the matter should have been closed then and there. Looking at some of the headlines on the news channels has been quite embarrassing.

  • KCS on August 19, 2010, 4:55 GMT

    I think that ICC should consider changing the rule, the batsmean should get the runs scored of the "No Balls" whether be it in the middle of the game or the last ball of the game, after all, the batsman is scoring of the ball, it is not a dead ball, just because a "No Ball" is bowled. Everybody is blaming the batsman, bowler, cricket boards etc., where is the point to all of this, in order to avoid similar situations in the future, take corrective action now!!

  • Vish... on August 19, 2010, 4:55 GMT

    A smaller no-ball or a wide would have done the trick...

  • Praszz on August 19, 2010, 4:52 GMT

    Why Shewag is shouting about his 100 rather than Indian Victory..... Is that according to the spirits. Shewag kicked a ball for 4 to keep Amal away from strike..... So Mr. Shewag where was the spirit at that time. When Baji and Sreeshanth acted like children on field where was the spirit. When Thendulkar took a grounded catch and turn the match arounf against England where was the indian spirit? Its all fake.... This all happen just because Shewag acted like a child who has lost his milk bottle. Shame on him for crying for an 100.....

  • Kaushal V. Patel on August 19, 2010, 4:52 GMT

    If an Indian player has done the same thing to SL batsman, it would be a big disaster. Similar incident happened with Sachin Tendulkar and this one with V. Sehwag. Personally, It is not blown out of proportion. Dilshan and Suraj do deserve the fine. And, I do appreciate that SURAJ apologized after the game but Dilshan is the culprit.

  • Onlooker on August 19, 2010, 4:50 GMT

    Exaggeration, I agree. But shall we stop this ? Same news over and over on all TV channels, websites, so on. I love cricket but doesn't mean that I'm ok with so much publicity about some cricketer being denied one run in a match while thousands of people across the world are denied their basic rights and facilities. Stop it.

    Go ahead, flay me for saying this here.

  • Saroj Sharma on August 19, 2010, 4:49 GMT

    It seems the Rules prompting the Umpire's decision are subject to misinterpretation. The Laws of Cricket cover these incidents as follows:

    Law 24 - No Ball Clause 11: The ball does not become dead on the call of No Ball. Clause 13 : Any runs completed or a boundary scored from a No Ball shall be credited to the batsman. Clause 15 : A batsman can be dismissed off a No Ball- therefore the ball cannot be dead.

    It is a clear case for the runs to heve been credited to Sehwag as would have happened if it was a legitimate delivery and was hit for a six.

    Sorry the Umpire did not get it right !!

  • markaz on August 19, 2010, 4:46 GMT

    All this issues blown out to less privelege countries. if it is done by Aus, Eng, Ind, it will b said it is part of the game.There a so many incidents done by those coubtries but eyes were closed.Randiv spoke the truth and got punished, if he had lied he would have escaped.

  • Shekhar on August 19, 2010, 4:45 GMT

    Spirit of cricket Vs passion for cricket! I think what Randiv did was perfectly correct. He was passionate ( and I am not even talking about patriotism). Why should Sri Lanka allow someone to score a century against them? I think what Randiv did was fair. Did Indian tailenders give Murali his 800th wicket on a platter even when the test match was all but lost for India? No, he had to earn it. What if it was a legal ball and Sehwag was caught trying to hit a six? Should the fielder have dropped it to allow him to score a century? Where is the so called spirit when fast bowlers bowl bouncers to No. 11 batsman? Come one guys.... give me a break. If I were Randiv, I would do the same.

  • Nathan on August 19, 2010, 4:40 GMT

    I agree that it's probably a bit nasty and against the spirit of the game, but really no big deal. However I'm sure you wouldn't be writing this if it was an Australian that did it

  • Vinod on August 19, 2010, 4:38 GMT

    after continuously watching the last over, i feel that it was sanga the script writer not dillu or randiv. sanga is an excellent cricketer and a fantastic politician too....when he said that he didnt know that particular rule of denying the batsman a run in such a case, that aggravated my doubt considering the level of knowledge and awareness that sanga have over viru or anybodyelse for that matter. having said that, this incident has not taken away any respects for him as a captain and as a magnificent sportsman. kumar, be a good boy you can still be a world beater.

  • cricsri on August 19, 2010, 4:37 GMT

    come on guyz, in india, individual records mean a lot such as Viru's hundred to the public, even though Viru can keep quite, not our public. we are mad of individual records. that is why we are such a big fans sachin, cant you guyz understand this and why we are making all the fuss about it. Even the media is seriously interested in blowing up this issue because any news related to Indian cricket gets plenty of viewer-ship, no wonder they are mad about it.

  • Anurag on August 19, 2010, 4:36 GMT

    The issue has got the attention it merited. It exposes the loophole in the ICC rule-book: Had Randiv bowled a wide (instead of a no-ball) and had Viru been stumped of it, would the batsman be considered not out simply because the wide was bowled before the stumping took place? Certainly not! In that case,the bowler and the keeper would have had a scalp against their names (and if not, it is as much a loop-hole as has been in the case of the boundary hit of the no-ball).

    What would you say if India miss qualifying for the finals of this event on net run rate, say by 1-6 runs, when the legitimately scored runs by Viru would have bailed the team out?

    It would be sensible for ICC to re-look their rule book; if not for the merit in the above argument, then to defeat an ignoble intention that is contrary to the spirit of the game.

  • Upul on August 19, 2010, 4:33 GMT

    Today game of the cricket is very much commercialized. Therefore, talking about so called 'Spirit of the Game" some time is a joke. In many times we can see the bad behaviors by players some time very senior players. Especially T/20 and one day serious very common for issues like this. Players are using many tactics to win the game (Huge money), however, if it is according to the rule what we can do rather than accept. I do not understand why punished S.Randiv because no ball is illegal but his action is not illegal. Bowling no ball is a normal by bowler any at any time of the game. It may be first ball of the innings or last ball. How we prove exactly that it was done by S.Randiv purposely. (May be yes, but not a illegal action). Therefore, Randiv can file the case and go to the court against SLC for his illegal punishment.

  • vivek on August 19, 2010, 4:31 GMT

    Please see the list of responses to this article...Indeed you all are right ..this article response has also gone out of proportion...Leave the issue behind and conc. on the future...

    Regards Vivek

  • anarchist on August 19, 2010, 4:26 GMT

    I choose to disagree with the article. an overreaction from media, cricketers or whosoever cannot be used to hide from the fact that this was an despicable act from randiv. Whether sehwag got a century or not is immaterial. He's missed many more and am sure he's moved on. What matters to me is the credibiltity of the game. As for the comments i am getting to read here from these so called cricket fans especially some srilankans ranging from fuzzy 'spirit', to even justifying by giving same wierd fuzzy logic which is exactly the reason why cricket faces allegations of match fixing n it's credibility is on line. The ambiguity in their own moral value system which most of these fans show in real life is precisely what is reflecting here. Hopefully it's not the majority. As for srilankans, they can keep crying hoarse over the injustice and conspiracy theories, i can give my own consipiracy theory about randiv n dilshan fixing the match outcome & sehwag not getting to his century.

  • Zak on August 19, 2010, 4:21 GMT

    Mate, I believe for the first time your article is completely out of sync! THIS HAD TO HAPPEN for the torchlight to be turned on such ugly practices. For a change a Board has taken quick and decisive action (hello hello ICC, BCCI and the rest of theh Boards). We all should applaud this. Sambit I believe you have been (may be we all have been) so desensitized by the apathy and inaction of all the Boards and ICCC that when somehting like this happens we are so surprised that we are unable to applaud it! Will it spur the ICC and other Boards out of inaction - I am not holding my breath. But well done SLC for upholding the spirit of the game!

  • Sudeep Mukherjee on August 19, 2010, 4:14 GMT

    what Randiv did was a schoolboy prank. We all have done something similar playing for our school or class etc. Please remember we are very good friends with Sri Lankans more like an elder brother. The younger brother has done something wrong and apologised lets not rub his face in it. We should accept the apology and move on. The media has gone completely overboard on a non-issue which should have been settled between dhoni and sanga. Lets concentrate on our WC preparation and find few bowlers from somewhere

  • mahasen on August 19, 2010, 4:12 GMT

    Agree with the article.

    I was thinking about Dhoni, who was deliberately blocking the ball to allow Shewag to get his hundred.

  • RahulK on August 19, 2010, 4:12 GMT

    Lets Move ON!!! It's a competitive sport, what Randiv did was all right there shouldn't have been any suspension. SL shouldn't worry about winning spirit of the game award they should worry about winning a match. and indian cricket team not all that pure that they always play with the spirit of the game....

  • jai on August 19, 2010, 4:12 GMT

    if it is not intentional then what ever he says is ok, but he did it intentional which is not correct at this point of time. If sehwag as 90 or 93 then it is acceptable with warning but he is 99 and just a single will make him a mark on his career then a player don't like that(attitue to accept a mark by clapping is the best bowling side), it is a serious matter which should be punished. It is not a war, but a game where you shake your hand at the end of play. When he took sehwag on 99 with good ball nobody complined but this is clear loss of confident on him and his bowling and made him to bowling big no ball to make him defend but hit for six. If he defended that no ball, what will happend. india win and no chance to score 100.

  • Adeel Azhar on August 19, 2010, 4:07 GMT

    It is as bad as Strauss not leaving the crease after a big edge which was not given out. If we talk about soprtsmanship, this also counts!

  • RC on August 19, 2010, 4:05 GMT

    How about seeing this breaking news: Sehwag and Dhoni apologize to Randiv and Sanga for getting the issue blown out of proportion. I think they should do it to uphold the friendly relations between the team. :-)

  • Kashinath on August 19, 2010, 4:00 GMT

    Agree its blown out of proportion. Absolutely no punishment neccessary. I am an India and still feel there is nothing wrong with what the bowler did.

    Look at it this way. When a person is nearling century and if there are not too many runs to score the other bathsman always accommodate as Dhoni attempted to do so at the other end. They do this by not scoring themselves. If this is legitimate why not the opposition doing what he did. And this was a rule very few including Sehwag did not know - he thought he scored a hundred through a hit of no ball. A newer cricketer would know more detailed rule than seasoned Sehawg? I would argue he was trying to help Sehwag. Would Randiv still have been blamed if he took a wicket? I think Media hype is causing boards to over react!

  • Hasan on August 19, 2010, 3:46 GMT

    The point here is about the Gentleman's Game. It looked very cheap from an audience perspective to deny a century by deliberately bowling a no-ball. He could have fought to get him out even at that stage. I suppose thats how cricket is supposed to be played. It reminds me of the "under arm ball" incident of 1981. After so many years, now people don't care about who won that match but do remember the disgrace that incident has brought.

    my 2c

  • Vaibhav on August 19, 2010, 3:43 GMT

    Just think of poor Sehwag.. It was a rare feat that he remained not out in a one day match.. He batted slowly to protect his wicket and then you deny him a hundred.. He will be tormented to see such a thing happen when he actually batted in a mature way.. And he might throw his wicket next time as a revolt.. :P

  • Mass on August 19, 2010, 3:40 GMT

    If Randiv's no ball was petty, the reaction from SLC and the ICC was even more petty...

    i hope sehwag would prove in the next match by making a double century...

  • Pradeep on August 19, 2010, 3:38 GMT

    Stupid law. been watching cricket all my life and still don't get this law. This is why The Americans and the Chinese don't watch cricket, way too complicated. And what a cry baby Sehwag is, so he missed a hundred . Big Deal. All this tweeting and nonsense. A real man like Tendulkar wouldn't even care.

  • N.Ahmed on August 19, 2010, 3:33 GMT

    Remember Sehwag deliberately kicking the ball into the rope to concede a four? Where was the spirit of cricket then?

  • Srilankan on August 19, 2010, 3:29 GMT

    Yeah Randiv did a mistake and he had apologised,Good. When Murali was taken to task by the spectators in Australia,Where was our Cricket Board?Went to hiding

  • friendfromusa on August 19, 2010, 3:26 GMT

    Poor Randiv got 'out' on his own 'no ball!'

  • kaushik on August 19, 2010, 3:00 GMT

    I'm just wondering how bigger the issue would have been if it was Saching in Sehwag's place!

  • chembu on August 19, 2010, 2:50 GMT

    When Kumble was on the verge of taking his 10th wicket again Pakistan, Srinath bowled all wides to the batsmen helping Kumble to get his 10th wicket, what do you call this??

  • Roy on August 19, 2010, 2:36 GMT

    I wonder why Sehwag left along 2 previous balls without hitting a single and wait to hit a six for his 100 and why Randivs put two good ball without a no ball or a wide in that two balls to finish the match? Match could have finished earlier...?!

  • RRR on August 19, 2010, 2:31 GMT

    Wow Sambit - Looks like you are just an armchair critic! Even Sri Lankan Cricket Board gave an apology .... may be they want to preserve their ICC sportsmanship award! I wish you as an EDITOR should have seen a bigger picture than people like us!!

  • Balaji Krishnamurthy on August 19, 2010, 2:29 GMT

    I don't agree with you Sambit. If this had been just a one-off, we could have moved on with Randiv's apology. It is the 3rd time Sri Lanka is doing this to an Indian player. As far I see it, gamesmanship is all right. But this was'nt gamesmanship, it was a childishly petty act. But I don't believe that Randiv acted alone. It was possibly Sangakkara's hand in this whole thing. Sangakkara's act of conceding 4 byes was intentional, no wicket keeper would have conceded that. But I do feel sorry for Randiv. SLC has shot the messenger.

  • rajeev on August 19, 2010, 2:12 GMT

    I totally disagree with sambit,no law was broken but what about the sportsmanship? Randiv and Dilshan needed to be slapped on the wrist and thats what Srilanks Board did,if Randiv had been ignored he would have done it again,we are not talking legalities here,we are talking ethics.

  • sherron on August 19, 2010, 2:04 GMT

    WELL WRITTEN.OBVIOUSLY THE INCIDENT WILL HAUNT HIM FOR EVER BUT BY APPOLOGISING SHOWS THAT HE HAS REDRETED WHAT HE HAS DONE.SO AS SAID & AS "PROFESSIONAL" CRICKETERS BOTH OF THEM SHOULD BE ABLE TO LEAVE THE WHOLE INCIDENT ASIDE & CARRY ON.THERE IS NO POINT OF HANGING ON OR DIGGING GRAVES TO MAKE THINGS WORST.

  • Asad on August 19, 2010, 2:00 GMT

    Tell me if this makes sense. Randiv throws an alleged deliberate no-ball but it doesn't impact the result of the match or have any impact on the series - gets a match suspension. Broad picks up a ball and deliberately hurls it at Haider in the process causes him physical harm by fracturing his finger and this throws an in-form player out of the series - this earns him a minor slap on the wrist and effectively a pat on the back by a partial docking of his match fee.

    How does one take the professionalism and integrity of the ICC with any seriousness?

  • narasimmamurthy on August 19, 2010, 1:51 GMT

    The article has put things on correct perspective. Move on , Indian fans, media!

  • superkid007 on August 19, 2010, 1:50 GMT

    Hey i think randiv deserved the punishment and even dilshan should share it. I remember the underarm bowling incident by australia bowler on last ball against newzealand to avoid defeat. This incident is no less samefull to the present randiv incident where he bowled a noball to prevent sehwag century. Players should be punished to avoid such CHEAP tricks and should play in sporting spirit.

  • Mohamed Z. Rahaman on August 19, 2010, 1:48 GMT

    I agree with the article. I would also add that the Indian players, fueled by their supporters, have an obsession with records and statistics, hence the bruhaha over this minor matter.

  • Satish on August 19, 2010, 1:46 GMT

    Blew out of proportion? Do you encourage the same thing happening again and again? Or do you to protect the integrity of the game? Why write such a big article when you dont understand the big picture? I watch cricket for the spirit of it. Imagine how it would have been if happend in LORD's?

  • v.giri mudeliar on August 19, 2010, 1:34 GMT

    Sehwag's missed century is not the issue. Also Randivs if left on his own would NOT have bowled a no-ball.He has been manipulated. and the clever machination of Dilshan came into play. Again do not forget the Captains remarks however innocuous it may seem. Wrong time to give advice.Don't you think. Randiv should have been given a warning and told to upholt the 'spirit of the game'at all times. Dilshan as a very senior player shouild have been suspended and the benefit of the doubt should not have been given to the Captain. Both have brought the game to disrepute. A warning to all who think of unsportmanlike behavour. Hope this is a good lesson to all. Play the game as it is bigger than all you individuals.

  • Proportion on August 19, 2010, 1:32 GMT

    Suppose some player is being soundly beaten by Roger Federer, 6-2, 6-0, 4-0. And he withdraws just to deny Fed the satisfaction of winning. Will it not reflect badly on the sport of tennis if Fed was the "King of Walkovers", rather than "Grand Slam wins"? I remember once Justine Henin was unfit and was getting thrashed in a Grand Slam final - she withdrew when losing and drew a lot of flak.

    Sports like cricket and tennis sometimes require an opponent to "go through the motions" (as opposed to, say, football, where if a losing team stops making effort, the winning team will keep slamming in even more goals). The entire sport would be reduced to the ridiculous if losing sportsmen start behaving like Randiv did, so I don't think the issue is blown out of proportion.

  • Somesh on August 19, 2010, 1:29 GMT

    Its not about the law Sambit..its not EVEN about Sehwag's century, its also not about BCCI's muscle-power over SLC..its PURELY about the SPIRIT of the game..which is certainly on its way down.

    I was surprised to see that a write like you (whom I regard a lot) has taken such a narrow view of the matter. SLC has set a GREAT example by taking action. It goes to show that STILL, the spirt of the game is MORE important to few people than other things.

    I am glad the media blew the matter OUT OF PROPORTION, else such events would become common and further dilute the SPIRIT of the game.

  • abhi on August 19, 2010, 1:23 GMT

    Rightly said Sambit (only the first sentence) that "you are desperately out of sync with this". You are out of sync with the spirit of this sport to call it 'out of proportions'. It's not the matter of completing the century, Sehwag would be the last person to need that century. If these issues are not answered harsh, cricket will soon become like soccer, needing yellow and red cards to control the temperament of players.

  • Vijay on August 19, 2010, 1:22 GMT

    I agree. The ban or apology from the Cricket Board was unnecessary. The matter should have ended when Randiv said sorry to Sehwag.

  • SPRB on August 19, 2010, 1:16 GMT

    This is for Sambit Bal as you r saying that the matter was projected in out of propotion, but I wan to add something to it. Whatever Suraj Randiv did is it in spirit of game? for sure a big NO. As a bowler if u gave guts try to bowl ur opponent not to give wide or no ball so that ur opponent cannont achive what u deserve. Imagine a situation in the 1st test when Murali was at 799 wickets and 1 short of 800th, If Indians wanted they would have denied that wicket to him but getting out to another bowler or some other way but they did not. Even though Indians knew that they r going to loose the match still the last wicket fought not giving his wicket to someone else. Just think if one of the Indian bowler doing the same thing what Randiv did, all the media including the Indian media whould have ripped him apart.

  • niaz on August 19, 2010, 1:11 GMT

    If money from BCCI to SLC determines whatever BCCI wants, cricket would become a sports like wrestling. Guess who would be the wrestling champion?

  • Sri on August 19, 2010, 0:58 GMT

    The article is spot on ONLY if you want to view this incident as an isolated incident. If you take a broader view that cricket is sport and deserving of sportsmanship, the incident is symbolic of many things: cricket is a business and so meanspiritedness and gamesmanship is part of the game (how can you condone ANY level of sledging?); BCCI's clout in such matters comes from its overflowing coffers; statistics are important for individual players as they make more from product endorsements than match fees (Randive is a beginner but a more established player many not rue being docked the match fee); and so it goes...

  • Rationalist on August 19, 2010, 0:46 GMT

    Whether it is in the spirit of the game or not, it doesn't really make a difference IFF ICC had changed the rule. If a batsmen scores off a no-ball then he should be given all the runs scored for that delivery. Sehwag scored 6 off a no-ball. He should be given 7 runs. There won't be foul-play anymore. End of the story!

  • Nick Coxhill on August 19, 2010, 0:31 GMT

    The fact that Randiv has been banned when Stuart Broad was only fined just goes to show that no-one cares about discipline in cricket. What Randiv did was wrong, but he didn't deserve to be banned. However, Broad assaulted a player with the ball, and he should have missed the Oval Test.

  • Amar on August 19, 2010, 0:31 GMT

    I beg to differ. It is not a small incident. Everyone should know what they can get away with and what they can't. If you are newcomer to a team which represents a small market and part of a team that is run by a bankrupt organization - one must learn how to behave. That is nature's law - learn it or pay.

  • Prashant on August 19, 2010, 0:30 GMT

    There was nothing wrong in the gamesmanship involved here! Yes, it was not in the spirit of cricket but then what is today! I have a simple question to ask - if a bowler has taken 99 wickets and this was going to be his 100th wicket, would the batsmen in the spirit of cricket - given his wicket to the bowler for him to celebrate! So why are we expecting anything else from a bowler. It was smart thinking, of denying a batsmen a legitimate 100! I guess the Aussies would have been leading the pack, but guess the SL team can take a bow!

    Our media has nothing else to report and hence the headlines - CRICKET CRIME, as if somebody was murdered or pillaged! Get real guys, no team wants a record of century against them and if by sticking to the rules they can achieve it - Good on them! No need to apologise. If this was America, Randive could have sued the board for wrongful decision of banning him for a match. Take note here - the SL board acted on its own with a prompt from ICC!

  • ILoveUSA on August 19, 2010, 0:22 GMT

    Sambit Bal: I think SL board did the right thing. Such things should not be allowed. Emotion does not have a role in professional sport. If anyone would have done something as pity as Randiv had done that person would have been fired in corporate USA-- on the same day. People often cite Shewag giving a four against SA. That action was perfectly OK because what Shewag did was in the interest of game. It is OK to influence the outcome of a game by taking legal actions such as getting a weaker person on strike. What SL did was not to influence the outcome of the game. The game at that point was lost by SL. The actions in the last over were personal and contained malice. A batsman on strike on 99 and 5 runs are scored as extras cannot be explained without intention of malice. To call this instance blown out of propotion is to allow injustice. If ICC is really serious in making cricket popular then it should start taking such instances seriously.

  • jay on August 19, 2010, 0:01 GMT

    Agree 100% with Sambit, a mountain has been made out of a molehill, why this obsession with centuries ? The 99 by Sehwag was so much better than so many centuries, and I am sure Sehwag himself does not care which means he was probably goaded by others to stoke up this matter. This is only going to make the Lankan team very bitter and bitter teams play well so India can say goodbye to their chances of making the finals. I only hope there is no backlash against the Lankan players who participate in the IPL.

  • Joe on August 18, 2010, 23:55 GMT

    It was not against the ICC rules for Adam Gilchrist to use a squash ball to help him hit sixes at a World Cup final and deprive Sri Lanka of a possible World Cup victory so the SL Board of Cricket kept a cowardly silence. So did the rest of the cricketing world, including India. Randiv did not break a rule either but his breach of cricketing conduct is serious enough for the SLCB to deprive him of a well earned match fee (remember he was the highest scorer in that match) and ban him for one match. Well done Don Quixote alias Sri Lanka Cricket Board.

  • Kavi on August 18, 2010, 23:45 GMT

    This issue has been blown out of proportion by the people who have way too much time on their hands. Move on people and get on with your lives. Just spare a couple of mins and think about the many times all the other teams have broken the spirit of the game and this includes several Indian players as well so my advise to all of you who still want to make a big deal out of it- Move On!

  • Ramaiah on August 18, 2010, 23:41 GMT

    I agree with Bal. What emerges for me is this: 1. Sehwag, as Bal says, must have moved on. He's outspoken but not petty (like most of Indian media and some emotional types out here) 2. BCCI is, as expected, a bully 3. Sri Lanka cricket embarrasses all (not just Sri Lankans). 4. Sanga thankfully is his graceful self in this.

    The whole point of Bal's article - to my understanding - was to douse the fires, cool it a little bit. It sucks to see the low depression area moving into Cricinfo. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!

  • Anonymous on August 18, 2010, 23:33 GMT

    I dont agree at all mr Bal. This incidence is not about someone getting a century, its about a petty mind. Sri lankan board have set a very good example that these things wont be tolerated. If the matter had ended as you said , then its an indirect invitation for players to carry on with this attitude. The game does not gain respect only through great performances but also through great and sportive minds. However great a player is, he earns true respect only if he plays with true spirit.

  • Zaman on August 18, 2010, 23:22 GMT

    Cannot disagree. Our Indian media and the SL board has gone overboard with this. A fine would have been fine.

  • bigwonder on August 18, 2010, 23:19 GMT

    Out of proportion? You said it. Your article is way out of proportion. Articles like these do not promote healthy discussion but provide fuel to the wrong fire. Now SL fans think their player did nothing wrong and insist its all BCCIs fault. WOW!!!!

    I now wish Indian tailenders should have denied Murali his 800th wicket. I am sure they would have been criticized (may be banned) but it would have been a very very good lesson for SL, their fans and Indian critics. It would have sent a message LOUD AND CLEAR - do not underestimate Indians and take them for granted.

    Shewag expressed his opinion and did noting wrong. If I had worked hard and was deliberately denied a century, by all means I am going to tell people when asked. SL cannot get the fair play award and keep turning their eye toward such incidents. People always like to blame Media, but its the media that brings all this information to us. Without media, you would have not known what happened out there.

  • Meet on August 18, 2010, 23:15 GMT

    Randiv and party got what they deserved. They spoiled the spirit of the game. And for those of my friends who think Sehwag's complaint was wrong, try to score a century in ODI and then talk. Lankan board did a right thing - their players are known for good discipline on the field and they want to maintain that status - no nonsense accepted. Poorly written article, if you have right to criticize media in your report, so do they have rights to express their views.

  • Ramesh Sampat on August 18, 2010, 23:15 GMT

    About this controversy, we have discussed everything BUT why no one is talking about changing the laws of the game, whereby in such situation when the batsman has actually connected and whatever the runs that are earned, from that play should be credited to his account...!! Here before the last delivery was bowled the team India did not meet the winning requirement until that one run was scored. The question here is did India win the match by one run or the 5/6 runs as a result of that Six? Thus this situation will not arise in the future if the governing body of cricket will make the necessary change in the rule by allowing the run scored during the actual game to both the Team as well as the batsman who scored the run. Thank you.

  • Rav on August 18, 2010, 22:52 GMT

    If it is no big deal why did you write this article Sambit, about the incident adding to useless media pontifiation?;)

  • craigmnz on August 18, 2010, 22:42 GMT

    Can someone tell me when the rules of the game changed? I remember a Test match in 1986 (Trent Bridge) where Martin Crowe won the game hitting a no-ball from David Gower for four. It was argued at the time that the match ended with the no-ball (as this gave NZ the winning score) but the four was added to Crowe's score as the ball as not yet dead. Why was this not done in this case? It would at least stop such petty tactics.

  • Manie on August 18, 2010, 22:41 GMT

    It appears everyone is tunnel visioned into this petty issue that they forgot to ask a fundamental question. Why would the batsman not get the runs they scored of their bat if it is a no ball. A no ball is a bowlers mistake so the opponent team gets a run and extra ball (or free hit depending on the type). Yet what was the batsman's mistake that they deny his runs if he was quick enough to make use of the opportunity (or gets it in fluke). There is no rule for Wide ball being hit to be called Wide anymore not batsmen being denied their runs. I think ICC should look into this to avoid future controversies like this one.

  • Tom on August 18, 2010, 22:40 GMT

    But what Randiv did was not fair. I would've not surpised if it was done by an Australian player. What if M Muralitharan was not allowed to take 800 wickets in the test cricket. Remember that he had to get the last Indian batsman out to acheive that. What if the last man delibrately did a hit-wicket to deny him the 800th wicket? Would that have been fair, even though there is no law against that? What Randiv did was an ugly act...Sehwag's initial statement was very professional... though his later statement was not...he should've left taht matter after his initial statement...Srilankan cricker board's decision is there internal matter...it doesn't make sense discussing that. As mentioned in this article it's time to move on. But even time when something similar happens in cricket, this incident will be defenitey brought in to the discussion. That is something Randiv should've thought when he listened to Dilshan.

  • Partha on August 18, 2010, 22:36 GMT

    Hello Gaya, If you had learnt the full scenario you would'nt mention Kapil in your comments. As I had watched that match live on TV, Kapil himself had repeatedly warned the non-striker not to back up too far, no comparison what Sanga and Dilshan had schemed here.

  • Mahesh Kawade on August 18, 2010, 22:30 GMT

    Do not Agree with you mate. Had this not been taken seriously players would have come up with more such stupid tricks which harm the spirit of the game. And If Randiv was so desperate not to give Sehwag a 100 then he should have tried to get him out rather than doing something as stupid as what he did. Kudos the SL cricket board for taking action against him ensuring that such a thing will not be repeated again.

  • Nishantha.H on August 18, 2010, 22:22 GMT

    While the author has put the point across aptly , some of the comments here are as ridiculous as the pig headed response from the SLC . Sehwag is no angel and as far as any right thinking individual is concerned he has no business to be talking about the spirit of cricket - remember the infamous kick over the boundary to deny Hashim Amla the strike with the last man in ! To add to all that his credibility takes a another blow when just a few minutes after brushing off the incident as "one of those things " in a post match chat with Tony Greig , he goes on to berate the bowler and the Sri Lankan team in a boorish press conference probably at the insistence of someone else . Morale of the story - Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones at others !!!

  • Manish on August 18, 2010, 22:20 GMT

    I do not agree with this article, not because I am indian, but because I felt that those actions that go against the spirit of the game should be reprimanded. It was highly unfair to Sehwag and it's ok for Sambit Bal to say that the matter is petty, but it was Sehwag who missed on a century (that he deserved). Randiv deserves the punishment he received and this will set an example for future!

  • Sam on August 18, 2010, 22:19 GMT

    Well Said. It is the reality. Mountain out of mole. Is it possible to hype that Shewag played for century then?

  • Pal on August 18, 2010, 22:09 GMT

    Very good article.I think the whole thing is blown out of proportion. Remember once the same Sehwag kicked a ball to the boundary so that they get to bowl a tailender instead of a batsman? The media did not scrutinize at that time.

  • deep on August 18, 2010, 21:49 GMT

    There is no comparison between Sehwag kicking Amla's shot for four and this deliberate no ball. Sehwag's act was done to deny Amla the strike and thereby save the game. Just like how captains set deep fields to offer a single to the batsman farming the strike.

    If by denying Sehwag his century, Randiv could have won the match for sri lanka or at least increased their chances, well then I would praise him for that. But this was just an attempt at gamesmanship, maybe to get Sehwag off his game for the next match (might have the opposite effect actually). A young player like Randiv would not have thought it up himself. Maybe Dilshan suggested it because he has some grudge against his DD teammate (he did sit on the bench all of last season after all). Or maybe Sangakara suggested it because he wanted to mess with Sehwag's head.

    Either way, the punishment meted out to Randiv, and Dilshan, is way over the top. And I am disappointed at Sangakara, he should not seek scapegoats.

  • DK on August 18, 2010, 21:49 GMT

    IMO, everyone did what they had to do. SLC board had to do it to justify the spirit of cricket winner tag and nipped this in the bud to show not just to world but to their own cricketer that this is something to be taken very seriously. It may be trivial matter to others, but the spirit holders have to take stronger measures. It however makes me wonder how BCCI would have reacted if some Indian player made that school-boyish mistake. I suspect that they would have tried to cover up.

  • Vijay on August 18, 2010, 21:47 GMT

    Dont agree with author.

    what if the bowler runs till the middle of the pitch and bowls a bouncer injuring the batsman...its only a no-ball - should we not make an issue out of it ?

  • Naguib Khan on August 18, 2010, 21:42 GMT

    Sangakara is the one and only person in SL team with these kind of mentality and attitude. I still believe that Dilshan only forwarded Sangas message to Randiv. He always try to confuse the umpire with fake appeals and all bye wearing an innocent mask on face. Former SL payers were too respectfull and with good manners, but nowadays the total team menatality is changing and the leader is the one playing a key roll. Now it starts reflecting on SL audience too, the banners appeared during last match is an eg.

  • lcg on August 18, 2010, 21:39 GMT

    @trueanalyst: Your argument "India could have easily spoiled the farewell test of Murli by getting out to somebody else." is incorrect. India was fighting to save the test by not throwing that wicket away. Your point regarding the Sehwag/Amla incident is valid though.

    I do not find fault with what Indian players/fans say. However the SLC over-reacted. Punishment has to match the offense, not the perceived damage to the Victorian era standards they are trying to maintain (when no one else is).

    This is the same attitude that made SLC punish the team which travelled to SA with 25 year bans while the English players who did the same got away with 2-3 match suspensions. That time they destroyed the carrers of players like Anura Ranasinghe, Ajith de Silva and Mahesh Goonatilleke. And if these types were there Murali´s carrer would have been over with the chucking incident and Arjuna would have been sacked too.

  • Kundan on August 18, 2010, 21:38 GMT

    I do not agree with Sambit. Yes, sorry makes sense, however

    What is more important than saying sorry is 1. Whether the act was done intentionally 2. Whether the intentional act resulted is fair sport?

    In the spirit of the game, the strategic no-ball did not go quite well. It was right on the SL board to apologize.

    I don't think the matter was blown out of proportion.

    Thanks

  • Venkat on August 18, 2010, 21:38 GMT

    While it is true that media usually blows things out of proportion, the incident itself cannot be ignored. Randiv entered the history books of unsportsmanship like Greg Chappell. I even doubt Sangakkara's keeping that let byes. Having kept for Murali, it looks absurb that he let byes for a not-so-difficult delivery. At the international stage, such incidents are a mark of indecency and cannot totally blame the media. But a ban I think is too much, rather Randiv should have been fined. Randiv is a good bowler and nice bat too as far as I have seen and he should concentrate on his career.

  • Jason Kennings on August 18, 2010, 21:35 GMT

    I have lost a lot of respect for the SLC here. It is obvious that the BCCI (much like the 08 fiasco of getting Bucknor kicked out and Harbhajan off) has stepped in here and pressured the SLC to "take action". I suspect that Randiv's apology was also forced by the said pressure. Here are a few things that don't make sense. Dilshan and Sehwag are team mates and good mates, why would Dilshan advice something so petty? It is even possible that he wanted to give Sehwag the 100. Sehwag (by his standards) was on 99 for a long time, why wasn't this bowled earlier? Why is everyone assuming that the SL players were aware of the stupid rule even though the Indian players clearly weren't? Why didn't he simply bowl a wide, a much safer option? And where was this reaction when Sreenath bowled a bouncer a metre ahead of the line (dangerous to say the least), and when Sehwag deliberately kicked the ball over the line vs SA (this is exactly the same -assuming Randiv was deliberate in terms of "spirit).

  • Manhar on August 18, 2010, 21:33 GMT

    To K S Sreeharsha,

    In the event of where only one run is needed for the bating team to win and a no ball is bowled and batsmen runs that will not be counted because the no ball event took place first and awarded a run to batting team and consequencesly batting teams wins right there, hence there is no more need for the run that batsmen ran, as match finished as soon as no bowl (giving the single required run to win) is declared.

    Hope this Helps.

  • Prem on August 18, 2010, 21:32 GMT

    Inspite of being die-hard INDIAN Cricket fan and more of Sehwag, I felt what Randiv did was absolutely right. Actually only these acts give the hundreds all the more worth, since it says how much an opponent values your runs inspite of match being in the lost cause.Sehwag should actually be proud and as should all Indians. The verdict from SLC only confirms the power of BCCI and meagre SLC board.

  • KK on August 18, 2010, 21:23 GMT

    so Mr.Sambit, I can puncture your car when you are leading last lap in a F1 race and say Sorry? You will be happily say "Its ok" and forget the incident?

  • Neel Valame on August 18, 2010, 21:18 GMT

    The important rule to remember is: Players of Gentlmen's game of cricket, just like any responsible citizens of the country, should abide by ethics, morals and rules all. 1] What if Suraj bowled this no ball to keep Bradman stranded at 99.96 denying him perfect 100, wouldn't there be hostiric controversy? 2] What if Suraj bowled this no ball on the last ball of the match with India needing only 1 run to win, wouldn't there be betting controversy? 3] What if Suraj would have stopped Brian Lara from scoring his 400th run with this tactic , wouldn't that deprive cricket of it's jewel? 4] What if Suraj deprive Ricky his 5*th century in the similar circumstances in denying ricky a possible record?

    That is why it is important for SLC to uphold the spirit of the game and put the things in teir proper place. BRAVO SLC! You won the hearts of millions!!!

  • abhishekh on August 18, 2010, 21:17 GMT

    Cannot disagree more.. there are times when someone has to take stand on nonsense. SL board did that and their action will have definite bearing on the Cricket Gentlemen spirit . Mr. Sambit cricket is not football where even a player with head butt is awarded man of the tournament ...cricket is the only game in the world where decorum is as important as your skills...

  • tin.tin.in.usa on August 18, 2010, 21:14 GMT

    Dear CricInfo: Could you guys enable spelling and grammar checker on the blog entries :). Pathetic entries and even more pathetic errors :D - semantic or otherwise.

  • Dinesh on August 18, 2010, 21:14 GMT

    England should learn from this example set by the SL board.

  • Shri Vikram from India on August 18, 2010, 21:14 GMT

    Let's forget BCCI, SLC and money for a while.Let's play "neutral neutral" like "doctor doctor" you know.Assume it was Sulieman Benn who bowled this no ball to Ponting.Now much as I love Benn and hate Ponting,I would still be a little pissed with Benn.Many here talked about how Indians and others have been guilty of breaching the rule book.However,on almost all such occasions the guilty party was doing it in order to achieve,to WIN,to do better at the game,and not to make a mockery of the proceedings.Randiv's act had nothing to do with strategy, or a desire to win or shine out.It was a churlish act worthy of a school boy, he might as well have tried to pull Sehwag's pyjamas down after the century and giggled about it later.It was a "boys" thing you know,like "Hey we lost by 100 runs but wasn't it funny when I pulled his pyjamas down?" The Sehwag-Amla kick was strategy(albeit flawed and duly fined)aimed at WINNING,not at denying a landmark.Eventually,fans were cheated more than Sehwag..

  • Tyler on August 18, 2010, 21:12 GMT

    I agree with Sambit that a lot is being made out of this issue which has been needlessly blown out of proportion. Sure, what SL did was probably not in the proper spirit of the game but the again I remember Monsieur Sehwag kicking the ball to the boundary just a few months back to ensure that Hashim Amla was denied the strike and India could bowl to the inexperienced tailender. Am I the only one who sees a parallel between the two incidents?

  • Anonymous on August 18, 2010, 21:06 GMT

    Somebody in the comments above tries to draw parallels between this incident and other incidents like Sehwag or some other fielder deliberately giving a boundary to one batsman to ensure the strike goes to another batsman.

    This analogy is flawed at best and totally misses the point at worst.

    Sometimes when a bowler sees a batsman come down the wicket, he deliberately bowls a wide to aid the keeper in effecting a stumping. This is a perfectly good (in fact *useful*) strategy to *take a wicket*. Deliberately giving a single or boundary etc to ensure the strike goes to another (obviously weaker) batsman is again a perfectly plausible and useful strategy that a team can employ to *win the match*.

    That is *not* the case with this deliberate no-ball incident. It was clearly and unambiguously an act solely committed to deny the batsman a century.

    That this was a sad incident that should not have been done is obvious. And not punishing it amounts to encouraging it.

  • Uday on August 18, 2010, 20:59 GMT

    @Kewl and other who say they dont understand the rules.

    6 runs were not cedited to Sehwag since the match was already over when the no-ball was bowled. Similarly if a team needs one run to win and the batsman hits the ball to the boundary but they complete the single before the ball went for a four the batsman gets just one run and not four because the game ended when they completed the single. One the other hand had the ball reach the boundary and they didnt complete the single the batsman gets four runs.

    On the above topic, I personally feel that Randiv should not have been banned. The ban should have gone to Dilshan. If a senior player tells you to do something you do it. THe bigger culprit here is Dilshan according to me.

    I see many people criticizing BCCI. I dont think BCCI would have taken any action on this matter. It was SLC's decision and they are solely responsible for it.

  • Raj on August 18, 2010, 20:58 GMT

    I certainly disagree with the proposition that "the guilty part apologises and the offended party accepts" means the matter should be closed, especially in a public arena. Then there will be no motivation to improve the spirit of any interaction and indeed the spirit of sport. Laws cannot be written for everything and every cicumsatnce. Individuals must be held accountable for their behaviour.

    I am sure Mr. Bal has had an opinion or two on the spirit of the game.

    Mr. Bal asked "where do the rest of us come in"? I ask "where does Mr. Bal come in to voice his opinion on the matter through his blog"?

    If he thinks he deserves an opinion, he should afford the same to everyone else.

    Regards, Raj

  • Anonymous on August 18, 2010, 20:55 GMT

    Sambit:

    1. Considering you wrote this article Thursday evening (IST), you definitely seem to be woefully and "desperately out of sync" with the facts. Complicity of other senior players (Dilshan) is *not* a "ridiculous whisper/rumour" but an established fact. Brush up your Sinhalese and listen to what the stump mic has picked up. It was a deliberate no-ball *and* "encouraged" by others. Anyway Randiv is too young and junior to think of doing something like this by himself.

    2. Sure, "spirit of cricket" is a fuzzy concept. But it *has* been called upon previously to mete out punishment (if necessary) so why not this time as well? Or are you arguing that we should just do away with it entirely?

    3. "The bowler apologized, the batsman accepted" should *not* be the end of it because unless there is no tangible punishment, this act will serve as a precedent and be repeated again and again. It is *very common* in the dying stages of a match for some batsman to be near a 100.

  • P S Parameswaran on August 18, 2010, 20:55 GMT

    I agree with the article and in a nation where the game Cricket is taken emotionally by us it's not a surprise that this controversy had happened.

  • Guru on August 18, 2010, 20:33 GMT

    While I agree with the author on most points, it must be pointed out that this was not an isolated incident. SRT was denied a century along the same lines some time back. This nonsense had the makings of getting into norm of acceptable behavior. I really appreciate SLC for getting into this and trying to nip it in the bud. I am not sure that any other board would have reacted in this manner.

  • Suren on August 18, 2010, 20:32 GMT

    I wonder how Srilankan Cricket is dreaming of Suraj Randiv as their Future & successor of Murali.More over this guy has no ability to attack the batsmen. Its obvious that he have a chance to dismiss sehwag, but he opted the other way by listening to Dilshan! Poor Guy he cant even think on his own. A cricketer of Suraj Randiv Character and mindset cant be Murali's Succcesor.

  • Jose on August 18, 2010, 20:31 GMT

    Brings to mind the underarm ball that is still discussed and is framed in cricketing folkore. It was perfectly legal (then) too; Suraj (Ranadiv) had no business to heed to Dilshan and should have kept his wise head, Dilshan (as the perpetuater) also should be banned a match.

    Sorry, i completely disagree with you Sambit. Every thing we discuss about in cricket is related to players statistic, of course, it can be put behind us. But it is neccecary to bring some semblance of fairness and justness into cricket, if it starts with SL, i laud their management into cotemplating it..

  • CricPlayer on August 18, 2010, 20:30 GMT

    Once again, Yes Mr.Bal, you are out of sync on this one.

  • Rony on August 18, 2010, 20:29 GMT

    Yes, I agreed with the article.SL board did much more about Randiv. Randiv aplogise to sehwag, that should be ending. SL cricket board took action unnecessarily.Is this not enough that Randiv, Sangakara, and board also aplogise for this?? I think all this happen because the name of the team is India. If team is Australia instead of India, then also this type of action will taken. This no ball is not against any law of cricket. And if said about the spirit of cricket, then the matter is this type of incident happens many times before. I saw many indian player behave very roughly in the play ground during mathch. Is this go with spirit of cricket?? Australians are famous for their slazing . Is this a part of spirit of cricket?? And I think indian team also should play their role to finish this. ICC also happy for this action !!! Randiv just become a victim..... to make some people happy...

  • Sanjay Trisal on August 18, 2010, 20:26 GMT

    It is the nature of the Beast, 'Money Power'. BCCI being the richest cricket board in the world is relaxing its muscle. If the same would have happened 10 years back, nobody would have even paid attention.

  • Ravan on August 18, 2010, 20:25 GMT

    I strongly condemn this "The bowler apologised, the batsman accepted; where do the rest of us come in?"

    They are not playing for fun, the two players representing the two nations, and expected to true sportsmanship.

    If they are playing in school ground I never min. For example will you accept If india totally win by extras! Spirit of the game will die and no longer cricket will be gentleman game accepting others win... Think about it.

  • Skand Bhargava on August 18, 2010, 20:23 GMT

    If Sri Lanka cricket board is so spineless that it apologises to opponents, bans and fines it's own players due to media pressure, then the players playing for such a board deserve what they got.

    On the other hand if the board did what it did because it thought that is the right way to handle the situation then Sambit Bal can give a rest to his fingers and keep his opinion to himself.

  • Prashant on August 18, 2010, 20:18 GMT

    I totally disagree with the issue blown out of proportion. The penalty is justified.Complying with the spirit of game is as important as any other rule in the constitution of cricket and any violation needs to be sincerely dealt with.

  • Ingu on August 18, 2010, 20:15 GMT

    Cricket is played for the enjoyment of fans around the world. The SL team, deprived millions of people in India and the rest of the world of a joyous and entertaining moment. It was mean spirited and unsportsman like and he and the team deserved what they got. Interestingly Dilshan plays for the same IPL team as Sehwag and has done so for the last 3 years. That makes it even more mean spirited.

  • True Indian on August 18, 2010, 20:12 GMT

    First of all, it is not a big matter as Shewaq himself told that all teams do this. As a batsman he exnjoyed his century in the spirit of the game and expressed himself when he came to know that his century was denied just by 1 shot. Of course, nothing wrong with Randiv as he also did the in the even of the game. Its not last game for Shewag. also for Randiv too.

    I don't think people reacted to much for this. Its only media and cricket boards.

  • Sanjeev on August 18, 2010, 20:11 GMT

    the funniest part is sehwag and dilshan play for delhi daredevils in the ipl!!! also why each and every match is being played at dambulla we know the team batting second have problems chasing the targets even sanga admits that and also lights pitch are not good for eg we saw how sl lost in the asia cup final

  • Phani on August 18, 2010, 20:04 GMT

    I saw someone mentioning Ganguly bowling a wide deliberately when Sanath was charging down the track while he was on 189. Forget about the score of the batsman, it is a boling tactic any bowler would use when the batsman charges down. It is a common phenomenon in Cricket. This incident cannot be compared with the current situation. There was one more comment from some one else about the net run rate. In the hypothetical scenario that he talked about, the target is 150. He was talking about reaching 156 in 34.1 overs in terms of the run rate. The net run rate required to reach the final would always be calculated based on the target and will never be calculated beyond that.

  • Pratul on August 18, 2010, 20:04 GMT

    I personally feel the SL board overreacted. Randiv must be shocked at this even after apologizing, while Sehwag must also be taken aback by this development. People who are blaming Sehwag are just plain stupid. He is a guy who always says what he feels. He must have never wanted Randiv to get a one match ban or something on the same lines. Regarding BCCI bashing, it is nothing new. People have made it a norm to blame BCCI for even something as stupid as a sneeze by another cricketer. One thing has to be understood that SL board wants to show they didn't win the Spirit of the game award for nothing. Its just plain simple, "SL board blew it out of proportion and gave media a chance to help it along." Cheers!!

  • phaedrus on August 18, 2010, 20:04 GMT

    an unexpectedly ludicrous consequence of a fundamentally mean (the tendency to deprive others of glory is basic) streak and its unabashed expression ! but i love the icc . for making it so dark and humourous .

  • CricFan2 on August 18, 2010, 20:04 GMT

    The apology was the cake, the ban was the icing. Gr8 punishment for unsportsman like behavior.

  • Nishantha.H on August 18, 2010, 19:36 GMT

    Spot on Sambit ! The reason for this is the Sri Lankan cricket board for years now have been saddled with permanent interim committees who are mere political stooges and puppets and are at the mercy of their political masters who will do anything and everything to bow to the whims and fancies of "big brother "India without so much as a second thought on how it would affect the game of cricket in the long run . What happens next if an indian batsman on the threshold of a milestone with his team needing the same amount of runs is denied same by the opposition bowling a wide or him being hit on his head and running a leg bye , will that bowler also be banned and fined ? . The stupid ruling on this sorry episode which at best is questionable gamesmanship ( and sri lanka are not the first team to do it by a long shot ! ) ,has set is ridiculous and will reverberate within the game with severe consequences in the years to come !

  • mm on August 18, 2010, 19:36 GMT

    The incident will be on Shewag's mind as much as it will be on the fielders'/bowlers' mind when Shewag takes guard next time. I can guarantee you that Sanga and others will let Shewag have it (sledging) when he walks into the middle next time. I am sure lots of "cry baby" references will be thrown at him. It will be an interesting contest to watch. But one thing is certain though ... Indian players, in particular, care a lot more about landmarks than Sri Lankan players such as Sanath, Murali, etc. No Indian player would have walked out of the crease while on 187 (6 runs away from world record and 13 runs from 200) in an ODI match. Sanath did. No Indian bowler would have announced his retirement at 792 with one test to go. I would even go Sachin is the most landmark-conscious of them all. May be Veeru, on the other hand, appeared to be the least concerned ... at least among his peers within the Indian team. For Veeru get embroiled in such a fiasco is quite ironic

  • Infinite Thought on August 18, 2010, 19:27 GMT

    I am not as concerned by the prsonal records as the NRR. The no-ball rule robbed us 0.07 in the NRR. If the NRR comes to play and India misses the finals because we were worse by less than 0.07 (looks unlikely now!), that would be a tragedy.

    Otherwise, this is exhibit 6189 of how Indian media blows everything out of propotion. wish they focused on dantewada massacre after effect rather than sehwag missing a century!

  • Thiags on August 18, 2010, 19:24 GMT

    Any player, it doesn't matter which country u belong should play the game in spirited manner and has to lead by example. Cricket is Genetlemans game, Now it is no more. Randiv deserves it. Its not blown out of proportion. Sambit Get up.. IF indian players do make mistakes then they also need to be punished. Lets take sachin's case of ball tempering. He was punished earlier and later he was cleared. So Rule is a Rule.

    Why dont u put 170 balls as no balls to make the country win? Why no one does that?

  • Manush on August 18, 2010, 19:23 GMT

    When you have a third umpire and Match referee for this match, and when things have gone this far, why can't they officially declare that the match was won by India with the last ball getting 7 runs and in the process Sehwag completed his century.

  • Manush on August 18, 2010, 19:22 GMT

    When you have a third umpire and Match referee for this match, and when things have gone this far, why can't they officially declare that the match was won by India with the last ball getting 7 runs and in the process Sehwag completed his century.

  • Mahesh on August 18, 2010, 19:15 GMT

    Why drag BCCI into this? Or blame Sehwag for making a noise about the deliberate no-ball? Why penalize Randiv for playing within the rules of the game? ICC should be kicked in the backside for keeping such a rule. If a batsman can be run-out of a no-ball, even if it is the last ball, why should he not get the runs he scores of it?

  • Anirudh Bhatt on August 18, 2010, 19:15 GMT

    Mr. Sambit Bal. Well done. People like you define hyocracy. If you are travelling by a crowded train or a bus and another person pushes you by mistake, you will give him every abuse you know. He may apologise but you will go on and on. But when it comes to writing an article, you become human and feel bad for Randiv. You paint Randiv as a hero and Viru as a villain. Great job. And when you blame media, hope you remember cricinfo is not a charitable institution doing good for humanity. Before you speak evil of a person with 21 test centuries, please look at the mirror or look at some articles appearing on cricinfo (I am refering to the one last year by an Australian which stated that India will not remain No 1 test side for long.) Would request espnstar to look at the content of this website very seriously. I am very hopeful that the contents of this article and the website are honest and not driven by 'other considerations'. Hopefully we ll get a more realistic view of events.

  • paresh kurani on August 18, 2010, 19:13 GMT

    When a batsman gets a decision by umpire and he feels he is not convinced - if he even looks at umpire in disbelief - he gets penalised saying it is a disrepect to the umpire and inturn disrespect to this gentleman's game - Isn't what Randiv/Dilshan (???) did same as disrespecting the fellow cricketer and inturn disrespecting the game? I think Srilanka needs to grow up and shade this neighboring friendly nation image - they are not "gentlemen" and they do not deserve adulation from BCCI or Team India - remember Indian team gave one of the best farewell to Murali in his last test - i am yet to such a gesture any other team give to any indian cricketer - hardly seen...

    Also, no one in MCC/ICC is talking about "why the no ball is counted in batsman's scorecard but not runs scored"...

    one simple question - all these world's so called governing bodies - why are they so unrealistic? we saw this in FIFA as well and now ICC... Paresh Kurani

  • Vaidya on August 18, 2010, 19:12 GMT

    Makes sense from SLC's perspective. SL has been winning the spirit of cricket award for the past 2 years and their players have been known to behave well on field despite weird actions and suchlike. This sends out a clear message to all players that such behaviour will not be tolerated. Randiv is a young player and will hopefully learn from this. Remember Gambhir earlier getting into trouble with players often and getting banned/fined and Gambhir now. It does seem over the top, but the intention is definitely good and I don't think it has anything to do with India being on the receiving end.

  • Saurabh Sharma on August 18, 2010, 19:11 GMT

    Sambit.........its very easy to write a article like this....but playing in the middle and scoring a century is very tough. How all srilankans would had felt if in the first test india's last batsman got out delibrately by hit wicket on any other bowler's ball instead of murlitharan,and murli deprived of 800 wickets.My dear whole of srilanka had forget there dinner with their family for next month.Think about it.......This gentelman game is not for gentelman like u.......So stop watching cricket and start watching WWE.

  • Vinod on August 18, 2010, 19:10 GMT

    I don't agree with you, Samit. Suraj Randiv made it a personal issue and played in a cowardly manner. I expect only Aussies to do what he did - actually, this is even worse than the underarm bowling by Aussies, because SL was guaranteed to lose the match - at least the Aussies did it for the victory! So Suraj is rightfully punished. It's a good thing that he will be back for the match against India, so Sehwag can have fun.

    Now, the "law" that allowed Suraj to do this... well that's a stupid law and should be changed.

  • Anonymous on August 18, 2010, 19:08 GMT

    i think the rule is just dumb. Shewag did hit a six, so they should have counted that. Stupid ICC

  • sam on August 18, 2010, 19:07 GMT

    If India lost they start blaming the pitch, If Sehwag not completed his century, He start blaming the opponents, these are the trades and tricks of the game, you have to live with them, Sehwag is looks like a school boy playing in his back yard. BCCI knows now they have the veo power in ICC bcoz of the financial advantage they have over other cricket playing nations, thats why they and their cricketers show childish behavior all the times, they r not ready to accept there weaknesses. Thanks to Srilankan team for once again showing the real face of BCCI and Indian team to world cricket. If the lose something they start crying like spoiled child.

  • Mack on August 18, 2010, 19:05 GMT

    Though your concept of "bowler apology, batsman acceptance" sounds great in an article., batsman do move on but will never forget. Heck, people who watched this will remember for a very long time.

    Don't let Sanga's smooth talk fool you. This is guys is a well seasoned veteran in speaking to the press. His answers are never direct and circumvent the issue. Almost like a politician.

    Sehwag did point out that this had happened once before to Tendulkar. One thing people should not forget is that sport of any sort is an entertainment at it's best with no script, and no one knows the ending or who is going to be the hero or villain. That's why masses flock to this theater which most call it sports arena. It is nothing but a huge stage.

    The spirit of the game is about fairness and playing hard and that's the beauty of a sporting event as to pre-scripted plays, dramas, movies etc. Randiv and Sanga both violated that trust which audience from world over put in the players.

  • hasan on August 18, 2010, 19:04 GMT

    as i know randiv broke no rule so he has a clean sheet

  • Rajesh V Singh on August 18, 2010, 19:02 GMT

    I as a spectator felt cheated by this deliberate no ball bowled by Suraj Randiv because it took away a much deserved, fitting climax to a good match. I am not only saying this from an Indian cricket fan point of view but as a general cricket fan. I do get my share of disappointments too when India loses so why I am being deprived of the ecstacy and joy of a perfect win along with an accomplishment of some personal milestone of one of my favorite cricketer. In other words, India's win coupled with Sehwag's well desreved century would have been more satisfying for me than just an Indian win, and I am sure its true for other Indian cricket fans too. I strongly feel some action had to be taken to set a precedence so that these incidents are not repeated. I also feel that it wasn't just Suraj or Dilshan but Sangakara is also an accomplice as the four byes that were conceded just before this no-ball was no co-incident. Malinga's 4 wides to deny Tendulkar his hundred we already know about....

  • Common_Sense on August 18, 2010, 18:58 GMT

    Sambit, I totally disagree with you here.

    "The bowler apologised, the batsman accepted; where do the rest of us come in?"

    Answer to this may lie in yet another question. The bowler bowls it, the batsman plays it, where do the rest of us come in? Do we really not come anywhere?

    Beyond this its more of a matter between an employer and its employee. SLC has full right to question Randiv, what the hell was he doing there. Was he supposed to do that? Was this the part of his job description? As a member of Sri Lanka team he is supposed to win matches for the country. He should not use the platform and means provided to him by SLC to sort out his personal animosity against someone.Its a simple case of indiscipline which maligned the image of the SLC against which their action is justified.

    And regarding the apologies, I must say all are hollow, its all keeping his ipl future in mind.

    If the Lankans want to stop everyone else to make centuries, why not get all out under 90?

  • Deepak J on August 18, 2010, 18:58 GMT

    The very fact that there are so many comments about this article should say something about why it's such an emotive issue. Sport is at it's best when the contestants give their best. Randiv's action was petty on many levels, and even given that the spirit of cricket is fuzzy at the best of times, that no-ball was DEFINITELY against even the loosest definition of it. Randiv is an exciting cricketer, but he deserves little sympathy for souring what was a great match till then. It was cynical and self-defeating. Nobody who's played cricket or who's a follower of the game could enjoy what we saw. I'm sure it turned off many viewers who were watching. That was the real problem! If the penalty is a good deterrent to anyone who wants to follow this example, then great!

  • Venkat on August 18, 2010, 18:55 GMT

    I agree. This is totally uncalled for and unnecessary. If cricket was a gentleman's game, this matter would have ended the moment Randiv apologized. After all this is between the guys on the field who battle it out and should have ended there. It is becoming evident that this is more about power struggle with both boards intervening in this trivial matter and trying to make a bid deal of it.

    Embarrassing stuff in the name of cricket! Can we focus on the bigger things please?

  • Rahul Bose on August 18, 2010, 18:48 GMT

    Couldn't agree with you more. I am surprised at the response from SLC. Players do much worse things and get away without incident, just look at Stuart Broad. Why did SLC feel the need to step in when match referee has no issue with it? The players were also fine after the apology.

    Personally as a Sehwag fan, I was looking forward to the next time Viru faced up to Randiv. Up, up and away...

  • Prokash on August 18, 2010, 18:46 GMT

    Hello folks: I think we are missing soemthing here. The decision was made by Srilankan board was not against Randiv or Dilshan nor in favor of Sewag, it was made against the wrong play to prevent the same occurence in future. I think the Srilankan board made the right decision against the ill mentality of the players, does not matter whether it was illegal by the ICC law or not. You can use all the techniques of play to beat the opposite team but it is unacceptable to abuse the system. If it continues, it will ruin the fam eof fair play and cricket as a whole. Don't let it happen.

  • Anup Kumar Das on August 18, 2010, 18:44 GMT

    SLC had to appease the cash rich BCCI and had no choice but to ct, albeit over the top! It's now BCCI's turn to warn Sehwag against issuing public statements. He failed to score off the previous balls. Being the most senior cricketer and vice captain of the team, it was below the dignity he deserves, to have moaned in public on how the Lankans deliberately deprived him of a century! I don't think Sachin Tendulkar reacted this way when HE was denied a century at Cuttck when Malinga bowled wide. THAT was not deliberate act but nevertheless the Great master never bemoaned the missed century. He went on to make more and continues to talk with his bat. THAT is the spirit of the game!

  • Samir on August 18, 2010, 18:43 GMT

    Rules for "spirit of game" when batsmen is nearing 50/100 or any landmark..

    a). there should be no bouncers b). there should be no yorkers c). fielding captain should not allowed field placement, he should play as it were any other part of match d). No slips or catching positions should be placed e). Batsman should be given a long hope or a half volley outside off stump

    the point is, there shouldnt be any hurdle for the batsman to reach the landmark.. the only way he shouldnt be, if he throws away his wicket...

  • Ramesh on August 18, 2010, 18:42 GMT

    Hi. assume a situation where India chasing 171 and just 1 ball left and 1 run required. Touch your heart and say guys, wont you pray to god for a no ball or wide from the bowler to let india win.... its all the same!!!!!.

  • Mahesh on August 18, 2010, 18:40 GMT

    Issue is NOT blown out of proportion

    Sehwag played a TRUE HEROIC innings. It was dramatical finish and a sad ending to a heroic innings though it doesnt take anything away from the HERO.

    It deserved the escalation it deserved. I was surprised when Sehwag told it was intentional but god, he was right.

    Despite the noball he hit it like a HERO for a six but thanks to the stupid rule he was denied the century.

    There is only one word that justifies Sehwag. He is a HERO.

  • Ramesh on August 18, 2010, 18:40 GMT

    Everyone here is over reacted. These days Sankakara speaks too much in press conference about sprit of Cricket (when New Zealand run out Murali when Murali is congratulating his team mate for the century ). So when his team do a mistake, they are forced to act on this in someways. Randiv is made scapegoat. Srilanka should start think about Dilshan , next captain. His attitude like this might impact young player's careers.

  • Qamber on August 18, 2010, 18:39 GMT

    i agree with the writer.....there was no need to create fuss about it.....Randiv didnt break any ICC law, infact that was a naughty act nothing more then that, why including cricket boards for this childish act.... did ECB apologize regarding Broad's act in the 2nd test against Pakistan, NO. becuase it was an ON field matter and match refree dealed with it not cricket boards.

  • Pratul on August 18, 2010, 18:37 GMT

    @K.S. Sreeharsha... are you kidding me?? You said, "What if there was a need for one run for victory and the batsman run the run but a no ball was declared. Does that constitute a draw?". Now think about it, if there was a need for one run and a no ball is bowled the batting team wins. How will it be a draw then? Scores are already level according to you and a no ball is bowled. lmao :D

  • Ashes on August 18, 2010, 18:35 GMT

    This just goes to show that power means everything in this game - not what it originally started out as - "A Gentelman's Game". With the way the boards and broadcasters dictate the game today - you cannot peanlize someone on an assumption - yes, he made a mistake - but that's the end of that move on (Like most of the people out here have mentioned).

    Indian cricketers are far away from being gentlemanly in this game and there are numerous instances of that. Their only driving force is fame and money - not the game at all - so where does the sportivness/gentelman's game come into the picture??

    Many good points here - except for the biased ones....excellent article.

    Cheers.

  • Sriram on August 18, 2010, 18:32 GMT

    Wanted to say two things. 1. "Spirit of the game" - is what is perceived on camera. So whether afridi tampered with the pitch or Moin was caught appealing on a ball clearly grassed, cheating, if caught, will be reprimanded.

    2. I think its worth letting people know the bigger reason for the game. The Ban was punitive damage, to let people realize what cricket is about in the end. Appreciate each other's effort, have fun, and enjoy the game.

  • PADDLE SWEEP on August 18, 2010, 18:32 GMT

    time to move on guyz!!!enough is enough.

  • sheshk on August 18, 2010, 18:31 GMT

    Hats off to SLC !! Though a little too harsh on Randiv, SLC has won 'my' respect back for being the only gentlemen - controversy-free cricket team. I hope other boards esp Cricket Australia learns 'something' from this !!

  • kk777 on August 18, 2010, 18:30 GMT

    ha ha ha ha ha... talk about blowing out of proportion!!!have guys even seen the no. of comments on this article...that's exactly why and how it was blown out of proportion

  • Ajay on August 18, 2010, 18:30 GMT

    Well written article. But i guess the issue had to be blown out of proportion some time or the other for the higher ups and the teams to understand that its not in the spirit of the game to do such a cowardly act. It has been happeing in the past, be it any team. Guess all the teams have done it in the past one time or the other. when such issues become big and strict steps are taken to curb it in the future, its then that the teams will understand its not worth the price. Losing a match after doing somethin shameful in a not so sportsmanly attitude and also paying extra price for the loss with the act and putting a black mark on the career and bringing disrespect to the entire team by the act.

  • Singhe on August 18, 2010, 18:30 GMT

    I do love Viru: but he is the culprit of his own demise.He could have gotten his century, but he wanted a six. SL was determined not ot give it to him. He refused the opportunity for singles and SL then decided on the deliberate no-ball. Viru was embarrased when he found out the no-ball ended the game and he will not get the six. He at first said the right things and then he got bitter with his comments. SL need stop this practice, which they have consistently one over the years, of denying players centuries by giving extras away. Play hard and use the deliveries to get his wicket. Something tells me Sanga is the biggest culprit in this whole incident.

  • shanaka on August 18, 2010, 18:29 GMT

    This is all blown way out of proportion. Most probably randiv's act was deliberate. But suspending him on that is nothing short of ridiculous. Even the apologies are uncalled for. Sanga denying his involvement is also very amusing.

    The real issue here is the post match comments of Sehwag and his arrogant behavior. How many times has sehwag not walked off when he has edged a delivery and known. Did the bowler cry (in the manner sehwag did at this incident) at each of those occasions after the match. So how many times must have sehwag himself denied a bowler of a wicket (may be a 5 for or even a ten for in a match). Would the BCCI suspend sehwag or would sehwag apologize.

    Whats even more amusing is, the comments about sportsmanship coming from indians who actually wont even allow matches that their team is going to lose to be finished.

    Sehwag is probably the most dangerous batsman in the world right now, but he has publicly displayed his arrogance by this incident.

  • Tom on August 18, 2010, 18:28 GMT

    I totally agree with the suspension. Whatever Randiv did is not unlawful, but it's against the spirit of the game. The youngsters who are watching and learning the game as we speak on, should see this as an example and learn that the spirit of the game should never be compromised. I hail srilankan board for taking this action and urge other boards to take a look all the negative tactics that are being employed in the game by their teams and take necessary actions to lift the spirit of the game.

  • Abhinav Praneet on August 18, 2010, 18:28 GMT

    Excellent comments Sambit!! The media circus around this incident is totally out of proportion. We all make mistakes, sometimes intentional and sometimes under misguided direction, but this kind of frenzy does not do good to anyone. Knowing Sehwag, he is not even bothered beyond speaking out his mind, which he already did. In his trademark style, he did smack the ball for six, not knowing that it would be a no-ball!! I think our cricketers err and correct themselves, but "experts" around them are ready pounce and lynch them beyond that!

  • Sharad Mohan on August 18, 2010, 18:27 GMT

    Sambit, I think this article of yours unlike others is very onesided..If there is NO use of records in cricket along with the actual results then its fine, but when a century is considered a milestone and if some one comes close (99) to getting that why to play foul cricket. Sri-Lankans have been our friends but i will definiately not like them doing this to Saurav, Sachin and now Shewag and go unpunishised...An emerging player like Suraj Randiv has balls to no-ball to a living batting great like Shewag on his and his countries key milestone..is definately not a matter of trivia..Thanks to SLC for taking action and keeping our coordial relationship..We love Sri-Lanka !!!

  • KC on August 18, 2010, 18:27 GMT

    SL cricket board thinks of the incident as a major issue which I think is commendable. Let's appreciate the actions taken by the board to maintain the spirit of the game. Why do Sambit (and others) choose to belittle the actions of the SL board?

  • Puneet Khurana on August 18, 2010, 18:22 GMT

    I completely agree with ban, you should not be escaped for the mistake which you did knowingly. If you think Sehwag did’t deserve 100 then you should have capability to oust him on 99 why you were approaching negative to stop on 99. If such things will be encouraged then it will not be called gentle men's game anymore.

  • Dr. aditya on August 18, 2010, 18:21 GMT

    Sorry boss, if things like these go on, days are not far, when these tactics will be very common, as regards your parallels to the spirit of the game are concerned, sledging has always been a part & parcel of the game and has been globally condemned, rather than seconded. Nothing was overboard, acts like these kill the very basis of the spirit of any sport & can't be given a blind eye. Shame on you for being a reputed website's editor & trying to play the devil's advocate

  • Naag on August 18, 2010, 18:19 GMT

    Deliberate noball is totally against spirit of game. Win like true sportsman and accept the defeat too in same spirit. Good to see SLC' action on this matter.

  • saravanan on August 18, 2010, 18:16 GMT

    Randiv's action is quite common in the world of sport. Sehwag's disappointment is baseless, as he was given two decent deliveries to score a single to reach hundred. Unnecessarily the issue is blown up. it is a silly matter.

  • udaykiran on August 18, 2010, 18:15 GMT

    ppl.. y there are so many comments on this? Everybody has done what they need to do and life will go on. Randiv has done it in the heat of the moment. Its just the human mentality. Every batsmen likes to have a century in their records and so as sehwag and he was upset that it is denied illegally. He was upset and let out in the media. Nothing wrong. Media wants to be popular and WE PEOPLE look at the news if there are these kind of issues and they used this issue and SLC they want to prove that they are fair enough(award thing) and there are. I feel like we ppl here with comments blowing out things big and I am sure this will be only for few days. And I don't believe why some always bring BCCI into this. For every issue they bring BCCI which has nothing to do with the issue. Lets go on and will njoy cricket.

  • prashanth on August 18, 2010, 18:14 GMT

    Cricket is about both the teams trying to win and all players involved trying their best to so until the last ball. In a particular tournament, South Africa lost a game against England deliberately because that could lower the net run rate of Australia and hence Australia was out of the tournament. In that case all the columnists had raised a cry saying that it was against the spirit of the game. That is the paying public that loves cricket deserve a fair contest. And that's how the topic of Spirit of the game comes in to picture. The Sri Lankans should have tried to win the game until the last ball rather than bowling deliberate no ball or deliberately giving away byes.

  • Gabbi on August 18, 2010, 18:14 GMT

    I'm surprized that nobody is asking a very simple and pertinent question in this whole episode that why on earth was Randiv not trying to get Sehwag out? Cricket is a funny game. Isn't Sri Lanka supposed to hope and try to get all the remaining batsmen out even when the scores are equal. Is what we were all taught as kids that the game is not over until the last ball?

  • Rudy brome on August 18, 2010, 18:14 GMT

    I think the board over-reacted. Evenso, Randiv's action was worse than kicking a ball to the boundary to keep a lesser batsman on strike. That would have been gamesmanship, within the law, to give his team an advantage. This incident brought no benefit to Sri Lanka and was just a mean-spirited act against a fellow player.

  • vaibhav on August 18, 2010, 18:14 GMT

    I disagree. Yes, the media went overboard, but that is usual. What else you expect from media these days?

    I think the author makes very weak comparisons which muddy the waters. If the author wants to just criticize the media, fine. But,

    1) I do not think the SL board apologizing was out of proportion. It was a nice gesture, in the same "spirit" of the game. Criticizing media actually muddies the waters here, in my opinion. Media over reaction and Randiv's apology/SL board reaction are two different things. They did the right thing and certainly not overboard.

    2) Comparing this with batsman rarely walking, bowlers appealing is again a very weak comparison. What does he seem to imply? That no one plays in the spirit of the game, hence I am ok even slapping you as we left the spirit of the game long back?

    3) People(note not media) who did consider this an unfortunate episode are not doing just because one Virender Sehwag missed a century. They realize the game is bigger than Randiv and Sehwag. To view this as Sehwag missing a century misses the point by a fair distance.

    4) The bowler apologised, the batsman accepted; where do the rest of us come in? Think hard Sambit Bal.

    Randiv had a brain freeze. Understood and forgiven. But SL board reaction is well done! - Show quoted text -

  • sands on August 18, 2010, 18:13 GMT

    I doubt if Sambit Bal has ever played serious cricket in his life. He is one of those armchair Captains!

    Its nothing short of cheating - to do it deliberately - mean, petty dont describe it well.

  • wiiCricket on August 18, 2010, 18:13 GMT

    Why Randiv waited for another two deliveries to bowl a no-ball? Shewag is just a whining baby. And so is Randiv. I would not have gone to apologize b/c Cricket is not a Gentleman's game anymore. If you want to score hundred, try again next time. Just don't be a baby.

  • Milinda on August 18, 2010, 18:12 GMT

    I think SLC overreacted in this case. If you want to save the spirit of game then dont take wickets of the batsman so they can score freely.Never ever take the wicket of a batsman whose in 90s. this is clear stupid action by SLC

  • idiot on August 18, 2010, 18:11 GMT

    well said Naveed. we indians care only abt the personal milestones of cricketers >> making them feel like gods << which they arent !!!!!!!

    for a change lets look at the outcome of the match, india won comfortably with a bonus point. No worries if sehwag hit 100 or 200. 100s dont count, only winning as a TEAM counts !!!

    This is too silly a issue to be discussed this big in media.

  • SK on August 18, 2010, 18:09 GMT

    Well well... I feel the incident seem to be natural one where a bowler always tries to take wicket/not to allow batsman to make any runs and batsman always tries to score runs. I think ICC needs to go back and review the Cricket Laws here. In normal instance, when a bowler bowls a noball, an extra run will be awarded to the opponent including the runs scored by the batsman of that noball and that ball is accounted for the batsman as he plays the ball which is correct. But in this incident, only the noball is considered and an extra run is awarded to the opponent which took the score past the target, at the same time why the batsman was denied the runs scored of the same noball ? They denied the runs scored by the batsman and the noball is accounted for batsman as played, thats not fair. Why cant they award 7 runs (1 noball + six) to the winning team. In either case the team is winning. BCCI should appeal ICC to look into the law and correct it, by rewarding Sehwag with 6 runs.

  • Gaju on August 18, 2010, 18:08 GMT

    I totally agree with you Sambit. When i read Randiv apologised to Sehwag i thought matter is over. But Sehwag has made little rush in venting out his anger using his micromax mobile with built in twitter tool. Frustrated, lonely in hotel room probably and mobile in hand he typed words which our lovely media picked up very soon. Sehwag should learn such things from Sachin and Randiv should learn some things from Indian politicians on how to fool people around you without getting cought.

  • Anonymous on August 18, 2010, 18:08 GMT

    If people should not be punished for spoiling the ame spirit then there is shouldn't be any award for "Game Spirit" which SL had two times. SL is a good team and so should stand on that.

  • tonahb on August 18, 2010, 18:06 GMT

    It's interesting to see how people start blaming BCCI for everything. SLC took the decision to suspend and ban its players not BCCI. As someone rightly said SLC took the decision not because of BCCI but most likely to prove that they truly deserve the Spirit of Cricket award.

  • GG on August 18, 2010, 18:06 GMT

    I totally agree with you Sambit. When i read Randiv apologised to Sehwag i thought matter is over. But Sehwag has made little rush in venting out his anger using his micromax mobile with built in twitter tool. Frustrated, lonely in hotel room probably and mobile in hand he typed words which our lovely media picked up very soon. Sehwag should learn such things from Sachin and Randiv should learn some things from Indian politicians on how to fool people around you without getting cought.

  • Anonymous on August 18, 2010, 18:05 GMT

    I think it is fair that SLC acted by punishing those who deliberately acted to conspire against the spirit. Fine! So this article has gone overboard in calling the action "Out of Proportion".

    I have also seen other comments in here against the "Indian Fan". The "Indian fan" overreacts but not unreasonably. Giving '96 WC as an example is bad. The Indian players' effort was at question. It was not meant to kill the spirit of the game. The match in Chennai where India lost and the entire stadium was OK with it is the true spirit of the Indian Fan.

    I am proud to have been an "Indian Fan" and will be forever. Proud of Gavaskar, Kapil and now Tendulkar. I hope to see many more. Jai Hind.

  • Kashyap on August 18, 2010, 18:04 GMT

    I do not agree with the column. I would have expected any board to take a swift action like SLC did. I think SLC has not only sent a signal to their own players, they have set an example for other cricketing boards and cricket players and fans all over the world.

    "The Spririt of the Game" is not a small word and it has to be protected not only in cricket but for that matter any game. Now, was the punishment too much that is a different issue all together.

    Being a cricket fan I was enraged when I read that it was deliberate no ball in an attempt to keep the batsman from getting to the century mark. I aplaud SLC for their swift action and would expect such actions from all crecket boards in future.

  • jokistan on August 18, 2010, 18:03 GMT

    C'mon guys! Where's the sportsman spirit?

  • DocRay on August 18, 2010, 18:02 GMT

    Idiotic, feel-good article. It totally ignores that the stump mic instruction from Dilshan to Randiv to bowl a no-ball. An instruction to deliberately bowl a no-ball is not only unethical but illegal (references to MCC laws are found in other articles).

    Being banned for one match and docked his fees (and Dilshan's) was a fitting response. The Pakis here who bemoan Indian responses are the very same ones who couldn't honor Darrel Hair's decision as an umpire.

    As an Aussie, I'm aware of my team's sledging, etc. but comparing sledging with a deliberate no-ball with an instruction from a senior player is not in the same league. Sambit, you just dropped the Bal.:)

  • shanker on August 18, 2010, 18:02 GMT

    I fuly agree that it was too trivial. Is it not perhaps the rule the is tempting the guys to do such mischief? One should not expect opposition to bowl to help complete a century. Sehwag would have completed the century on any other day a few overs earlier. Suspension of Randiv is too harsh, probably SLC is trying to please. He did not bowl well in the match and would have been dropped in any case for the next match.

  • gurudutt tiwari on August 18, 2010, 18:01 GMT

    Zain Adeeb Only pakistani people don't have ny right to speak in this issue. Imran khan (He oppose to continue a match in 1989 one day series in pakistan when Indian cricketer was attacked because Manoj Prabhakar was bowling very well in that match ) Javed miynadad (why he was not given LBW in pakistan till neutral umpire was not introduce) and wasim akram (Calcutta test 1999 sachin run out controversy). They are always consider worst white dress men in this game of gentleman

  • Anonymous on August 18, 2010, 18:00 GMT

    Is cricket a sport played by men or is it a little girls tea party where everyone has to be sweet to each other? It's amazing how unnecessary punishments are dished out because a player does something which is a little bit "cheeky" but is not breaking any rules. This whole incident is just another one of those things which works in the favour of the stronger cricket board and probably wouldn't have been dealt with in the same manner had Sehwag done the same thing to deny Dilshan a century. Se la vie. By the way I'm not a Sri Lankan just a disgusted cricket fan.

  • Manoj George on August 18, 2010, 17:58 GMT

    Hi All,

    The only reason this issue got elevated to this level is the fact that - Sehwag did scored the enough- maximum- runs required for his century - & due to the ugly no ball he lost the century. Had Sehwag missed the ball without scoring, then I totally agree with what is written by the Editor.

  • Anonymous on August 18, 2010, 17:58 GMT

    Nice article. Very well written with balanced views and 'to the point' words.

  • gurudutt tiwari on August 18, 2010, 17:54 GMT

    Zain Adeeb Only pakistani people don't have ny right to speak in this issue. Imran khan (He oppose to continue a match in 1989 one day series in pakistan when Indian cricketer was attacked because Manoj Prabhakar was bowling very well in that match ) Javed miynadad (why he was not given LBW in pakistan till neutral umpire was not introduce) and wasim akram (Calcutta test 1999 sachin run out controversy). They are always consider worst white dress men in this game of gentleman

  • satish on August 18, 2010, 17:54 GMT

    dear sambit; for your kind information, cricket is the religion in India & cricketer are the gods. so please support the cricket & cricketer in india. be practical....... & take only onside either India or Sri lanka.

  • Nampally on August 18, 2010, 17:53 GMT

    This incident drastically breached the spirit of the game. Dhoni sacrificed his runs for Sehwag to complete his century. As it happened Dhoni left 5 runs for Sehwag.In come the culprits determined to deny Sehwag his century, First Sanga gives 4 Byes by slipping the ball right thru his gloves & then a delibrerate no ball - by over stepping one foot over the crease. Surely this is well planned hijacking of a well deserved century. How low can one stoop in a "Gentlemanly sport"? Sambit, I do not agree that this was overplayed. English literature has taught us a simple word "Sorry" which is supposed to annul all your blunders in an instant. Unfortunately Sehwag ends up on the losing end with one century robbed - his second 99 on this tour of SL. This incident irked many true fans who were not amused by such cheap tactics by the "hosts" to a "guest" batsman.In India our "guests" are considered more precious than the "hosts". So both the spirit of the game & culture were broken.

  • Suren on August 18, 2010, 17:52 GMT

    Sehwag at some point accused the entire team's collusion and that was pretty nasty. He stated about a past incident making them repeat offenders. While he absolutely deserved the century, he could have avoided rubbing them the wrong way. That said, all of us cannot be diplomats, he did what he did, SL team what they did. Who are we to question anyway? Mere outsiders, no, critical stakeholders eh?

  • Kumarcoolbuddy on August 18, 2010, 17:52 GMT

    @Sheru is saying that SL did a great job by denying Sehwag from century. Looks he is the brother of Dilshan. Why are ppl behaving so stupidly. Randiv was suspended for one match and yes thats not fair but this is third time SL player(s) behaving like this with Indian player(s). I understand that as a bowler he might have done that in the heat of the moment but Why Dilshan had to involve/encourage Randiv for that indecent act? Thats the most indecent act from Dilshan or any player. It would have been fair if Dilshan was suspended instead. If India really had power to control cricket world then why Indian players were punished many times even for appealing strongly. But when most of the SL players are appealing for all silly balls and iiritating batsmen and I dont see any punishment for that. FYI...Not only India but most of the teams will not stoop to that level. These kind of act is usually part of grudge.

  • Manjeect Modi on August 18, 2010, 17:51 GMT

    SLC was right in apologisdinfg .SLC have learnt one mantra which PCB has not and thats why SL gets is progressing finacially as well in terma of quality players coming out. The mantra is "Boss is always right" . Its a amntra that helps becomes successful finacially and in all other ways. And here the undisputed boss is BCCI . PCB decided to go against wishes of the BOSS. Look where they are. No home series for last 2 years and none in sight for next 20 years (unless Boss changes mind) , no WC matches hosting. In short no cricket , no profit , no reveneue and and a spiral downawrds towards cricketing doom.PCB adopted the cornered tigers theory which works in a blue moon . They forgot the fact that probbly 99 times out of 100 cornered tigers are either captured or shot dead . akistan is getting homeseries in England/countries are helping them but fact remains that they are helping only for profit profit. Ask PCB to give security assurance n ask teams to tour and we will see facts

  • HRG on August 18, 2010, 17:50 GMT

    Thanks Sambit for an excellent article. Dilshan is an established senior cricketer in Sri Lankan team has been fined, while Randiv gets a ban. Both of them should have been banned. I agree with you, Sambit, when u say "The bowler apologised, the batsman accepted; where do the rest of us come in?". Certainly we have no place Thanks once again for a very well balanced article

  • Kris on August 18, 2010, 17:50 GMT

    Bowling a deliberate no-ball takes away some of the joy of attaining victory for the two batsman in the middle and and also irritates them - this is a psychological ploy by the sour loser. In this case, it prevented Sehwag from getting a century too. The no-ball rule was the sucker punch!

    Doing it thrice (Ganguly, Tendulkar and Sehwag) against the same team definitely deserves some kind of disciplinary action.

  • Raj on August 18, 2010, 17:49 GMT

    Question for the author and all those who are saying it is not a big deal, imagine if this happened in the first test when Murali was on 799 wickets. If Pragyan Ojha or Ishant Sharma had given their wicket away to deny Murali of 800 wickets would it still not be a big deal?

  • Rakesh Mathur, MD on August 18, 2010, 17:47 GMT

    Dear Mr Sambit Bal:

    What Dilshan advised Randiv to do in an international match was cheap stuff, the kind small kids get involved with when playing in their local residential areas around town. Sehwag worked hard for his century and a sportsman should have loved to honor him with his ton. Most likely, you don't play cricket.Neither do I. But, who are we to say where the matter should end? Srilankan Board took the right acton. With the strength that IPL has over 'money in cricket', any player should think five times before acting cheap with Indian Cricketers. Disclaimer: I'm a great fan of Sehwag and Sachin.. Srilankans did the same with Tendulkar a few years ago.

  • siva on August 18, 2010, 17:45 GMT

    Well said. Before this ball Sehwag had 2 balls to play. Being a champion, he could have hit one of those rather than waiting for this ball. Without crying.

  • Raj on August 18, 2010, 17:45 GMT

    Mountain made out of a mole hill. The overstepping was silly, but the powers of the game have beaten Randiv hands down in pettiness.

  • rajesh on August 18, 2010, 17:44 GMT

    the way the indian media has wasted primetime news on this stupid century is disgusting. what do they have to say about the spirit of the game with srinath bowling wides for kumble to get 10 wickets? if a pakistani had got hit wicket in srinaths over what would arnab and rajdeep done they would have probably burst a vessel

  • cricproc on August 18, 2010, 17:44 GMT

    As some people rightly pointed out if the Indians played "naughty" cricket by throwing away there last wicket to deny murali his 800th test wicket all hell would have broken loose, the same characters who are talking like saints acting as if they are taking the high road would have been screaming at the Indians and off course BCCI.

    But when the whole world Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Australians, Sri Lankans ... are crying on India and BCCI, seems like we are doing something right. It’s human nature to bring down the top guy so if all commenter’s are ganging up on India to defend a silly shame less (and a lot of other issues as well)then India might be doing a lot of things right, the more people cry on India the more success India will get. There is a lot of resentment about the success of IPL, there is lot of resentment about the money BCCI has, there is lot of resentment about India number 1 test ranking and because of the above resentments and jealousy people are just going crazy

  • Jayaraman on August 18, 2010, 17:42 GMT

    I agree with what Sambit Bal has said. It is blown out unnecessarily and the persons involved were made to feel guilty.

    Once Virender Sehwag accepted Suraj Randiv's apology that should have been the end of the story

    The only reason why Sri Lankan board has acted is entirely the reason posted by Shen Mark – it is nothing but to please BCCI.

    What would have happened if Sehwag was bowled by a genuine delivery- may be Randiv did not want that. Next time to please BCCI, next ICC could bend the rule saying no bowlers can get Indian batsman out at 99.

  • Kappa on August 18, 2010, 17:41 GMT

    This is all due to Indian cricket economy. SLC & Sanaga have done more than what was expected from them (by BCCI).

  • laugh on August 18, 2010, 17:39 GMT

    Thoroghly blown out of propotion and many incidents have been swept under the carpet.However SLC looks to be under obligation to BCCI hence Indian players are also throwing their weight around like the water boy incident where such a big rumpuss was created.looks like cricket is no more a gentlemans game as money and power hungry foxes are on the fray!

  • srinin on August 18, 2010, 17:37 GMT

    How has the esteemed editor also missed the core issues like the average fan or the childish players and boards? 1) But for a half baked rule this incident wd not have come to pass. Call for scrapping of the anomaly of a rule which says the that a match can end even before a ball delivered can run its full course. 2) Let us give up this glorification for 50s, 100s, 5-fors etc in a team game like cricket? Does anyone keep score of how many points either of the Woodies had scored in their doubles matches? Does anyone talk about the individual lap times of the 4 athletes in a 4x100 relay in the Olympics? Or is any one in a football or hockey game obsessed with individual tallies? 3) THINK! If a team can do anything to deny a single to a batsman in a match already decided, how deeply has the malaise of 'playing hard' seeped into the players psyche? Does sports improve character?

  • aquarianx on August 18, 2010, 17:37 GMT

    I have always admired the Sri Lankans for the enthusiasm with which they play the game, second only to the Bangladeshi's. There was a significant transgression of the spirit of the game. The bowler has apologised and the batsman has accepted it. That should have been the end of the matter. We should remember that the BCCI did not want to get involved at all. The SLC action is an internal matter. So let us not allow this to create a chasm which some other cricket playing nations would love to see.

  • rsg on August 18, 2010, 17:37 GMT

    All of Sambit's arguments hold for the underarm bowling incident as well. Does that mean we shouldn't have bothered about that one too, save changing the law? In that case, Chappell might well have argued that, like this time, it did not change the outcome of the game. So why should anyone have bothered then? This article is just more confirmation of what I have long thought abt cricinfo editorials/editors... that they are way to overrated to be the voice (let alone the conscience) of cricket.

  • TipTop on August 18, 2010, 17:35 GMT

    SriLanka did not follow spirit of the game. But it doesn't warrant any punishment. They played according to the rules. Sanga should openly admit that he told Randiv to bowl deliberately so that Sehwag wont score 100. Also he should admit that 4b was also part of the plan. Why Sanga is behaving like hypocrite????? There is nothing wrong if a team follows this strategy to deny milestone to opponent. But Sanga should not pretend like innocent. Sri Lanka board should openly admit they don't give importance to spirit of the game rather than trying to soothe BCCI.

  • Shrikar D on August 18, 2010, 17:34 GMT

    I’m not so sure for the following reasons: a)Why have a document called the ‘Spirit of Cricket’ if it’s not going to be adhered to? b)The SLC Board had no choice but to act once the matter became public. c)Other cricketers also came forward with instances when the SL team acted in a similar fashion in earlier matches d)A team that’s won the Spirit of Cricket award twice needs to lead by example.

    Suraj Randiv’s actions on the field of play during those last few moments of the match were despicable & the fact that it happened with the encouragement of atleast one senior player is shocking. The punishment fits the crime.

    But, I do agree on one point: Let’s Move On! The matter is closed.

  • Vinod on August 18, 2010, 17:34 GMT

    I don't agree with you, Samit. Suraj Randiv made it a personal issue and played in a cowardly manner. I expect only Aussies to do what he did - actually, this is even worse than the underarm bowling by Aussies, because SL was guaranteed to lose the match - at least the Aussies did it for the victory! So Suraj is rightfully punished. It's a good thing that he will be back for the match against India, so Sehwag can have fun.

    Now, the "law" that allowed Suraj to do this... well that's a stupid law and should be changed.

  • Pradip on August 18, 2010, 17:34 GMT

    Issue blown out of proportion completely. Was winning more important than a personal 100? While Randiv acted stupidly, Sehwag also had 2 balls to take a single. He has opened his mouth again just like he did in Bangladesh and made a fool of himself. He needs coaching in speaking skills. Better yet, he should be banned from talking to media. August 15th was my 41st birthday, and he spoiled it for me. As I am on wrong side of 40, he is on wrong side of ethics. I am his big fan, but needs to learn a few things from Dhoni and Tendulkar. This issue could have been a juicy stuff for his future autobiography. Now, it's stale. I am deeply upset, and will probably have to work more to take it off my mind. Thanks but no thanks, Sehwag.

  • Pankaj on August 18, 2010, 17:31 GMT

    It would have been very interesting if Sehwag would have got stumped on that ball. :)

  • Anand on August 18, 2010, 17:30 GMT

    Its ridiculous to ban Suraj. Trevor Chappel was not banned for bowling that under arm ball nor was Greg Chappel fined for suggesting it. That was much more mean spirited than what Suraj did. Instead, in that case, the LAW CHANGED. I guess just CHANGE THE LAW NOW AND MOVE ON. I guess Suraj is a new kid and not a bog name so was handed out a ban. Dont worry Suraj. You are excellent and one day the world will fear your bowling the way they did Murali and Warne. You'll have everything to laugh then. That day, DELIBERATELY BOWL NO BALLS SO THAT YOU CAN GET TO BOWL ANOTHER BALL AT THE BATSMAN TO GET HIS WICKET. They will not talk about spirit of the game then. They will laud you for your cricketing intelligence. By the way, I am Indian and loved the way Sehwag batted. But it is such a shame that a no ball is made to look as if he crossed the border without permission and not just the crease. Most disppointed with the SLC for treating Suraj thus.

  • India on August 18, 2010, 17:30 GMT

    From the comments that I have read and from the point of this article, I think that anyone who thinks that this incident should be forgotten doesnt understand cricket. The hundred (100 runs) is the biggest achievment for a cricketer in ODI cricket, so why are people saying that sehwag should forget about this, he worked so hard on this pitch where 15 batsmen all struggled to make any sort of contribution. Why do people make such a big deal about Tendulkar and Pontings rivalry, about who will get the most test hundreds, lets forget about hundreds then, who cares about anything in cricket? A hundred is a record, it is something which a player will talk about for the rest of his career, but this hundred wont count for Sehwag because of foul play by a Sri Lankan player. In Football when a player dives in the penalty box it is considered foul play and that specific player is given a yellow card and the incident is never forgotten in a click of a finger, the same should happen here.

  • Raambo on August 18, 2010, 17:29 GMT

    The SLC has done a great job with their inquiry and subsequent decision to suspend Randiv and fine Dilshan. This goes to show that they realize how mean-spirited the gesture of Randiv and Dilshan. At least some people keep in mind the spirit of cricket.

  • rsquarev on August 18, 2010, 17:28 GMT

    I don't think its Randiv's idea. He is new player and don't think he knows there is such rule denying Sehwag's 100. Poor Randiv. He was a scapegoat.

    Sequence of incidents seem Sanga was the mastermind behind this. It is clearly evident that Sanga lied in post-match presentation that he doesn't know the no-ball matter. Anybody can grasp that he was lying while he is answering TonyG's question about no-ball controversy. He was wobbling initially and then started speaking about something unrelated to the question. Microphone recordings during last over, might reveal his involvement. It's SHAME on Sanga for PETTY n MEAN mindset. Ethically Sanga is not ELIGIBLE to represent cricketers in ICC. He should give up his representation voluntarily.

    Randiv or Sanga should have thought once what they were doing. They put Sri Lanka's pride at stake. I hope they realized now.

    Unlike other sports, Spirit of the game is part of the Cricket. That is why its called Gentlemen game.

  • Nazir Tyrewala on August 18, 2010, 17:25 GMT

    It's interesting that many people bring up Sehwag's (admittedly questionable) action during the India-SA test series. But if I recall correctly the umpires in that case negated the boundary and correctly let Amla resume strike. Additionally Sehwag was warned about it. That's what I believe should have happened in this case - if the no-ball was that egregious and blatant the umpire should have negated the delivery and forced Randiv to bowl again. That would have minimized the controversy.

    As far as the incident itself goes I do think that it was a petty action and my respect for Dilshan in particular (as the instigator) has really plummeted. I don't think this is all too different from the underarm bowling incident in the Aus-NZ game - at that time underarm bowling was within the letter of the law. Whether the result of the game is at stake or not should not matter and players should not indulge in such petty and mean-spirited behavior

  • Joe Philip on August 18, 2010, 17:24 GMT

    Only a warning would have done and not the one match suspension and the match fees.Sehwag played a wonderful innings and I dont think he played a slow game.He adopted that style in that game for India and not for himself and its unfortunate that he didnt get his century.

  • Simeon on August 18, 2010, 17:21 GMT

    I didn't see the actual match and checking out cricinfo I thought that it was a simple victory, but to dish out this punishment on a player to me is harsh. SL has its reason for banning its player but isn't bowling no balls and giving away byes actually benefitting the other side.India have bigger problems to worry about than about this. Recently they were bowled out for 88. I am sure that they would have wished for any help they could have gotten from the opposition on that day. I have seen other players(not mentioning team) when 1 run is required for victory just fire the ball down the legside for wides or byes and nothing has even been made of it.

  • KarK on August 18, 2010, 17:20 GMT

    It looks like some of the people commenting here now wants Sambit to apologize for having Dinner with his family! Wow I see similarities between Sambit and Randiv here! Randiv's no ball and Sambit's Dinner were obviously not well timed, planned and executed. But seriously I am appalled that some of you, Sangha and Sambit thinks that Sehwag is the problem here!

  • shinas on August 18, 2010, 17:17 GMT

    i hope sehwag would prove in the next match by making a double century...

  • unknown on August 18, 2010, 17:16 GMT

    I get the feeling that had this happened to Tendulkar then all Indian fans would be on S.Randivs back even more, but because this is Sehwag we should move on. Incidents like these hurt cricket, no matter who it happens to it should be sorted out in the right manner no matter how long it takes.

  • Ravi on August 18, 2010, 17:15 GMT

    As spectators and ardent followers of the game, we give cricket the color it has now. That's where everyone else, other than the batsman and the bowler, come in.

  • Venkatesh on August 18, 2010, 17:14 GMT

    Good article. When there was no rule broken, all this was unnecessary. After all, it is up to the bowler (bowling team) to bowl in whatever manner they like, whether it denies a batsman a century or a double-century for that matter. Yes, there is something called spirit of the game and if Randiv had to be reprimanded, it should be done by his captain because he is the one responsible for things on the field. A ban is too much. And as always, newspapers are ready go make a huge fuss about nothing.

  • Pavan on August 18, 2010, 17:14 GMT

    I am amazed that a somewhat accomplished writer like you would make light of the situation. There is always going to be overreaction by the media but the thing that you fail to realize is something like this has no place in the world of cricket. Yeah, Sehwag should have probably taken the high road but thats another discussion for a different day. Randiv deserved the one match suspension and so did Dilshan for putting that thought into Randiv's mind. A great point was raised by one of the earlier posters; What if India deliberately denied Murali's 800th test wicket. You think Australia and England media would have pounced on that?

  • ramki on August 18, 2010, 17:13 GMT

    If Randiv's no ball was petty, the reaction from SLC and the ICC was even more petty...

  • Sachin on August 18, 2010, 17:12 GMT

    I tend to agree with ListenToMe about undue or harsh punishment to Indians in the past. It was Mike Denness, who had penalized Indians in South Africa on ball tampering and India had protested.

    Before the time of neutral umpires, a lot of decisions used to go against India in Sri Lanka. You can ask K.Srikkanth -- he got a lot of bad decisions there.

    Currently, I find Ranjan Madugalle punishing Indians, a lot more than he does to other players, as match referee.

    Sambit Bal says that this was blown out of proportion, but if what Sehwag says about Tendulkar too having been denied a hundered, then it is a pattern of lack of sportsman spirit by the Lankans, and has to be highlighted. A minimum number of overs in a day as well the 20 mandatory overs on the last day of a Test match, are the direct result of unsporting behaviour by various teams. If something good comes of this incident, so be it!

  • sri on August 18, 2010, 17:11 GMT

    makes soo much sense

  • dnc on August 18, 2010, 17:11 GMT

    I think SLC board is correct in deciding about the ban. As a srilankan I regret and feel why Randiv gave up(free run) before india had won the game ??? Aren't we suppose to fight till the last ball and set a good example. Its another point that Sehwag deserved a centuary and it will be disappoiting for him and he has always been very outspoken.

    I also like that Randiv apologised to Sehwag so he shouldn't be punished for it but he was rightly punished for not fighting till the last moment, He is wearing the Srilankan cap and he needs to respect that.

  • kiruthigai on August 18, 2010, 17:10 GMT

    I am an Indian and I too strongly condemn the delibrate act of Randiv.. but the action taken by SL Board is too much.. Randiv is young and new to international cricket,actually he need a counseling not a ban... He has apologised thats the fullstop to this whole issue.. why fine and ban.. this not how you have to prove the spirit of cricket...

  • Jose on August 18, 2010, 17:09 GMT

    The real issue in the match is about awarding SIX for no-ball when the scores are level. The deliberate no-ball is surely a disciplinary matter for the sake of "spirit of the game". After watching carefully last 4 balls it is clear that: (1) great Sangakkara deliberately let the ball slip out of his hands, so the scores are level, (2) Two good dot balls - credit to Suraj & (3) Dilshan had a chat with Suraj & a deliberate no-ball is followed. So, there are three culprits in this episode & Suraj is just a victim of foul play by his two seniors. Luckily Sanga went scot-free. You can see eloquent Sanga mumbling when Greg asked about the no-ball in the post-match presentation. Ideally Sanga & Dilshan should get bigger punishment, compared to Suraj.

  • terrance on August 18, 2010, 17:08 GMT

    contined.

    The captain cannot be found guilty.. A senior player had to be blamed and had to take the responsibility on behalf of the real culprit( Captain Sanga) , it cannot be the former captain under whom one of the spirit of cricket award was won, so the lamb who had to take it on him was Mr.Dilshan.

    Randiv should hv been let go, with a warning but Sangakkara should hv been suspended for this series.

    But the decision is made and the innocent was punished.

  • Benedict on August 18, 2010, 17:05 GMT

    Its no big deal in a game. The typical happy smile after the six of a no ball and the disappointment soon after, this was really hard to handle. Its not Suraj, or Sanga or Dilshan. Its Sehwag's emotions. whats in a number anyway. Good it happened, at least for India. As for Sri Lanka, this will be a blotch, that will haunt them for long. Only hope its forgotten soon.

    Somehow I have this impish thought that Delhi Daredevils must dump Dilshan.

  • terrance on August 18, 2010, 17:04 GMT

    Come on Sri Lankan cricket fans, please listen to what Sanga says before the delivery." What he meant was if he hits he will get runs". They are Internatioal players,even a child with a bat knows that if he hits he can run .. There was no need for Sanga to say that to Randiv. What he meant was my friends that " Even if you send down a no ball, if he hits still he will get runs."

    Does that make sense to all of you !.. Here Sanga might have not known about the law and made Randiv aware that if he middles he will get runs or to be on the good books, he would have still known the law ,and spoken the opposite to distract people.

    The blaksheep is the Captain Sangakkara. I still feel he cold hv collected the ball that went for 4 byes.but giving him the benfit of the doubt, here he is the culprit. (Contiued)

  • jairaj on August 18, 2010, 17:03 GMT

    sambit bal have u ever been on 99? or 49 ? or to lower the bar a bit on 9?

  • anoopshameed on August 18, 2010, 16:58 GMT

    As I wrote earlier, I whole-heartedly congartulate Srilankan Cricket Board on their strong reaction. But, what if we all are looking at the whole issue in the wrong light! India needed 5 runs. The first ball goes for 4 intentional/unintentional byes. The next two are dot balls. Dilshan gets the feeling that Sehwag wants to get to the 'targets' with a 6 and advices Suraj to bowl a noball so that Sehwag can have a go. Everything went as planned except the Law Book wasn't 'Updated': Sehwag misses century! Now naturally Sri Lankan board has to punish the players for giving up easily. They ban Suraj, fine Dilshan, Sangakkara cries. Everything fits in except there is no chance to mention the usual reason of BCCIs money power. So let's say that Dilshan wanted to make sure he is picked by Delhi Daredevils in IPL 4!

  • sreekant on August 18, 2010, 16:57 GMT

    sportsman spirit,what gavaskar not going after the umpire had given lbw,not only that he also took the incomming batsman,this u call playing in sportsman spirit or what about ganguly's claiming gilchrist catch in 2003 WC!!!!!!!

  • Narayanan on August 18, 2010, 16:57 GMT

    Who asked ICC to change the rule that winning runs only count? Is it because Sachin or any other batsmen shouldn't score more centuries. Its stupid that a rule has been made and Randiv didn't do anything wrong. What he did is with in laws of the game. Why should he be penalised? If so ICC is wrong in making the rules and the rule should be got back immediately.

  • Huzzy on August 18, 2010, 16:56 GMT

    Why is this issue blow out of proportion? Sehwag has lost a century to his name and that in no way is blowing out of proportion.

  • True Sri Lankan on August 18, 2010, 16:54 GMT

    Randiv, it's your fault that you apologized first. You should not have done that because you didn't do anything wrong. Those brainless SL cricket board officials moved on to apologize openly. Hats off to Sambit Bal and moderate Indians who are commenting here. As someone said, SLC board and Indian media has destroyed the spirit of the game over this incident. Shame on you SLC board! Randiv, I suggest you go ahead with filing a case of fundamental right violation against SLC board.

  • JP on August 18, 2010, 16:52 GMT

    Well said Mark.Well said Sambit. Most have missed the crux of the issue. Randiv may have deliberately balled a No ball and confirmed it by his own apology. On the other hand Sehwag definitely induced it. He faced 3 deliveries before the No Ball. For a batsman of Sehwag's caliber 2 deliveries are too much to score 1 run. Mind you his strike rate in the later overs were very high. He might have wanted to finish the match with a bang - 6, and marking his time to pick a lose delivery, knowing very well there was a long way to 40th over. Sensing this Randiv may have balled the No Ball. So it was a battle between the wits. Naturally the loser complains. Either of them shouldn't be blamed. Its part of the game. Spirit of the game - does it really exist. Hardly any case in the affirmative, plenty in the negative.

  • Arvi on August 18, 2010, 16:50 GMT

    Its just blow out of proportion. Just a game forgot guys India won with bonus point.

  • dave singh on August 18, 2010, 16:49 GMT

    While I enjoy reading your articles, I could not disagree with you more this time.While records and centuries are considered incidental to the game and not the motive to play, as suggested by most great players,It goes too far when it matters more to the opponent team to prevent the other player from getting to them. It is mean spirited to say the least but reprimanding the players involved is not out of line. Otherwise, where will this end, will anything that is not illegal be acceptable. I am reminded of the famous test when Miandad and Imran beat India in the mendatory overs under Bedi's captaincy and the time wasting tactics before the start of the mandatory overs went as far as one of the players totally removing his shoelace and redoing it, wasting a full five minutes. That was disgraceful, thank God Pakistan deservedly won the match.

  • Arun on August 18, 2010, 16:48 GMT

    I agree with Sambit Bal. The incident should have ended with the apology rendered by Randiv. The issue was closed. When the involved are themselves at ease after the apology, I don't understand why the readers or the SLC should make a fuss of it. The issue of the no ball bringing the game to the end is for the ICC to ponder and not anyone else's fault.

  • Kunz on August 18, 2010, 16:47 GMT

    If such things are not stopped in time, they will make unfair precedent. SLC did right thing by punishing the cricketers.

  • Manoj on August 18, 2010, 16:46 GMT

    Very correct. Once bowler apologized to Sehwag, matter should be over. Do not forget, Srilanka has won 'spirit of game' more than once in recent times. Randiv is young and will learn from this incident.

  • aman on August 18, 2010, 16:45 GMT

    if randiv is dint not play wrong then why this cricket records and why the players records remove all and dont made the crickets as heros

  • San on August 18, 2010, 16:44 GMT

    Excellent Reading. Well Said Sambit.

  • Chirnav on August 18, 2010, 16:43 GMT

    Rest of comes in picture because we watch what is happening. We are passionate about game. We know if something wrong is happenig. And this out cry can result in rule change as it has happend in the past.And it is important to remind to players that play the sport in SIPIRITED manner. And this kind of action never fits well on the team that has won "Game Of Sipirit award" twice.

  • Prasy on August 18, 2010, 16:42 GMT

    What Randiv did was well within the laws of the game. A player should not be banned for moral reasons within such laws, either change them or learn to live with them. Moral policing should have no in competitive sports

  • veeru on August 18, 2010, 16:39 GMT

    lets say that if this happens in world cup, due to this the run rate will change. Doing deliberate is not acceptable it is some thing like match fixing.

    But giving punishment to Sri lankan players is tooo harsh.

  • Suresh on August 18, 2010, 16:38 GMT

    I think this issue is getting the due attention it deserves. What Suraj did is a shame and what SL cricket has done is commendable. If these issues dont get the due attention to hold hte spirit of the game, what else gets attention ?!?>!?!

  • Anonymous on August 18, 2010, 16:37 GMT

    well written. Sewhag missed a 100, But he did face 3 balls before this happened!, Bowler did this intentionally to deny a 100 on his own accord or persuaded by a senior player..Randiv apologized, Srilanka apologized.. and Now this is a media circus. why don't we just move on .

  • friendfromusa on August 18, 2010, 16:37 GMT

    I agree. This issue is blown out of proportion by Sri Lanka board. Sehwag's frustration was understandable. I sympathize with him. Randeev did not break any law. Why do have to expect sportsmanship spirit from poor Lankans? Do you think, we would expect same from 'ever sledging' Aussies? A one match suspension was unwarranted. When Sachin missed his century in Cuttack, because Malinga deliberately bowled a wide. He didn't make so much noise. But Sehwag is Sehwag. He doesn't in calling a spade a spade. He did. Randeev apologized. Sangakara apologized. Sri Lanka board also apologized. Then why one match suspension? Poor Randeev. An upcoming cricketer will be traumatized by this incident for sure. Surprisingly, nobody is talking about the 4 byes. Look at Sangakara's expression! As if he is fooling small kids! He is bigger culprit, than inexperienced Randeev, who was co-axed into bowling a 'no ball!' Before the next match, he will practice in the nets, not to bowl a 'no ball,' ever again..

  • Rakesh Mathur, MD on August 18, 2010, 16:36 GMT

    Dear Mr Sambit Bal:

    What Dilshan advised Randiv to do in an international match was cheap stuff, the kind small kids get involved with when playing in their local residential areas around town. Sehwag worked hard for his century and a sportsman should have loved to honor him with his ton. Most likely, you don't play cricket.Neither do I. But, who are we to say where the matter should end? Srilankan Board took the right acton. With the strength that IPL has over 'money in cricket', any player should think five times before acting cheap with Indian Cricketers. Disclaimer: I'm a great fan of Sehwag and Sachin.. Srilankans did the same S_ _ T with Tendulkar a few years ago.

  • Karthik on August 18, 2010, 16:36 GMT

    What is the point in writing multiple columns on the same topic, when all you recommend is to move on from the issue? Even the 'great' ICC said that it considers this issue closed, as if anyone just bothered to check with them on this one. Let us move on and focus on SL/NZ game.

  • Query on August 18, 2010, 16:35 GMT

    Any how Randiv would have sat against NZ, Mendis would have played instead of him. Why not ban Dilshan also,he is supposed to have given the idea to the childish Randiv who implemented it without thinking about the consequences. He did not do the implementation perfectly by giving such a huge no-ball. They did not ban Dilshan because he has to play against NZ to save themselves.SLC is also doing a big drama unecessarily because they are in BCCI's pocket and BCCI is satisfying its huge ego. If it was ACB SLC would have been so humble, only because this is BCCI they are doing this big drama by giving waste punishments which does not have any practical implications. Moreover these SL players are big benefeciaries from IPL. Like Indian cricket they also make their schedule as per IPL. Can anybody please answer me, why our cricketers are wasting their time in a waste pitch like that of Dambulla? The pitch is not good for limited overs cricket. The lights are bad. All matches in Dambulla?

  • Rahul on August 18, 2010, 16:35 GMT

    Why are people so single minded? Can't you it this way round? Remove India out of the fray. Till the last ball is bowled, the match is not lost. Randiv, if so we can say, believed he had lost it and gave an extra run, which was not what a team member should have done. Leave Sehwag out. Still Randiv is wrong. He is right in being punished! He is answerable to his team too.

  • Paramu on August 18, 2010, 16:33 GMT

    I cannot agree with the concept. Fielders appeal strongly, batsmen stay their ground ven knowing they are out, sledging... all these are to win the game. And now we have the technology to know what happened. This case is hard on the spirit of the game and has the danger of setting a bad example. First it is not about winning the game but denying the batsman a century he well desrved. this has gone that personal and shouldn't be allowed in any game. Second it is not just the bowler.. as we come to know there are other players, including the captain involved. It is a shame.

  • Agnar on August 18, 2010, 16:33 GMT

    I think Sri Lankan and Indian cricket boards have created and over blown this incident to generate more public interest in their new found frequent encounters. India-Pakistan rivalry is not working these days since they don't play cricket in Pakistan. Is Indian cricket board looking to Sri Lanka for a new rivalry? That kind of nationalistic craze is unhealthy. Sri Lanka does not need it.

  • Sanket Dalal on August 18, 2010, 16:33 GMT

    I couldn't be happier with this outcome, except I felt Dilshan should have been banned for a 1 match as well. Honestly, who does Sri Lanka think they are? They are completely bankrupt, rely almost purely on India for their survival and their players make a ton of money playing for the IPL. Now they have the audacity to mess with India on the Cricket field? The Sri Lankan Cricket board realized immediately the consequences of the actions of the arrogant SOBs that is the Sri Lanka cricket team and took appropriate steps as needed.

    Sri Lanka need to show more respect and realize that they're survival depends on India. You never bite the hand that feeds you.

    Now I'm dearly hoping Randiv never gets an IPL contract and as for Dilshan, to quote Denny Green (Former coach of the Arizona Cardinals, NFL), "They were who we thought they were!"

  • Punter on August 18, 2010, 16:31 GMT

    You have missed out on the biggest point - how much would the bookies have made because Shewag was denied his century ?? Dilshan is a bookies boy and his instructions to Randiv was to save the bookies a tidy sum. The ICC has to go into this and get the link between the bookies and this incident. Randiv has to learn and learn he did and I doubt that he will do something like this in his entire career, Two thumbs up to the SLC for taking action, Sambit thinks it out of proportion but as a Lankan we want dicipline in the team and newcomers like Randiv must be put on the right track right from the start. Dilshan will get his dues soon if not later....he is under the scanner......

  • VK on August 18, 2010, 16:31 GMT

    I do not agree with the article. Committing a mistake is one thing (even though it is not illegal but certainly not in the spirit of the game), but accepting is commendable on Sri Lankan board part. SL board is setting a great example for their team. Hope other teams are watching it. It probably happened in the heat of the moment. Or may be not, this is the second time in two years it happened as it was reported the other one - Tendulkar being denied a century opportunity last year. Sehwag missed centuries in the past and will miss more in the future. That is not the point. If Sri Lankan board did not interfere Randiv might not have apologized who knows. And it might become a practice for every team. It is commendable for what SL board did! Let us just move on!

  • rayna on August 18, 2010, 16:31 GMT

    The whole game of cricket is where bowlers don't allow batsmen to score runs. So whats the fuss ....Dambulla is not in Heaven.... no balls, underarms, bouncers & yorkers, googlies etc...etc... these can all be deliberate in laws of cricket....Stats Guru would tell us how many cricketers were denied at 99.... it is interesting to find out the reasons as well.

  • Anonymous on August 18, 2010, 16:30 GMT

    India must focus on cricket: This whole incident makes me sick. Ok, Sandiv went against the spirit of the game. He apologized. Can we end there. Who cares if Shewag is 99 or 100. INDIA WON. WAKE up guys. That is more important than a 99 or 100. I am sure Shewag won't care. Maybe Sachin would. I mean, wake up and focus on building a truly # 1 team. India's mentality sicks me (I am saying this as an Indian). Sanga is a Gentleman. If it was an Australian captain, they would have cared less for all this overboard reaction. The problem with Indian team is it has a rare match winner in Shewag and our test bowling is miserable and most of the young players spend time complaining of either pitch or some other nonsense.

  • PS on August 18, 2010, 16:28 GMT

    Feel ashamed of being an Indian cricket fan where we hail individual achievements this much.

  • sumitcute on August 18, 2010, 16:25 GMT

    If a team needs 1 run in 1 ball & batsman tolled the ball high in air & completed the run b4 being caught then the batting team should win with such rules

  • sumitcute on August 18, 2010, 16:25 GMT

    India did not denied Murli from 800 wickets by giving their wicket to other bowlers..nor Dhoni declared the innings when murli was on 799 wickets.. but its gr8 frm SLC that they hav taken an action.... but the rules must change...

  • Hari Gangeshan on August 18, 2010, 16:24 GMT

    When a batsmen can be stumped off a no-ball or the last man is being shielded by a better quality batsmen by not taking single which would otherwise have been taken...sides bowling a leg side line to frustrate and prevent the batting side from scoring are well within the laws of the game. So what's the fuss about a bowler overstepping to deny a batsman of a milestone. The rules dont say that you need to give a batsman a chance to score a 100! Can some clearly prove without a question of doubt what Randiv did was deliberate? IF so then bowlers and fielders staring and sledging batsman calls for a ban. Personally i think the media has blown this whole incident sky high. If Randiv did what he did was deliberate and deprived Sehwag a well deserved hundred- it was well within the laws of the game. For those of you who cry foul please stop making a mountain out of a mole.

  • halik mohamed on August 18, 2010, 16:23 GMT

    its not good habit for any players.they wanna make good physical with good manners.......

  • GopalaKrishna on August 18, 2010, 16:20 GMT

    Sambit, understand as you stated the incident is over played. But do you agree if the same is carried out on the field from now on by other players and other teams.I hope nope is hte answer.In that case what ever SL board and Sehwag did were right by giving it proper colour and enquiry into incident. Thus both Randiv and Dilshan are punished as one was the implementer and the other Perpetrator.In this whole incident I rate Sanga and SL showing good sportsmanship and they continue to show the same for the good of cricket. I'm big fan of Sangarkara when it comes to gamesmanship and playing cricket within it's spirits. it is just my openion that he is best SL captain I have seen and the best captain of current lot of captains.

  • Vulture on August 18, 2010, 16:20 GMT

    With all due respect Mr. Bal, I beg to differ. The fans come into the picture before, during and after this or any incident. It is for the fans that the game is played - where would the game be without it faithful followers? Any sport? It is not petty either, quite the contrary, for starters a century is at stake. Not only that - records and reputations are a couple other aspects of the situation that come to mind. We do not know how this 'petty' incident will affect all parties and individuals concerned, or for that matter the fans in the long run...right now we can only speculate. My two cents - it was downright MEAN! Why someone would do a thing like this just blows me away. And to think that Dilshan and Sehwag are teammates (Delhi Daredevils) is all the more mind-boggling!

  • Tajwar on August 18, 2010, 16:18 GMT

    Some people are wack here. They are complaining that we don't understand since we were not on 99. What difference 49 or 199 makes if you end up winning the match. A player can score 300 but if they don't win the match then what are they achieving? Personal success ofcourse but isn't it about the team winning the game? Sure it was not a fair play by Randiv/Dilshan but a class athlete (supposedly Sehwag) shouldn't complain over something like this. As for the punishment, I think it is fair. SL are trying to maintain their reputation and who ever tries to breach it will and should be dealth with. Lastly, media blows things out of proportion. This incident could have remained down low but it's kind of impossible in this world where we are surrounded by media.

  • Vadi on August 18, 2010, 16:14 GMT

    Sambit, I agree with you. Bowler apologized and Batsman accepted. Full stop.

    But Radhiv should have tried to get Sehwag out, that is how it should be. Radhiv ruined a possible chance to become famous. Instead he earned himself a shame. May be his confident level is very low at this time, because he was bowling to a main in form.

  • Hardik Somaiya on August 18, 2010, 16:11 GMT

    It was quite surprising to know later on that it was Tilakratne Dilshan who suggested Surat Randiv to bowl a no ball, Sehawag being his cpatain and team mate in IPL Delhi Daredevils team. Its really bad on part of Dilshan as he earns more from his IPL team than what he would be earning from Sri Lankan Cricket in whole year.

  • Dishum on August 18, 2010, 16:05 GMT

    May be Randiv should have just bowled a WIDE down legside instead of a NO BALL, result would have been the same as it is now. Everybody could have been saved from all this FUSS....!!!!!

  • vsy on August 18, 2010, 16:03 GMT

    I think acting against the spirit of the game for the cause of one's own teams benefit is different from the one that affects a persons benefit. If sri lanka was benefiting from randiv's actions (not that a no-ball would ever help SL), it would have made sense for randiv to act such stupidly. But denying a hard earned century is deplorable and I think is punishable. I doubt if anyone who is supporting Randiv would themselves be ready to drop a 100 rupee bill on the road, let alone an ODI century.

  • bikash on August 18, 2010, 16:02 GMT

    though i m indian but i feel it's a pretty naive decision and the SL board have gone overboard by banning randiv for one match.just a warning should have been enough.though its against the spirit of the game but cricket is no more gentleman's game.

  • Marl on August 18, 2010, 16:01 GMT

    Why then is Greg Chappell still scorned for bowling the under arm. Yes. batsmen do not walk, and bowlers appeal sometimes even when they know the truth. But this is part of process of cricket. Cricket has an umpire in place. One has to draw the line somewhere. Randiv went overboard. So did the media. Period.

  • VK on August 18, 2010, 16:01 GMT

    I do not agree with the article. Committing a mistake is one thing (even though it is not illegal but certainly not in the spirit of the game), but accepting is commendable on Sri Lankan board part. SL board is setting a great example for their team. Hope other teams are watching it. It probably happened in the heat of the moment. Or may be not, this is the second time in two years it happened as it was reported the other one - Tendulkar being denied a century opportunity last year. Sehwag missed centuries in the past and will miss more in the future. That is not the point. If Sri Lankan board did not interfere Randiv might not have apologized who knows. And it might become a practice for every team. It is commendable for what SL board did! Let us just move on!

  • AJS on August 18, 2010, 16:01 GMT

    Spirit of game or not, the question is about giving one's best on the field. As a bowler, Randiv's job is to take wickets, and stop the flow of runs. If I am bowling even in a lost cause, my first tendency will be to tat least add on one more wicket to my tally. For all we know, maybe the no-ball that went for six could have been a no-ball that was caught brilliantly by a SL fielder. Century or no century, It wasn't the right thing to do. Period.

  • Satish on August 18, 2010, 15:59 GMT

    To Sambit: "The bowler apologised, the batsman accepted; where do the rest of us come in?" Good question but again, why did you come in? There are several things in life which are not unlawful but are unethical to do.

    To TM Dilshan: Sorry mate!! Good luck for next year's IPL if you intend to play for DDD. You won't be in the good looks of its captain or his best friend.

    Dilshan always seemed like a guy with wrong attitude but I thought it was just my perception. This indeed shows that he does have a wrong attitude. Being a senior player, he gave a budding star a very wrong idea.

  • layya on August 18, 2010, 15:59 GMT

    What SLC did was to keep up the spirit of game and make sure something like that will never happen again.there is no shame in doing that.you need at least some gut to make things right when something's gone wrong. Indian cricket fans are the ones always grow matter over the proportion. They can't even tolerate a loss of a single match and burn stadium and their own cricketer's homes.That's what indian fans should be ashamed of.Indian fans who are exaggerating on this matter and talking wise about sportsmanship i ask where were you when Srishanth doing his donkey dances when he takes a wicket insulting the batsman, when Harbhajan slap srishanth. I guess all the indian fans who burned the stadium when they were loosing the semis to Sri Lanka in 96 are well aware of sportsmanship.Indian fans never criticize their faults but sees an act of gentleman-ship as to be shamed.

  • DK on August 18, 2010, 15:58 GMT

    Guys, I think we are too eager to make Indian cricketers the fall guys for all controveries that involve them. Is it really that difficult to understand that any batsman would cherish to have a genuine shot at scoring a hundred as a winning contribution? If Lanka did want to deny him the hundred - they would be better off to do it right way and to get him out. Comments about Sehwag should have scored hundred in earlier balls, Indian players are after milestones etc is a matter of sour grapes. Where were all these folks when SL went on and on to score 900+ to get triple hundreds for their players and lost opportunity to win a test match?

  • Dave on August 18, 2010, 15:58 GMT

    Sorry Sambit - this is not over the top. Dilshan has become a big mouth in Sri Lanka cricket and with a massive ego. His urging Randiv could be heard shouting instructions from wehere we sat on the boundary. It is a disgrace that a player of this so-called international calibre cannot keep his mouth shut when prudence would have been sensible and advising another to commit a transgression. Also, to those who don't understand the Law (not rules), check Law 21 the result, note six - winning hit or extras. The wording is clear enough. This law has been the same for the past 22 years and it is suggest Mr Bal that you learn the laws as well and the reasons for taking the the SLC decisions they have. If I was part of thye board, I would, as a Sri Lankan ban Dilshan for the rest of the series and Randiv for two matches and tell our captain to make sensible comments in future and not suggest it is over the top. Players need to learn discipline and this is one one of enforcing it.

  • Barath on August 18, 2010, 15:57 GMT

    The decision of one day ban on Randiv is absolutely correct. I wont accept Sambit Bal's opinion. Why most of the people are blaming sehwag and BCCI. As Randiv is the culprit, you should blame him. If u want to blame any other person, then you should blame Dilshan who insisted Randiv to throw a no-ball and not the BCCI or the Indian media or Sehwag.

  • Shyam Sunther on August 18, 2010, 15:56 GMT

    A very well balanced article. The media has gone overboard on this one too. The Sri Lankans have been magnanimous enough with their apologies & corrective action. No law had been broken. The spirit of the game is another matter. Worse things have happened on the cricket field, including those involving the Indian team. Randiv & Sanga had the courtesy to immediately apologise, instead of trying to wriggle out of the issue by devious means. What if the no-ball was genuine and the bowler had stood by it? Who is to prove otherwise? So, let's put this behind and move on.

  • Jana on August 18, 2010, 15:56 GMT

    While SL Cricket Board Action is out of proportion, it must be noted this seems to be the third instance in which SL did to India in specific as some media's suggested.

    As someone rightly pointed out, will SL board or for that matter, any other board will punish a player for not walking out if he has nicked a ball? That is also spirit of the game issue!!!

  • Anonymous on August 18, 2010, 15:55 GMT

    Well it might have been blown out of proportion. However, I would admire SLC attempt to uphold the spirit of cricket. Other boards should also take the notice of this.

  • chandra on August 18, 2010, 15:55 GMT

    I disagree with he article calling it Out of proportion. Well, mostly every small thing will be blown Out of proportion by the media. But nothing wrong in what SLC did. Let us not always hold a view that he did not broke a law, may be true, but consider this. Even when the batsman is given out for no reason and he stands his ground to make a point, the law calls it breach of code. In that view, deliberate no ball is more offense than standing ground after given out or any thing that sort, and it needs to be dealt with. Let us not look on the book to see if it is breach of code, some times things like this needs to be dealt with. So, in my view what SLC did is not go out of proportion, but had to go out of the way and took care of it.

  • trueanalyst on August 18, 2010, 15:54 GMT

    India could have easily spoiled the farewell test of Murli by getting out to somebody else.They played cricket in right spirit .Regarding someone saying Amla prevented from getting strike by Sehwag,it was done for the cause of the team so that India could have a go at the tailender.Anyhow Amla got 4 runs & was not denied the century .It is reprehensible for the spirit of cricket award holder to do such an act which is definitely against the spirit of the game.

  • Gaurang on August 18, 2010, 15:54 GMT

    Really well said. There was no need to raise an issue to this level. If Randiv already appologized, what is the point in banning him. Totally uncalled for. Poor guy. :( This will set a bad example in name of "spirit of game". I think Sehwag should appologize now that his intention was not to drag this issue to such a level! And if it was, I'm sorry it's not worh it.

  • AA on August 18, 2010, 15:51 GMT

    Mr Samit Bal Nicely written article but as the so called newspaper have devoted full pages for this incident, it has also given you something to write about.You are talking both sides of the coin. On one hand you find it ridiculous that Srilankan apologised and all the blah blah after the incident and on the other u felt that mater should have been over after Randiv apologised. You have questioned the spirit of the game also as fuzzy concept. I also agree that in cricket or for that matter any other game the spirit has gone and players fight for every inch of space. I am personally not in favor of apologising for something you have done intentionally. There was no need for Randiv to apologise as u rightly said he played within the rules of the war oooops game. Remember the Uruguyan stiker Suarez who stopped the goal with his hands.

  • AM on August 18, 2010, 15:51 GMT

    Being a young player, Suraj was misguided by his senior teamsters. Instead of encouraging him to get Sehwag out and get a wicket under his account they totally misgudided him. Being comeptetive and getting Sehwag was the True Sspirit of Cricket. Instead this happened. Poor judgement!

  • Vijay on August 18, 2010, 15:49 GMT

    Nice article. Incidents like these ought to be condoned. Personally, I enjoyed it. The way I see it, it was just a game on its own, which SL had won. Well done, Sangakara!!!

    Sehwag has no reason to feel disappointed. The team's won for christ's sake. 100's just a number.

  • Sesh on August 18, 2010, 15:49 GMT

    The ban should be given to Sangakkara first. He played innocence but the actual thought process started from him. Do realize that this happened twice already that too in Sanga's captaincy. 4 byes is the start. So the ban should be 2 matches for Sanga, 1 each for Dilshan and Randiv.

  • malalasinghe on August 18, 2010, 15:48 GMT

    SLC did the right thing issuing a statement apologizing Viru and indian team.In the heat of the battle mistakes happen, Best thing was he went and apologized.Plz dont crusify him for thz matter,and theres no point of bringing politics to thz matter, those things happend in the past and will hapen in the future,but the game must move forward. he s a rookie, he ll learn. Every one is allowed one mistake.TO ALL THE INDIANS>>> WE ARE SORRY AND IT WILL NOT HAPPEN AGAIN.

  • Praveen on August 18, 2010, 15:48 GMT

    I'm perplexed as to why you ppl don't consider this to be an issue. The last Indian pair of Murali's final test could have denied Murali his 800th scalp by gifting their wicket to any other bowler. If they had done that, all hell would have broken loose. Rather, they played in true spirit of the game. When this happens to an Indian player, the world claims that we're making a hill out of a mole.

  • ss on August 18, 2010, 15:48 GMT

    Why only Indians are to play with sportsmanship?

    Sambit I bet this wudnot have been your reaction if Murali was deliberately denied the 800th wicket in his last test match.. why? because sportsmanship and spirit is expected from Indians and not others!

    It was the last pair of Indian batting and I feel proud the way Ojha and I Sharma braved through the SL bowlers and stuck to their ground rather than gifting their wicket to any other bowler.

    Murali, where are you, any comments?

  • Debartha on August 18, 2010, 15:47 GMT

    Hi, I totally agree that the issue has been blown out of proportion. But I am curious to know one thing. ICC/MCC says no law has been broken by Randiv. But is thre no law which prohibits team from deliberately losing a match. If so, SL has broken that law as technically (may not be practical) SL would have still drawn the match by claiming the last 5 Indian wickets without conceding a run. Just for knowing I am asking this, have nothing against SL or Randiv.

  • trueanalyst on August 18, 2010, 15:47 GMT

    India could have easily spoiled the farewell test of Murli by getting out to somebody else.They played cricket in right spirit .Regarding someone saying Amla prevented from getting strike by Sehwag,it was done for the cause of the team so that India could have a go at the tailender.Anyhow Amla got 4 runs & was not denied the century .It is reprehensible for the spirit of cricket award holder to do such an act which is definitely against the spirit of the game.

  • Savan on August 18, 2010, 15:46 GMT

    I know how that how 1 run count to win match but for the benefit to batsman the rule must be changed after controversy of Srilanka's team and specially randiv. This issue will defenately change the rule but i am not sure about sehwag's this score will count 99 or 105

  • Kapil on August 18, 2010, 15:38 GMT

    I strongly advocate the change in rules, which I guess is about to happen, thanks to the influence BCCI has, if the six was not given then the ball should also not been counted in sehwag's account. Because if it was a no-ball then the match was over at that very instant.

  • ListenToMe on August 18, 2010, 15:37 GMT

    Most of the people here are saying Indians have done like that before,like this before etc.It is just like politicians do when some blame is put on their party.If Indians have done something wrong before,then it could have been made an issue that time. Please don't talk about it now to defend the current issue.I am watching cricket for the past 15 years and I know that untill BCCI became rich,Indians used to get some kind of ban or punishment without doing any mistakes.The umpires, the match referee then opposite teams all hate the Indians.I still remember the incident when 6 of our players got banned for just a silly reason of excess appealing!!There are a lot of incidents in the past.Now that BCCI is in a good position to react strongly, even the Australians are not playing foul against Indians.We have got enough of these.Now it is time to react to such dirty unfair way of playing.It is not good for cricket.I suggest all teams should react strongly to these kind of incidents.

  • prad on August 18, 2010, 15:36 GMT

    kewl has made a vey good point. above all it is the law which is unfair. if the law was that the batsman would get the runs scored than this incident would not happened as there is no benefit to fielding side at all. of course, bowling a deliberate wide would have the same consequence. moral of the story is ...... there is always more than one way to skin a chicken. cricket is so intersting compare to other sports. At all times our indian media has to hype up everyting. majority of the blame lies with them.

  • Qalandar on August 18, 2010, 15:36 GMT

    Why is the (facebook) "like" option not there on Cricinfo blog posts, when it is there for articles?

  • Sanjoy on August 18, 2010, 15:36 GMT

    The punishment was required for sure for such an action of naughtiness or whatever you name it. Otherwise Cricket will loose the spirit it boasts above other games.

    We feel good when a captain calls back the most prolific batsman after being given out by mistake, what is that - SPIRIT OF CRICKET.

    Without which the game will die out and loose its charm.

  • boshyd on August 18, 2010, 15:35 GMT

    What nobody seems to notice is before the no-ball Sehwag still played 2 legitimate balls and couldnt score a run. Its not like Randiv gave away the no-ball at the first instance. How many dot balls should they continue to bowl to Sehwag to complete his century? Move on, please.

  • prabeesh on August 18, 2010, 15:35 GMT

    well u said it in first line "your totally out of sync". Media hype is too much for a silly matter but i see in no way overboard for SLC to give a ban on randiv..its sends a clear message they are serious about it and this will make future straight

  • Sai on August 18, 2010, 15:33 GMT

    I dont think the issue is blown out of proportion. Actions like this show the character of the players concerned and a strong message needs to be given. I think that Dilshan should have been given a one match ban instead of Ranadiv since he instigated the new player.

    This kind of action is disgusting by any team at any level and I think the same action should be taken if it is done by Indian players tomorrow. Personal animosity has no place in a team game and the sri lankan board should be congratulated for being bold enough to accept the obvious and take strong action.

  • Praveen on August 18, 2010, 15:30 GMT

    I think the media, sehwag and srilankan board has made the issue very big. Actually there is not issue at all and srilankan crickers are not at fault at all. There were two legal deliveries bowled by Randiv before no-ball. Sehwag should have utilized that opportunity. This is one point ot note. Secondly Sehwag initally did took it lighlty but during presentation he changed his mind. I dont understand why he did it......probably senior players said him to do so(this was sehwag statement on Randiv):)

  • NJ on August 18, 2010, 15:29 GMT

    To the fans: Please stop victimizing the victim; Sehwag lost his century, was asked about it and responded the way he did. All he said was he thought the no ball was deliberate and was instigated by a senior player - these were both true. And for those who have brought up the 2 legal deliveries before the no ball, wow, please get a life.

    Yes, BCCI and its money was probably responsible to the sun rising east today, and of course for the punishment ultimately meted out to Randiv - no one else has any responsibility to conduct the affairs of cricket the right way.

    And yes, the Indian fans are also to blame for their favorite son missing a 100, and yes, for the running rising east yet again! Bottom line, I think a lot of people have been very close-minded and reinforcing stereotypes.

    What Randiv did was wrong. Whether it was bad enough to warrant the huge controversy and the ban, I'm not sure. SL fans: Before blaming the BCCI, Sehwag and Indian fans, please check your own backyard.

  • cricfan100 on August 18, 2010, 15:27 GMT

    I think there is no need of SLC. BCCI can also control the cricket in sri lanka as well. I am ashamed of you SLC. Get lost

  • Vijay from Bangalore on August 18, 2010, 15:27 GMT

    Mr. Sambit Bal, if you say the whole episode has been blown out of proportion then you lack the ability to judge, simply for the following reason, I hope you know that SL are 2 time winners of ICC award for playing with good spirits, which means its their responsibility to shoulder it come what may.....and suddenly if they indulge in such cheap antics you come up to say the issue shouldn't have been exaggerated. May be you wanted Randiv to walk scot-free?...Its better he is sitting out for the next match only to set examples for others not to indulge in such things in future. And if you think am an INDIAN and am happy with his ban....no.....Am not happy in fact am disappointed to have read your column and wasted my 5 mins in writing all this...GOOD LUCK!!

  • hsengiv86 on August 18, 2010, 15:26 GMT

    who knows if sanga had stood by randiv, they could have found their new murali, like what arjuna did. it would have given him a immense confidence in his career.

  • Anonymous on August 18, 2010, 15:25 GMT

    Another fact, the problem is with the rules.

  • Sri on August 18, 2010, 15:25 GMT

    Very short-sighted. If this continues to be ignored and kept "between the batsman and bowler concerned", then it will happen again (between another bowler and batsman) and again. That will at some point induce an ugly response (ala Monkeygate) and then people will start making millions simply because they were taunted by someone else. It's a crime to be bystander, they say. So it's a good thing that this issue is being addressed duly and publicly.

  • narendar on August 18, 2010, 15:25 GMT

    I don't agree with your comments.

  • Anonymous on August 18, 2010, 15:24 GMT

    Its totally not Surajs fault. Sehwag cant say Suraj did it deliberately. Sehwag faced two deliveries before the suspected delivery where he fails to get the run in both occasions. So this is the third ball he faced. Though Sehwag played well its his inability to get the Hundred. Actually Sehwag him self & the most indians are those who done such things in past. If the spirit is there They should walk when he himself knows that he has got out, but Indians never done whereas Srilankans mostly do.

  • Sri on August 18, 2010, 15:24 GMT

    Very short-sighted. If this continues to be ignored and kept "between the batsman and bowler concerned", then it will happen again (between another bowler and batsman) and again. That will at some point induce an ugly response (ala Monkeygate) and then people will start making millions simply because they were taunted by someone else. It's a crime to be bystander, they say. So it's a good thing that this issue is being addressed duly and publicly.

  • Giri on August 18, 2010, 15:23 GMT

    Sambit, How would you know if somebody steals a century out of your pocket..? If you think this was blown out of proportion then you actually support the un-characteristics spirit of Sri Lankan team. Screw you and the people who support a simple apology from Ranadiv...

  • Vishnu on August 18, 2010, 15:23 GMT

    @RealCricketer,Your comment seems to be out of Place.First of all,it was SL cricket board who made it as a big issue.Sehwag expressed his dissapointment and it ended when Randiv apologised to him.But SLC created unnecessary problem and may be, as Sambit said even Sehwag may be embarrassed by this!!Stop blaming Indian media and indians without any valid reason.

  • Sudheer on August 18, 2010, 15:23 GMT

    It's an opportunistic world. Even sambit bal got an opportunity to write an article because of this incident. Otherwise he would have been scratching his head thinking what to write!! So let's enjoy the news and forget it!

  • Shridhar Jaju on August 18, 2010, 15:22 GMT

    I agree that this issue has been blown out of proportions. And amidst all this hype created by the media, a very important thing has been missed - the absurdity of the law that denied Viru the ton.

    I admit that a different law is required for cases when a team needs just 1 to win. Lets consider a scenario where a team requires 1 to win with 1 wicket in hand. If the batsman is stumped off a no-ball, we cannot have the team winning by 0 wickets!

    But if the batsman has scored a 6 off a no-ball, he should be awarded those runs! The bowler bowled an illegal ball... why should the batsman suffer? I know too many laws are batsman friendly, but this one is a legitimate case of the law needing to be changed in favour of the batsman!

    At the end of the day, those 6 runs might deny India a spot in the finals based on Net Run Rate. Worse still, if 6 such runs were to deny South Africa progress into the 2nd round at the World Cup, they will have to live with the tag of 'chokers' for 4 more years.

  • Abby on August 18, 2010, 15:22 GMT

    Blown out of proportions!! Sambit, you must be crazy to think that way. We all should remember that it's a 'gentlemen's' sport and has no place for maligned and soured intentions. It's not about being not able to complete the century, it's about the spirit the bowler was bowling with. Although the action was within the rulebook, you have to take hard actions to make sure this sport keeps itself away from such despirited efforts.

  • Santosh on August 18, 2010, 15:21 GMT

    The bowler bowled, the batsman scored runs; where do the rest of us come in?

  • Anonymous on August 18, 2010, 15:21 GMT

    I see no reason why the 6 should not have counted towards Sehwag's total, but cricket's rules are constantly being interpreted differently each time. The ban, however was overboard. Will the ICC start punishing batsmen who nick a catch and refuse to walk? What about fielders who take bum catches and claim them?

  • Anand on August 18, 2010, 15:19 GMT

    Why there cant be a fair play in every match? If its called a gentleman's game than why it is not played in that way. First sledging and now cheating.

    What i understand is that if players are not observing the spirit of game in a positive way then get shrewd and introduce all technology to nail the wrong doings. After all it will keep check on evil doings on the field. Introduce all possible technology to help on field umpires. It will keep players under check and will be forced to play a positive cricket.

    Sehwag raised this matter b'se it was done delibaretly. Dont blame him. He has missed couple of centuries. He has indirectly helped to arrest the cancer of bad behaviour on field.

    I personally thank Virender Sehvag coming openly on such issue.

  • Anand on August 18, 2010, 15:18 GMT

    Why there cant be a fair play in every match? If its called a gentleman's game than why it is not played in that way. First sledging and now cheating.

    What i understand is that if players are not observing the spirit of game in a positive way then get shrewd and introduce all technology to nail the wrong doings. After all it will keep check on evil doings on the field. Introduce all possible technology to help on field umpires. It will keep players under check and will be forced to play a positive cricket.

    Sehwag raised this matter b'se it was done delibaretly. Dont blame him. He has missed couple of centuries. He has indirectly helped to arrest the cancer of bad behaviour on field.

    I personally thank Virender Sehvag coming openly on such issue.

  • RAJ SINGH on August 18, 2010, 15:18 GMT

    We have a discussion ongoing regarding the Sehwaag incident; herunder are 2 comments for which we would like your input: 'I was always under the impression that the match was ended after the ball was bowled regardless of it being a no-ball. Sounds to me like the score for India should have been whatever it was plus 7 and Sehwag not out on 105." How can you separate the no ball from the runs scored off it just because there was 1 run to win... that is wrong. Do not think there is any rule in this regard.. Would love to hear their explanation

  • Homer on August 18, 2010, 15:18 GMT

    The manner in which the issue played itself out does put put a question mark on the proportion. That said, the issue itself has highlighted two side issues that Mr Bal ( and most commentators) sidestep.

    First is the absurd rule that deems a match over when the winning run is scored inspite of the fact that the ball is still in play, thereby negating all runs/dismissals accrued. What is to prevent a bowler from bowling 5 feet outside the popping crease, have the umpire signal a no ball , and not deliver the ball? Per the rules, game over!

    Secondly, shouldnt the ACSU be eve mildly interested in the manner in which the sequence of events unfolded? Two years ago, there was a minor kerfuffle when "Indian businessmen" were found staying in the same hotel as the vsiting Pakistanis. What were the bookmaker odds that Sehwag would score a 100? What odds that he would do so with a six?

    Shouldnt this be atleast considered before being summarily dismissed?

  • prabwal on August 18, 2010, 15:17 GMT

    Exactly.The matter has been blown out of proportion.Just have a look at the comments published in Cricinfo on the coverage.I personally feel deeply sorry at the state of the affairs.

  • Zain Adeeb on August 18, 2010, 15:17 GMT

    TOTALLY blown out of proportion. If this happened to any other team, it would be long forgotten, but god forbid anybody does something against India. A few people also said, there is NO LAW against bowling a no-ball on purpose; is this any different then Dhoni basically not scoring so Sehwag gets a better chance at a 100??

    And why is nobody mentioning there were 2 LEGAL BALLS bowled in between? If SL was so against him getting his 100, why give him TWO chances to get it???? And why is nobody complaining about Sharma who basically STOOD there after being given out LBW???

    Oh.. I forgot... Sharma is INDIAN! SHHHhhhhh

  • jay on August 18, 2010, 15:17 GMT

    Sambit Bal has no clue about sportsmanship...

  • ssr on August 18, 2010, 15:17 GMT

    Looking at the comments from some of the 'fans'. It is such stupid comments that need to be banned. Do the moderators do anything?

    Patil: SL board ordered the enquiry, not BCCI. Narasimhan: The SL board made it a big issue, not the BCCI. Enrico: URDS has nothing to do with this.

    The worst comment of all was when someone said he should have hit the four byes. Another Einstein said he should have scored a faster hundred. How are these inane comments published?

  • Rahul Garg on August 18, 2010, 15:16 GMT

    Actually the main point is not that batsmen and bowler agrees on apology and all that, the thing is 'There should be NO WAY you underperform in a game' which in a way Randiv did and deserves a bit of treatment...

  • Shahul Khan on August 18, 2010, 15:15 GMT

    The ban is harsh and Suraj did not break any rules even though I felt dejected seeing Sehwag not getting his century. How about some teams bowl mostly towards legside to draw a Test match? Is that tactic or against the spirit of the game? I guess BCCI is acting like a big brother to SLC lately.

  • Aditya on August 18, 2010, 15:15 GMT

    Where did the spirit of the game go when they ran out Sachin at the test match - Eden gardens, in 1999?

    Spirit of cricket can't be imposed. Its built within players. I do not see any good happening out of this.

    Great article from the editor. Really commendable and balanced reporting. Thanks!

  • anoopshameed on August 18, 2010, 15:15 GMT

    Can't agree with you at all. Sri Lankan Cricket Board has shown character and taken a bold step to admit the ill conduct by it's players and penalize them for it. It's definitely a postive step; something that has to be congratulated and copied by the others. In the past players from all the teams have done such antics and got away with, the last being Stuart Broad (let off yet again with minor punishment for a more severe offence). It is always better if the 'parents' correct their 'children' rather than wait for some passerby to have a go!

  • Shahul Khan on August 18, 2010, 15:15 GMT

    The ban is harsh and Suraj did not break any rules even though I felt dejected seeing Sehwag not getting his century. How about some teams bowl mostly towards legside to draw a Test match? Is that tactic or against the spirit of the game? I guess BCCI is acting like a big brother to SLC lately.

  • slammy on August 18, 2010, 15:14 GMT

    Mobitel Pvt. Ltd. should drop TM Dilshan as its Brand Ambassador.

  • Yog on August 18, 2010, 15:13 GMT

    I disagree. Don't view this incident as a duel between Randhiv and Sehwag. It is an unsportsmanship act done by Randhiv. Everyone who loves the sport have the right to grudge for this incident. Sehwag might deserve apology from the bowler. But, the problem is not just a batsman missing his hundred. It was denied intentionally by a bowler. It is a good decision by SLC board to ban him for a match. Fans were irritated by the incident and SLC took the responsibility to issue an apology.

  • Kart1982 on August 18, 2010, 15:12 GMT

    We are also forgetting that Randiv did bowl two legal deliveries before the no ball and finally it is upto the opposition if they want to give Sehwag a run or no. Well said Sambit, I completely concur. If anything this has only been done to maintain good relationships between the two countries as shenmark has said, as these 2 nations have been playing a lot against each other and the BCCI is helping the SLC board out.

  • Hitman57 on August 18, 2010, 15:12 GMT

    Wow, Randiv gets to apologize for a no ball which I am 100% certain wan NOT intentional. SLC made him apologize to earn favor from the BCCI. All this is due to a certain whiner named Sehwag.

  • gans on August 18, 2010, 15:11 GMT

    Sad to see Randiv getting a harsh decision for a silly issue. Apology was genuine. It should have been accepted and matter forgotten. Instead, the issue has gone overboard. Is it coz that BCCI are the power brokers today in world cricket and SLC wants to please them at any cost ? sad!

  • ListenToMe on August 18, 2010, 15:11 GMT

    This article is written just to defend some readers' comments about cricinfo that they are biased towards India. Sambit, you have made it balanced enough to make both Indian and Srilankans happy!! But come on Sambit, don't be afraid to tell what you really feel about this incident!. If you talk like this, then will you support Chappel's advice to bowl underarm? Will you support match fixing? Please don't write like a 3rd rate media editor!!

  • srinath on August 18, 2010, 15:11 GMT

    Atlast a man in support!I was waiting right after few hours of the match for this.None can blame Suraj based on Cricket-Laws(Code of conduct)..guys grow up. Shewag has the right to criticize but nothing more can be or should be done!

  • Blah on August 18, 2010, 15:11 GMT

    @schoolboy Exactly. And moreover Shewag always plays for the enjoyment of this beautiful game. He is never concerned about his accomplishments. He just loves playing the game.

    I just don't get it why they are trumpeting about this whole issue. Suraj was just being a schoolboy trying to deny shewag's century. And Shewag expressed it right away. And randhiv apologized. It must be "The End". But the media and the news channels are clamoring meaninglessly 24/7 for the past few days and blowing it offboard as if randhiv has murdered shewag. And your comment about shewag getting embarrassed about this inflated issue was hilarious. Lolz.. :)

  • gans on August 18, 2010, 15:11 GMT

    Sad to see Randiv getting a harsh decision for a silly issue. Apology was genuine. It should have been accepted and matter forgotten. Instead, the issue has gone overboard. Is it coz that BCCI are the power brokers today in world cricket and SLC wants to please them at any cost ? sad!

  • Anu on August 18, 2010, 15:11 GMT

    I wonder nothing happened against this incident i remember in 2000 at sharjah. When Sanath was on 189..he charged down and Ganguly bowled a wide deliberately and sanath was stomped out on 189-missed saeed's 194 and of course 200. Sanath went out quietly not like shewag's childish comments. Neither Ganguly didn't break any law there nor Randiv here in this incident. But look at the contrasting reactions. Very pathetic!

  • Zack on August 18, 2010, 15:09 GMT

    The issue is not about Sehwag's Century. Let us assume TeamA plays TeamB and if TeamA beats TeamB, TeamA goes thru to a higher round in a tournament. However if TeamB beats TeamA, TeamB goes thru provided it has a higher net run rate. Lets assume score to chase is 150 and under the circumstance TeamB must score 156 in a stipulated number of overs say 34.1 to have a better net run rate and than TeamA. Now let us say the scores are 150 at the the beginning of 34th over. To prevent TeamB from reaching 156 TeamA bowler bowls a no ball/wide ball deliberately. This seals the fate of TeamB. Hence the behavior of Sri Lankan team should be condemned.

  • Tej on August 18, 2010, 15:08 GMT

    Sambit, such things need to be escalated, players need to be disciplined, what if it was a Pakistan player who did the same thing to Sehwag, would you still write a similar article, I don't think so.

  • Allan on August 18, 2010, 15:08 GMT

    This is how the world media has turned. We the spectators are made to be part of the lives of those on TV. We judge everyone and everything. If no law was broken, move on! Even the commentators suggested a no-ball or wide while on air. So it was an instinctive thing to do. Crickt Sri Lanka's ban on Randiv should be contested in the court of law now as a wrongful suspension!

  • Sri on August 18, 2010, 15:07 GMT

    Its true that this has been blown out of proportion. But why the hell does BCCI and Sehwag get the stick in these pages? Not many reasonable people accept all the tantrums of BCCI. However, it appears as if there are hoards of writers and fans who like to see the domination of BCCI come down and yet pool money into cricket. Just as this incident got lost its direction, the writer and the india-bashing fans are venting their frustration of not being able to be in even terms in the cricketing world.

  • rajk on August 18, 2010, 15:07 GMT

    The editor of cricinfo enjoys outing instead of watching the exciting part of the game yet has the temerity to comment on the noball episode.Mr.Bal be sincere and passionate towards ur profession and please do not betray ur prejudice against Sehwag.

  • Sanjay on August 18, 2010, 15:07 GMT

    I think SLC is really at their lowest in spirits. Just the day before the Chief Curator tried to justify giving an unmade pitch to Indian cricketers, which was dangerous and injring, by saying that Indian team had no capability and did not deserve a well made practice pitch. Next dat his fellow team mates out such lowly behavious. WOW great cricket and mentality.

  • S.R Murphy on August 18, 2010, 15:05 GMT

    It is a waste of time to read such stupid articles by fellows like Sambit Bal, who have perhaps never played cricket and do not know the importance of a century for the batsman! It is not mere unsporting streak in Randiv that made him behave like that. It is a kind of sadism that has no place in cricket!

  • Sudantha Vidanage on August 18, 2010, 15:03 GMT

    I do not understand the fuss, I remember in 1961, Six of the famous WI players came to Ceylon (SL) for a friendly match. The last over of the day was bowled by Wes Hall in the fading light. At that time Micheal Tissera was not out at 98 and Wes Hall bowled the first three balls at lightning speed and Tissera could not offer even a stroke, they plyaed the game hard. Why are the Indian players complaining, they complain about everything including practice pitches. Cricket is a not game for boys it is a mans game. If the players are unhappy with the conditions of employmnet they should get into another profession. By the way the same match in 1961 Sobers bowled Three cosectiuve maidens with his left arm spin to none other than D S De Silva's brother DH, the Windies took the game very seriously. I think the SLC board reacted to another selfish and arrogant Indian player.

  • ratnakart on August 18, 2010, 15:01 GMT

    contd...

    imagine this is a match in INDIA..sanga wud have got death threats by now? randiv wud have been banned for life by srilanka board??

    needless to say i totally agree with sambit

  • rohit shukla on August 18, 2010, 14:59 GMT

    I think you're right Sambit if it would have been an Aussie or Pakistani players no board would have tendered apology,yes the no ball was bowled deliberately by Randiv and he tendered apology to Shehwag matter ends there,being an indian fan it hurts if an indian player was denied century but shehwag himself said it doesn't matter to him 99 or 100.But by no means Srilankan board needed to give that apology statement.This is just cricket no team would give free runs to opposition so that they can complete centuries and milestones. I feel Randiv should have been warned by the Board and captain and that was enough.Let's not make this a headline.Move ON with the game....

  • Rajasekhar Malladi on August 18, 2010, 14:58 GMT

    Hello Mr. Sambit Ball....Who are you to tell the vedanta....even after a lot has happend on the ground and outside, it seems you did not get the point. SL intensionally killed the spirit of the game and that is what is pointed out. NO used writing such article and I wonder how cricinfo accepted to publish such meaningless and ethicless article. My high regard to the site certainly diminished.

  • Satish on August 18, 2010, 14:57 GMT

    I agree that the no-ball issue has taken a long time to settle. But there are things that ICC should look into. The fact, the ball is a no-ball should in fact NOT be the end of the match till the ball is dead in which case, it was hit for a 6, and the runs scored should have been 1+6=7 runs. The ball was still "alive" even though it was hit for a 6. What could have been the outcome, if in fact, Sehwag had played the ball & was run-out while scampering for a run? Will it be considered that since the umpire signalling a no-ball prior to the run considered a win and Sehwag would still be at 99? Secondly, I agree that SL broke the spirit of the game, by deliberatly bowling a no-ball. What could if the roles were changed and a SL batsmen was on 99 and let's say there was an over to be bowled and the India concedes the match by refusing to bowl the last over. It will still be considered Legal but as far as the Spirit of the game is considered is it wrong? Some things to ponder over..

  • deep on August 18, 2010, 14:56 GMT

    indian team likes controversies,they want sympathy.remeber,sydney test it was umpires fault,they blamed on aussie team.now this time it was sehwag's fault not randiv's.he had 3 balls before no ball.if he wishes to make two dot balls deliberitely than i can't randiv ball a deliberate no ball.please tell indian team to go learn and understand mcc laws of cricket.it was fair.why any team would want a batsman to score century against them? when there are no laws for deliberate no ball or wides,that means it's legal.

  • s.indika on August 18, 2010, 14:56 GMT

    sambit, i admire your neutrality and even admire the way shewag acted. but the indian media and the BCCI's little lap dog called the SLC headed by a cheap crook diminished the image of a upcoming player. compare this with all the dirty tricks pulled by other players( and their mothers who gave them deuretics) any board would stand by it's players..ahh but not SLC - who are making mountains out of molehills.

  • A Natu on August 18, 2010, 14:56 GMT

    Soooo.....petty = ok? At this level? Really? No punishment necessary? I'd like to see you not complain the next time someone spits on the batter, throws the ball for no reason (breaking a finger as it were) or invokes someone's mother and/or sister (without the profanity, of course.) If you don't crack down on prima-donna's of the game (especially the ones who are marginally good, yet think they rule the roost), they're going to bring the game in disrepute. Might as well play/comment on (ice) hockey then.

  • Narayanan on August 18, 2010, 14:55 GMT

    There have been hundreds of incidents in the past when many payers (Australian Sic) have played against the spirit of te game, because it is within the rules of the game. Apology is acceptable. The others have not even ever apologised. The best way to correct the problem is the Match REfree should have athority to overrule the noball and give the batsman his due. This will be poetic justice. Another issue. The ICC should think about. A Wide is not sure till it passes the batsman and the wicket keeper can let it go for 4 and deny a batsman a century. Only thing the batsman has a chance to reach for it. But a no-ball happens even before the batsman sees the ball !!! So a no-ball is a safer denial mechanism !!! Think about it !!!

  • SM on August 18, 2010, 14:55 GMT

    here comes the news: Dilshan was the man! the socalled Delhi Daredevils teammate can't stand Viru getting a hundred! So called Dilshan Muhammed who converted into Buddism whereas Suraj Randiv converted from Buddism to Suraj Muhammed! Well, I am not sure who is proud of what! I will be surprised if these comments are NOT whacked by Sambit! Please publish these to teach a lesson! BTW..I am a Muslim

  • Arijit on August 18, 2010, 14:55 GMT

    To some extent SLC is right. Forget the fact that Sehwag was on 99*. A bowler should never give away a run on purpose, and a batsman should never get out on purpose. Who knows, if India had taken an extra 5-6 balls to get to the target, it could have affected their net run rate, and by the time the round robin phase is over, it could determine which 2 teams went through to the final. It still might happen that way!

  • Sougata Som on August 18, 2010, 14:54 GMT

    Qst: The bowler apologised, the batsman accepted; where do the rest of us come in?

    Ans: It was not a tennis match between Sehwag and Randiv, where most of the time personal glory matters. The match was between India and Srilanka, where more than 1 billion cricket fans watch cricket live. Players are treated like GOD and Cricket as religion. Cricket will die if you want to remove emotion and play it for rules and statistics only.

  • Niel on August 18, 2010, 14:54 GMT

    Well, yes the issue was blown out of proportion by media. But, keeping the spirit of cricket in mind, what dilshan suggested and randiv did was not sportsmanship spirit. And if SLC has decided to punish the duo, we can see it as a positive step towards restoring gentlemanship in the gentlemen's game. Rather than blaming BCCI or media or anybody.. we should look at the positive side. Also, MCC should take some steps in removing such irregularities - One delivery should be completely taken into account, the delivery was completed-though no ball, six was hit.. everything should count..simple...

  • Anonymous Fan on August 18, 2010, 14:54 GMT

    I don't understand why Sehwag's century was so important? Didn't that match happen to decide one winner out of two teams? Did that result come out? Yes, ... If Randiv had not done what he did (deliberately or not), he was well capable of denying him any runs in his over. In that case, what would happen if Dhoni had scored the last run in next over? Would Sehwag go against Dhoni too? If Dhoni had made next over maiden, just so that Sehwag could make his last run in following over, would that not be considered unethical?

    I am sorry but Sehwag not being able to score century is out of the question. His role in team is to make sure that team wins.. Not his gets his century whenever he wants..

    I feel sorry for Randiv. Whatever he did was within Cricket Rules. Allowing other person hit century is not sportmanship!!..

  • Anonymous on August 18, 2010, 14:54 GMT

    I just want to say that as an active follower of cricket, if I am watching a game then I am included in the game. As you have suggested - The bowler apologised, the batsman accepted; where do the rest of us come in?, then why do they even have spectators..why don't they just play in a field and get done with it. Are spectators only there so that some cashflow be generated, are they there to kill time..there may be few but I am sure there are a lot of them who come there to support and watch decent cricket..I think if it was deliberate then Randiv should apologize to the cricketing world...after all there has to be a difference between "Galli" or even "Club" Cricket and "International" cricket..afterall you guys (international cricketers) set example for the next generation...also ICC cannot set rules for each and everything..at the end of the day if an act does not let you sleep calmly then you know that the act is not right

  • rahul on August 18, 2010, 14:54 GMT

    Yes! this is too much for an incident. Its how a game is played. Randiv made a mistake but this incident got response much more than it deserved.

  • Rivi on August 18, 2010, 14:54 GMT

    exactly sambit....*sigh* i wish more people would understand! :| i mean like worse things happen in cricket these days....and like you say, no rules were broken!! apology offered. end of story as far as i'm concerned!! okay, maybe randiv needs to be cautioned/advised...but surely not suspended!?! what was SLC thinking?? if the answer is what ShenMark says........... shame on you SLC!!

  • rohit shukla on August 18, 2010, 14:53 GMT

    I think you're right Sambit if it would have been an Aussie or Pakistani players no board would have tendered apology,yes the no ball was bowled deliberately by Randiv and he tendered apology to Shehwag matter ends there,being an indian fan it hurts if an indian player was denied century but shehwag himself said it doesn't matter to him 99 or 100.But by no means Srilankan board needed to give that apology statement.This is just cricket no team would give free runs to opposition so that they can complete centuries and milestones. I feel Randiv should have been warned by the Board and captain and that was enough.Let's not make this a headline.Move ON with the game....

  • Karthik on August 18, 2010, 14:53 GMT

    Too much made out of nothing. Yes Randiv and Dilshan (he was no where in the picture until today... sneaky brat) acted like school kids. Saying so may even be an insult to school kids. But a one match suspension and fines for this. SLC is just acting holier than thou. Maybe they think what Randiv did is an insult to the country. I may probably feel the same had an Indian spinner done the same thing to deny Dilshan his well earned 100. However I think z warning and an apology would have been more that sufficient.

  • vijay on August 18, 2010, 14:53 GMT

    Yes. I do understand that the issue has been blown out of proportion. But the guilty should be punished. Otherwise they continue from where they stopped. To deny a century to a player (Sehwag) of such magnitude, dedliberately, is really a shame. And that to the way he drafted his innings is really commendable. You wont see Sehwag without a boundary for 6 overs and look at the way he scored from 75 on. I feel the punishment/apology was evident/deserving and hope such 'cheap' tactics wont be repeated by any player in the future..

  • me me on August 18, 2010, 14:52 GMT

    Look for Indian channels to come up with some conclusions from video feed as to where Sangakkara was looking when the byes were conceded, what was Dilshan signalling and why did Samaraweera stand still while the final ball was bowled. All this will give 10 new angles to the controversy. Cricket, in India, is like a movie. It needs villians. Heroes are always us, Indians.

  • ChaganB on August 18, 2010, 14:51 GMT

    I agree that the issue was blown out of proportion. Totally unnecessary. All said and done, I think we have had enough of IND-SL encounters. There is a desperate need to NOT have a series for some time now. The players know each other enough (through the constant IND SL encounters) and IPL that they have started to take each other for granted. I am sure that affects the over all spirit also.

  • mandeep uppal on August 18, 2010, 14:51 GMT

    Dear sambit,your article was quite upto point but you missed the essence.As a sports editor you must know that,whatever randiv did to stop sehwag from scoring sehwag was under icc rules but it goes against his own team.He ought to have bowled a legal delievery and should have faith in himself that he would get sehwag out or atleast not try to score.Instead he deliberately bowled a no ball and under performed.That for me was going against his own team.

  • RaviBangs on August 18, 2010, 14:51 GMT

    The no-ball incident was petty. But what followed after that is ridiculous. Those who say that Randiv's action was against the spirit of the game are totally ignoring those batsmen who refuse to walk even after they have nicked the ball and fielders who claim for catch even after picking up the ball on the bounce? If all these guys have to apologise for every incident, the cricket field would be full of 'apologies'. Guys, there is no breach of spirit of the game when the incident had no bearing on the result of the game. Spirit of the game was breached when Andrew Symonds stood his ground at Syndney against India even after clearly nicking the ball to the wicketkeeper. It altered the result of the Test match and India lost. Why Australian Board did not apologise to the Indian team? What was Sehwag doing then?

  • RM on August 18, 2010, 14:51 GMT

    Yes, no doubt the media, particularly Indian TV Channels like 'Times Now' did go hugely overboard on the incident, but just an apology by the bowler is certainly not enough. There was nothing wrong in the actions that SLC took. Its not just about the law, its not just about the spirit of cricket's "fuzzy concepts". Its about decency, wholesomeness and fairness. Yes, let the matter end, but there is a lesson in it for all that cannot be ignored. Ask Trevor Chappell.

  • Gayan on August 18, 2010, 14:51 GMT

    This shows the bankrupcy of the SLC. This is nothing than a show to satisfy BCCI. If spirit of cricket is in question the officials should have resigned its post a long time ago for their own conduct which has left Sri Lanka cricket at this state. It is the payers who have at least kept cricket in the country afloat.

  • bvnathan on August 18, 2010, 14:51 GMT

    Sehwag felt the "NO BALL" was deliberate, Randiv apologized and there ends the matter between batsman and bowler.

    If the "NO BALL" was defended/fielded and not smacked over the boundary you might not have heard so much noise, but the real issue is the rule connived by ICC which denies the batsman the run scored against the no-ball (whether deliberate or not deliberate);

  • sewd on August 18, 2010, 14:50 GMT

    Totally agree. This issue has been hijacked unfortunately by the media and turned it into a mountain from a molehill. Unfortunately the media in the sub continent instead of reporting news wants to create news inorder to increase their viewership. I personally am an ardent admirer of Sehwag on and off the field. Similarly his comment on Bangladesh being an ordinary side was used only in an inflammatory way as the whole paragraph was hardly shown by the news channels and only the much criticised sentence. Besides I also recollect a recent event involving Sehwag where he kicked the ball which had stopped just inside the boundary line, across it to inorder not to enable the settled senior batsman to shield the tail ender. I am sorry but I feel the Sri Lankan Board has bent backwards due to the media pressure and most of the television channels on the sub continent are nothing but indulging in over the top, exaggerated journalism with a penchant for "Breaking News"for silly issues.

  • rao.k on August 18, 2010, 14:49 GMT

    The most sensible piece i read so far . The issue is really overblown .The matter hould have ended with bowlers apology ! I wish some Indian players put this in proper perspective by saying say so . That will build bridges between the teams.

  • markymark on August 18, 2010, 14:49 GMT

    i am sad that this issue was blown out of proportion.

    this type of incident is very common, it used to happen quite a lot in cricket.

    for example i can remember west indies vs pakistan 1992 world cup,

    aquib javed bowled two consecutive bouncers (no-balls) to end the match.

    now as a result of this suspension, india are on the pedestal, anytime in the future, one of the indian players (harbhajan i know is number 1) indulges in a sharp practice, everyone will come down on the indian team.

    in my opinion this is not a big issue.

  • S Banerjee on August 18, 2010, 14:49 GMT

    Absolutely agree with you. What's required is a rule change. A six hit shud be credited to the hitter even if it's off the last ball of the match and of a no ball(i.e. evn if the total exceeds the winning total). This will take care of future troubles.

  • ravi on August 18, 2010, 14:48 GMT

    Many times people try to win a match with gamesmanship. While we can debate that is allowed or not it is understandable as you are trying to win.

    Here actually the infraction is much worse becasue in some sense you are trying to loose the game by not trying to get the batsman out till the last ball. It is OK to try to deny him the strike but to deliberately concede runs is NOT OK.

    Secondly the whole matter seems to be to deny an individual player a century "which is extremely petty" - Sehwag's contribution whether it is 99 100 or 101 is of the same magnitude with regard to winning the game which is all that counts. This SEEMS to be a deliberate attempt to try to diminish Sehwag's achievemnt this year versus perhaps other individuals in the SL team. This is very very unacceptable in any sport or event.

  • Syed Mubarak Jawad on August 18, 2010, 14:47 GMT

    So much gets bloated out of proportion in media and that is why I have such healthy respect for Cricinfo.com (I am always logged on). Yes I do agree with Sambit Bal that it has been blown out of proportion. Funnily Sehwag himself has been on the other side of the Spirit of Cricket when he deliberately pushed the last ball of the over to boundary (Hashim Amla's shot during India-South Africa series) to deny Hashim Amla the strike in the next over.

  • Jim on August 18, 2010, 14:47 GMT

    In one sense, we can see like SLC wants to make sure that their players do not indulge in any sort of petulance. They want to remove these things when it is budding and it is good to give a young player a message so he would only become a good person. Sir Viv was banned for two whole years from first class cricket just because he stood the ground after getting out. Randiv is just banned for a match though he didn't breach ICC code of conduct but MCC spirit of cricket. It all shows how SLC wants to win the spirit of game award and strives its players to act properly. It would be petty to bring SLC's financial interests with BCCI into this issue. Both boards don't stoop that much low. Players like Randiv and one responsible for him doing so would understand and make sure they get their acts in future which is good for cricket. However, I feel SLC should not have made a apology as it is a players' matter and they only just have to act towards their players accordingly.

  • Ash on August 18, 2010, 14:47 GMT

    It is not about an apology, the teams need to keep the spirit of the game and I think the one match suspension is the right decision. A batsmen playing under the lights in those tough conditions deserves a hundred, especially when he hits the bowler for a six and no wonder "Sehwag" is upset and I don't blame him. This has nothing to do with the BCCI having a heavy hand and influencing the SLC. The bowler aplogised, batsman accepted; SLC as a govering body has the right to give randiv and Dilshan with a one-match suspension. Now it is fair. WE are happy. Spirit of the game lives on. Sehwag I am sure will feel better..

  • shank on August 18, 2010, 14:47 GMT

    It is an over reaction from the SLC. No one was expecting a ban from Indian side and its even embarrassing to both sides. Have to watch reactions when they play next match. But all this shows SLC don't want to mess with or even send a wrong signal to BCCI (I think it learned from sending it's team to Pakistan which India had withdrawn on security grounds).

  • slHasi on August 18, 2010, 14:47 GMT

    Latest update on cricket rules : If a sri lankan bowler gets a wicket of a Indian batsman when he is in 99, the bowler will be suspended for 1 match. BCCI is ruling the whole cricketing world.

  • Narendra on August 18, 2010, 14:46 GMT

    The issue might seem quite frivolous, but looking at the bigger picture I think Dilshan and Randiv should be ashamed of doing such a dastardly act. Sri Lanka and Murali were in a similar situation not so long ago for the first test match. Murali was knocking the 800 wicket door and India had their tailenders batting. Ishant and Ojha could have easily run out or gifted one of their wickets to someone else, but I thought what ever they did bought a hell lot of honour to the game and to the individuals involved. What ever happened during the one day game was absolute crap and deviates from the spirit of the game. If they think that this is school boyish, then better they play school cricket than International representing their countries.... Mr Sambit, even though the bowler apologized, the batsman accepted, we definitely come in as a part of cricket lovers and who share a more than passion for the game. Some how these kind of incidents do not have any respect in my book at least......

  • Sujay on August 18, 2010, 14:46 GMT

    I agree that its a little out of proportion; but its not the same as batsman not walking.

    Some batsman not walking might change the outcome of the match. Not confessing a grounded catch might change the outcome of the game ... and so on.

    But whether Shewag got that one run or not, it would not have affected the Sri Lankans in any way. Which is why Randiv's no-ball left a sour taste ....

  • Chetan Asher on August 18, 2010, 14:46 GMT

    Sambit, you are right - this is ridiculous. Knowing what we do of Sehwag, this childish trick from Sri Lanka can come & bite them in the next match.

  • Anonymous on August 18, 2010, 14:46 GMT

    Sambit - "Some newspapers devoted a whole page to the incident, summoning the ICC and MCC for explanation". Cricinfo's a news site and now you've one more page dragging the issue even further.

  • Nishith Parikh on August 18, 2010, 14:46 GMT

    True, no laws broken but still loses match fees and is banned from playing the next game I suppose. No team wants the oppositon batsmen to score 100s against them. Small issues are blown out of proportion and framed as scandals. Sad on the part of the BCCI and the Match Referees.And yeah, if someone deserves an apology its gotta be Randiv.

  • VG on August 18, 2010, 14:46 GMT

    Well said. Of all the bullies and mean-spirited people that take the field Sri Lankans are by no means the big ones. They are nowhere near the likes of Australia/England/Pakistan. They are the sort of team I root for when India is out of the picture. I was disappointed that Sehwag was stalled but it's got to a point where I feel sorry for Randiv/Sri Lankans. I would like to see Sehwag speak up and calm this matter down. I wish he had taken this issue no further than his immediate post-match comments which were pretty sporting and magnanimous. Yes, there's been too much Sri Lanka vs India but I still do enjoy watching the two play because, as Dhoni said, it's clean competition. I can just watch cricket without getting amped up by provocative mind games and such.

  • Emar on August 18, 2010, 14:45 GMT

    Totally agree with you. This is a non issue being blown for lack of newsworthy news. I understand the need to highlight the issue but the relentless pursuit by the media is uncalled for. Randiv apologized to Sehwag and that should be the end of it. If needed, the powerful BCCI should have contacted ICC to resolve the stupid rule of the run not counting when the batsman hits it for a six or four.

  • Brave on August 18, 2010, 14:45 GMT

    Sri Lanka has earned their place by playing gr great cricket and playing it in the right sprite. They should continue this greatness without tarnish the game and the nation. As an Indian I love Sri Lanka win as a second team of my choice. Such petty players are a stain to the greats of Sri Lankan game....

  • Anonymous on August 18, 2010, 14:44 GMT

    sad

  • Bala on August 18, 2010, 14:44 GMT

    I don't understand why the six didn't count, then there would not have been any controversy at all. I think we should look at the rules again. If your team has 2 runs to win and you hit a 4 to win it, it counts as 4 for the batsman and the team. During any other time, if you hit six off a no-ball, it counts as six runs for the batsman. Silly interpration of rules complicating lives ..

  • Serenity on August 18, 2010, 14:44 GMT

    spot on ShenMark!

  • SS on August 18, 2010, 14:43 GMT

    Although the issue was definitely blown out of proportion by the media, I would have been horrified if one of our own players had acted as Randiv did. This act was not just mean-spirited but disrespectful of the opposition player. It is worse than Broad's ball throwing incident because the match was not at stake here - it was motivated purely by malice. With millions,including young children and future players watching, it is a terrible example and precendent to set

    Consider the ill-will that would have been fostered if say, Ojha had deliberately trodden on his stumps to deny Murali his 800th wicket. A century is a much smaller achievement, but the malicious intent is equally unacceptable.

    As a spectator and a lover of a game whose long, proud tradition of sportsmanship is slowly but irrevocably being eroded, I say that such acts have no place in this game and laud the Sri Lankan board for taking this issue seriously.

    Now if only the English board could do the same regarding Broad.

  • Chintan Shah on August 18, 2010, 14:43 GMT

    I totally agree that this issue is blown so much out of proportion. SLC cannot impose a ban on a player for this reason. This is utterly ridiculous!

    The player has lost respect from other players, but the issue should be left there. SLC: Please lift the ban from the player. This is not setting a good example and is definitely not good for Sri Lankan cricket.

  • Sid on August 18, 2010, 14:42 GMT

    Indian Media and some of the players have a habit of making a mountain out of a mole hill (I'm indian). Agreed srilankan players were childish and they have done this kind of ridiculous thing in past as well. And Sanga was definitely part of this. But come on! its within the rules, bowler apologised, now lets move on. Player getting banned for something as trivial as this is plain ridiculous. Srilankan board I think is on p0t. And that dude Rajiv Shukla is a moron.

  • Naren on August 18, 2010, 14:42 GMT

    Just ridiculous to give Randiv a one match Ban. The Indians always seem to make a big issue over a small incident. Take the Sydney incident, if Harbhajan kept his mouth shut, things wouldn't gone out of hand. He said something that felt like he was abusing Symonds. Finally Symonds was made scapegoat for complaining to what he thought was racial.

    If an Indian bowler did this to a Srilankan batsman, would BCCI do the same thing? They won't even apologize. They would say it is part and parcel of the game and move on. There is a limit to how low you can go down to satisfy somebody. Shame on SriLankan board going to the extent of Banning somebody. Just a reprimand would have been fine.

  • NagaS on August 18, 2010, 14:42 GMT

    Well said. It was heartening to see the bowler apologising. That's it.

    @ShenMark. I think BCCI is not intervening this time.

  • Kewl on August 18, 2010, 14:41 GMT

    I really don't understand the rules here. Lets say the score reqd. to win a match is 3 runs. And the batsman is on 95 and last ball, he hits a six. His score at the end of the day is 101 not 98. Shouldn't this apply and shouldn't Sehwag be credited with a century since he has already scored those 6 runs? Weird rules...

  • MS on August 18, 2010, 14:41 GMT

    This has been done to make BCCI happy. Suraj didn't break any law of the game. Is there any law that doesn't allow a bowler to ball a deliberate no-ball ?

  • mahesh wijetunge on August 18, 2010, 14:41 GMT

    Dear Sambit Bal, you are a genuine cricket lover. well sri lanka is always out to penalise our own people very quickly thinking that outer world probably would give a free lunch or something. i agree with you 100% on what you say. the decesion SLC has taken is a shame. well i hope someday they wll learn the right thing. by the way i am a sri lankan.

  • IndianCalypso on August 18, 2010, 14:40 GMT

    Well, the issue is more severe than just Viru missing his century. Its the way the players conduct themselves in the ground while playing the game of cricket that matters. They have to be reminded that they represent the country and silly they do does impact their countries reputation. Besides the Spirit of Cricket, its the Image of SriLankan Cricket in line. The reaction of the board is very key here to set an example for other boards whilst standing as a warning for other players. Srilankan Cricket is one of my beloved teams and I'm sure the players will learn something serious here.

  • Patil on August 18, 2010, 14:40 GMT

    I agree, if bowler said sorry, end's the matter. Suspension one match. Come on he didn't do any thing wrong. He was withing rule book of cricket. Money talks all politics, I am from india I think our cricket board too much to handle rest of world soem time. Htey influence too much accroding their wish.

  • RRASX on August 18, 2010, 14:39 GMT

    Sambit - The Lankan Board was right to issue an apology. The bowler should not have done this at this level of cricket & sets a bad example. Randiv should have been thinking to getting the batsman out or bowling a dot ball, that whats Murli would have done.

  • Narasimhan on August 18, 2010, 14:39 GMT

    The first sensible opinion piece I have heard on this subject. Sehwag cried like a schoolkid, and he should have been more graceful. The bowler is a novice, and I can cite many instances of experienced Indian cricketers doing far more mean things. And the Indian media and the public proved that as a country we have a long way to go when it comes to priorities in life.

    All I can say is "guys, go get a life"

  • Shash on August 18, 2010, 14:39 GMT

    I don't agree that it was the right thing to do... but the common phrase "Randiv bowled a big no-ball that denied the batsman a chance to get his century" is somewhat strange as Sehwage had 3 balls prior, 1 he missed and 2 he fended on 99*... I'm pretty sure it was deliberate, but Sehwage had a chance and he didn't take it... it's like a school friend of mine who fended 5-balls of the last over just to score the winning run off the last delivery and failed.

  • aashish on August 18, 2010, 14:38 GMT

    well, Sambit has nailed the point here, though ShenMark has just about hammered the nail :) Coffin closed. Its funny to see SLC actually banning Randiv for a match!

  • RealCricketer on August 18, 2010, 14:38 GMT

    Ok so Randiv and Dilshan lost all their match fees for the no ball denying Sehway a century. Stuart Broad threw a ball at Pakistani Batsman Zulqarnain Haider and aggravated a finger injury which ruled him out of a test series resulting in the poor man loosing his chance to secure a place in the Pak team. Broad is fined 50%. So denying Sehwag a century apparently is more of a worse crime than intentionally injuring a young upcoming batsman. That is pathetic! Clearly Indian bias needs to be stopped. I don't understand what's the big deal Sehwag didnt get a century??? The world needs to start standing up against these Indians and stop letting them dictate world cricket!!

  • Pranab on August 18, 2010, 14:38 GMT

    Issue has been blown out of proportion and Randiv (acting on the behest of Dilshan it seems) has got a raw deal (from his own board nonetheless). However, SL cricketers are gentleman on and off the field and this one-off incident will remain that - a one-off! P.S: If a senior cricketer like Dilshan urged Randiv to do this folly, then he should be banned and not Randiv. The seniors should set good examples of sportsmanship.

  • Sujan Rao on August 18, 2010, 14:37 GMT

    Very well said Sambit. Its been totally blown out of proportion. Indian media likes to gain out of nothing adding masala to it. Very outrageous decision by SLC to ban Randiv for just nothing. I'm telling this being an Indian.

  • James on August 18, 2010, 14:36 GMT

    That's your opinion and I respect it. It was certainly a well deserved hundred that was missed, one that won us the match. If a lot of people (including me) are worked up about it, let them be. We love Sehwag, how he plays and his milestones. Maybe not in the same magnitude, but we were robbed just as he was. Let us be disappointed without you judging us.

    Sport is about these little "one's", the little milestones and the victories. People are emotional about them. I don't see what is difficult to understand about this.

  • NIk on August 18, 2010, 14:35 GMT

    Well I side with SL on the matter. They shows ethics and morality over the legality and rule. It reminds me NYC Mosque Controversy: It rightful by law to build one even within ground zero, but is it ethical and worthinesses of being seen in bad light by most others?

    Its tough in today's world, but Ethics should play first than those legal rules. SLC set an excellent example of play by Ethics Vs Law.

    For those with lil thinking: If my wife finds out about my gf, I think I would apologize, even if no law requires a deliberate cheat to do that.

  • Shobhit Agarwal on August 18, 2010, 14:35 GMT

    It was not blown out of proportion, but it becomes necessary to teach lesson to the culprit so that it is not repeated again. When Sri Lankans players said that they did it deliberately then punishment is bound to happen. In India, cricket is a religion. Perhaps the only source of happiness to the millions of people who faces numerous problems in daily life here, so this reaction is 100% normal. Also after the end of a person carrer, it is his or her stats only which we remember, which remains forever in the memory. We havent seen Don Bradman, but his statics like his average, 29 centuries in 70 innings is what we get to know. So Statics matters a lot in everybody's life, not alone Sportsman, but it includes student, common man etc also.

  • Kumar on August 18, 2010, 14:34 GMT

    Sure, We shouldn't get involved in this, Mr. Bal I assume you are trying to say that we are just the spectators and we should keep out mouths shut. As cricket has been taking care of it customers so called viewers, spectators they mus thave their say as they are the ones who are feeding this game with their support, without which the game would never grow and will stay as a hobby like stamp collection :-)

  • m.i.husain.i.m on August 18, 2010, 14:34 GMT

    @ShenMark: Lol. So hilarious yet so true.

  • Sanjeev K Bawari on August 18, 2010, 14:33 GMT

    I agree completely with the author. What Randiv did was senseless but what is SLC board trying to prove? This will effect there team both morally in short to mid term and materialistically for tomorrow's crucial match

  • Vikram on August 18, 2010, 14:33 GMT

    Yes, but unfortunately you seem to be overprotecting. 4 byes and then a no ball. this is height. Understand if it denying only 1 run then it makes sens. but you try from the score 95 is too much of naughtiness.

  • Boom on August 18, 2010, 14:33 GMT

    what ShenMark forgot to say,

    1. BCCI is guilty of the pakistan floods 2. BCCI prevented bradman from averaging 100 by using its money 3. BCCI is the root of all evil. 4. All you have to do is give absolute power to cricket australia and trust them. they are god's representatives on earth and can do no wrong. 5. .......... 6. .......... .. .. .

  • balu on August 18, 2010, 14:32 GMT

    very balanced comment. We should not allow ourselves to be stolen by emotions. All of us mean spirited in atleast one corner of our mind. It would be petty to dispute it even after they apologised. But we should notice that this is typical sinhalese charecter. If they can become so mean spirited in a match that they are sure to lose, you can imagine how would they behave to the ethnic minority tamils. We have Taslima's Lajja to display how the Bengali muslims are cruel and undemocratic to deny the intrinsic right of Bengali hindus their right in Bangladesh, we do not have one to display the cruelty of Sinhalese in denying rights of Tamils, natives of that island, inhabitants of the island even prior to Sinhalese.

  • Gayathri on August 18, 2010, 14:32 GMT

    I agree. This issue has gained way too much importance. Let the poor boy be. He made a mistake, he has apologized, let us move on.

  • Sumit Singh on August 18, 2010, 14:31 GMT

    I do not agree with Sambit. Agreed the media hypes, but we have to put it aside. So Randiv apologized, but what if he didn't? What if he said proudly he did it for exact reason of denying Sehwag the century. Certainly that would be ugly. There is no assurance next time an incident like this would result in an amicable hand shake as this might have been. Sorry to say, I would not expect from a number of international cricketers. I don't think Ponting or his "mates" would be that charitable. Best to nip such behavior in the bud and others take some lessons from it. I congratulate SLC for sending the right message in no uncertain terms. Others should follow their example. Decency is expected and should not be left at discretion. My two cents.

    Sumit

  • Enrico on August 18, 2010, 14:31 GMT

    This is typical of the big-bully tactics of India. Sehwag himself did something similar not too long ago, by 'DELIBERATELY' kicking a ball over the ropes for four. This resulted in the in-form bat not been able to keep the strike. The same big-bully tactics were employed by India with regards to the UDRS for the just concluded 3 test series. Why do we keep bowing down to India? Desperate times call for desperate measures i guess!!!!

  • Harish on August 18, 2010, 14:31 GMT

    SLC has bent a bit too much...and the Indian Press as usual went overboard.

  • CricLover on August 18, 2010, 14:31 GMT

    Rightly said, SLC is going out of their way to please the BCCI. Everybody knows that BCCI is trying to help SLC financially, but even if you take help from somebody its not that you keep your head down.

  • CricLover on August 18, 2010, 14:30 GMT

    Rightly said, SLC is going out of their way to please the BCCI. Everybody knows that BCCI is trying to help SLC financially, but even if you take help from somebody its not that you keep your head down.

  • Sharath on August 18, 2010, 14:30 GMT

    With due respect its a worst article I have ever read. "Rest of us come in? " First you don't derserve a coloumn to right. The best part was Srilankan Cricket Board coming in to action, Otherwise Randiv wouldn't have gone to Sehwag for an apollogy. After all when did Randiv apollogize after Sehwag expressed his views in the media.

  • Sreedhar on August 18, 2010, 14:30 GMT

    Very correct..why all of them are making such a big issue out of nothing.Talking of spirt of the game, now, who is following that;its always in the words but never in actions and what is wrong in denying someone a century..you have every right to do that. Sorry to say this, but if the same would hv been done by an Indian, the headlines in the newspaper would have been "Captain Cool Make Sures opponent batsmen doesn't score a century".

  • Sri on August 18, 2010, 14:29 GMT

    Everyone is opportunistic to sensationalize and have their own ways. Don't you agree?

  • GauDan on August 18, 2010, 14:28 GMT

    Aptly said Mr. Bal. I suppose the reaction from SLC can be at best termed as "pre-emptive". Though I am not sure to what extent BCCI may have taken the situation had there been a lack of action on SLCs part. This was in no way serious crime than sledging.

  • sirasa99 on August 18, 2010, 14:28 GMT

    The bowler apologised, the batsman accepted; where do the rest of us come in?

  • jerry on August 18, 2010, 14:28 GMT

    I wonder if if it was the reverse , an Indian apology or a fine on the player involved would be imposed. overblown incident , Shewag also should be embarassed by the incident , let bygones be bygones ... a storm in a teacup

  • mangesh on August 18, 2010, 14:28 GMT

    Totaly agreed. Yes this is too much becuse of media. This should have stop when Randiv said sorry.

  • Kaka Babu on August 18, 2010, 14:27 GMT

    To stop further incidents of such nature action taken by SLC is good. Need to maintain the spirit of the game always...

  • mangesh on August 18, 2010, 14:27 GMT

    Totaly agreed. Yes this is too much becuse of media. This should have stop when Randiv said sorry.

  • Thribhuvan on August 18, 2010, 14:27 GMT

    I would say Randiv deserves 1 match ban and dilshan deserves too but lucky chap got clear chit..!!! carefull guys!!

  • Gurpreet on August 18, 2010, 14:27 GMT

    Sambit- There are couple of things that make the backlash justified. First one, Srilanka team has received ICC award for playing with right spirit for last three years - They deserve the backlash when they didnt honour the award given to them for being role model in team spirit. Second, Just imagine if India would have done the same to avoid Murali his 800th wicket? What would have been the public response?

    I think this more about sporting issue and should be addressed for the good of future of the game.

  • Partha Srinivasan on August 18, 2010, 14:27 GMT

    I kind of agree & disagree with the column...As the media loves these type of incidents, it does create added pressure for everyone(including boards) to react in some way...but trying to restrict such bad incidents is good for the brand of cricket...All the examples such as batsmen being non sportive, fielders cheating etc, if it exceeds a tolerance limit, they need to be punished(I think Match Referees had done that in the past), but since this is a fuzzy concept, there are no clear rules on when such incidents happen. so the answer is probably getting some clear guidelines for handling such conduct by players.

  • petty all around on August 18, 2010, 14:26 GMT

    Ridiculously petty from BOTH sides of the coin. Rhandiv was petty in the incident, Sehwag and the media petty with the reaction. An apology, for now, is very acceptable and I agree with you that the spirit of cricket issue is very fuzzy. Wasn't it similar when Eng's physio was sent on to waste time vs SA, wasn't it fuzzy when NZ accused Pak of ball tampering without proof when Pak reversed a ball in a t-20 and what about Sehwag himself when he deliberately kicked a ball to the ropes vs SA in a test earlier this yr. in order to undermine Amla's efforts to keep strike!? Where was the apology in all these incidents? SLC should be ashamed for their reaction and now I hear Rhandiv was suspended?! Ok, let's start suspending persons for knicking and not walking and then watch weakened line ups take the field for every game.

  • Azee on August 18, 2010, 14:26 GMT

    Why this Indian media makes hills out of moles is at times beyond me!? It's a shame that Indian team is raising concerns only after being at recieving end. Inzimam's infamous run out was a breach of spirit of game but they tagged it "under the legititmate rules" and everything subsided, then Dhoni setting a negative 8-1 field and termed it as strategy. Randiv bowled a no ball deliberatley and Sehwag knew it as well and in his immediate response he ruffled the issue but the media just couldn't let it go. I guess now every bowler would be keep a Sorry note if they bowl a wide or no ball against India and if an Indian batter gets out on 49 the opponent team captain will be asked to apologize and the cricket board to ban the culprit bowler. Petty stuff!

  • M.KUMAR on August 18, 2010, 14:26 GMT

    If Randiv had talked to any of our politicians they would have told him that he should not have made the no ball so obvious. This should certainly deter cricketers from resorting to such dubious methods to deny a cricketer a well deserved ton.It is another thing that you dive to your left right or whatever to stop a man from reaching the coveted three figure mark.It is sad that such a fine bowler who gives 100% even while batting or fielding should resort to such ways-it is a lesson this talented youngster will understand and should make him a better individual and Cricketer in that order

  • Limelight on August 18, 2010, 14:25 GMT

    Agree completely. However its a good tactical move by SLC. The last thing they want is an enraged Sehwag next time SL faces him.

  • MM on August 18, 2010, 14:25 GMT

    Cricket is a popular game because of a lot of reasons. Some of the most respected batsmen walk. Cricket is one game where spirit matters. These things have been brushed aside or kept hidden for a long time now. It took someone like Sehwag to state it plainly. Mind you, he blamed the Sri Lankan team with facts on his side. Any self-respecting country wouldn's like to be labelled as spoilsports or cheats for the acts of one or two individuals. This is how SLC viewed it. Is it too hard to understand? I feel it was nice of the Sri Lankan board to reemphasize to the world that they take the spirit of cricket seriously, unlike a lot of the others.

  • zzzz on August 18, 2010, 14:23 GMT

    I agree totally.. honestly I don't think that an apology is required. This is an issue of gamesmanship, not cheating, and it is a very fuzzy area. We each can have our opinion but there is nothing in the laws of cricket or anything definitive in the "spirit" to indicate that this is wrong.

    Well anyhow, assuming he apologised because he wanted to, well fair enough.

    I am totally embarrassed by the way the SL board has gone about this - what are they trying to prove? there are times when you need to stand behind your player (when he has broken no law) - this is disgraceful, not from Randiv, but from the board and the powers-that-be for the sake of whoever they are trying to impress.

  • Raghu on August 18, 2010, 14:23 GMT

    Samit Bal... stop writing about something which you are not clear about.. what you mentioned as "The overstepping looked deliberate and, coming after the four byes conceded off the previous ball" is wrong. Refer to the Cricinfo commentary, its the fourth ball of the over...

    Dont write for the sake of writing... the headline given is a crap... its not 'out of proportion'... it might be only for someone who didnt follow the game but having dinner some where...

    What the Lankan team did was totally against the spirit of the game.

    Dont write something like this again without knowing about it well

  • gayan on August 18, 2010, 14:22 GMT

    Of course that no ball is deliberate but that 4b wasn’t it was a good delivery which beat both batsmen and the wicketkeeper. If that was the case why didn't sehvag make contact with that ball, so for starters it was his mistake isnt it ? Speaking of sportsmanship do you remember the test match between south africa and India this year where sehvag kick the ball to the boundary purposefully to deny asim amla on strike ?

  • vijay on August 18, 2010, 14:22 GMT

    We should come in and make Randiv pity,so that it will not be repeated again. I read some where this is 2nd time from Srilankan Cricketers,and thats not fair. People like we love cricket and we want our players to get a Century and some times these disgusting scenes happen,this can affect the spirit of the game.Randiv would have been suspended for rest of Series.

  • prakash on August 18, 2010, 14:22 GMT

    ya its true the matter should have been finished when randiv apologised.Moreover i think SL is a play very much within laws of game.They have couple of walkers in their team as well. Feeling sorry for their present state.

  • k s sreeharsha on August 18, 2010, 14:21 GMT

    Regardless of the no ball incident, whether it was petty or not, the real issue lies with the rules of the game when the six was not allowed. What if there was a need for one run for victory and the batsman run the run but a no ball was declared. Does that constiture a draw? The rule seems ridiculous.

  • Akeel on August 18, 2010, 14:21 GMT

    I personally agree with you Mr.Bal that what the srilankan cricket board has done was ridiculous. It only breached the spirit of the game and therefore came to no harm but the SLC jumped out unnecessarily banning Randiv from a game and also dropping his match fee. it does not make any sense he faces all these penalties for bowling a no-ball(no doubt a deliberate one at that) but it seems to be a bit too harsh on a promising young cricketer.All i can hope is that Suraj Randiv's career will not be blemished for putting his foot in front of the line.I believe that the SLC has been wrong and randiv wronged.I personally hope that the ICC will take matters into it's own hands.

  • Gaya on August 18, 2010, 14:21 GMT

    Atleast SLC had a backbone to quickly respond for players discipline. What about BCCI,one guy slap another,players showing middle finger to fans,Kapil Dev did one of the most weird runout.Lot can learn from SLC to BCCI rather than thinking about bribing with black money.

  • aniket on August 18, 2010, 14:21 GMT

    mr Sambit you can't understand it cause you were not on 99. punishment done is well in favour of sportism in cricket.

  • psperera on August 18, 2010, 14:21 GMT

    This issue is indeed blown out of proportion and I sympathize Randiv and others being punished as well. SLC is just trying to kiss up to BCCI by making a point of support. The poor souls at the receiving end are Randiv Dilshan and Sanga granted what Randiv did is perfectly legal.

    The spirit of the game is broken or abused many a times with more substantial actions and at times go unnoticed. I am with you Randiv. Keep the head high and bowl'em out.

  • k s sreeharsha on August 18, 2010, 14:20 GMT

    Regardless of the no ball incident, whether it was petty or not, the real issue lies with the rules of the game when the six was not allowed. What if there was a need for one run for victory and the batsman run the run but a no ball was declared. Does that constiture a draw? The rule seems ridiculous.

  • Sundeep on August 18, 2010, 14:20 GMT

    Excellently written... I too feel it is just been blown out of proportion here..

    But it serves the news channels, papers and broadcasting company alike, the series just got more importance in public's views..

  • Manish Kumar on August 18, 2010, 14:20 GMT

    Yes, Totally agreed with Mr Sambit. The issue has indeed been blown out of proportaion, and from whatever we know about Sehwag (through media - of course), he will definately be embarassed that he has in some way been in picture towards this punishment on a young and upcoming cricketer like Suraj Randiv. Sometimes, it is better to let some incidents die its natural death. I feel sorry for Suraj Randiv. Best of luck to him.

  • Aks on August 18, 2010, 14:20 GMT

    SL has been the winner of the Spirit of Cricket award a couple of times. I think the board's reaction and subsequent 1-game suspension is purely to show that they take Spirit of Cricket very seriously and don't want this incident to tarnish their reputation. I think it's not over-the-board because they're sending a very clear message and this will act as a good deterrent. Also consider that SL haven't won a major tournament in a while and haven't topped any rankings in a while so the top Spirit rank is important to them and their standing in the cricketing world.

  • tarun on August 18, 2010, 14:19 GMT

    exactly.and now randiv has been suspended...giving the media some more news to exagerate. plus . to me it seems more as an effort by SLC to please BCCI. after all Sri Lanka's FTP is decided by BCCI and not ICC.

  • AZ on August 18, 2010, 14:19 GMT

    I totally agree with you. It was not the best thing to do. Randiv apologised, Shewag is fine with it and it should have been over.

  • CricFan78 on August 18, 2010, 14:18 GMT

    Well done Mark. I was waiting for someone to blame BCCI for this as well ... priceless

  • VivaVizag on August 18, 2010, 14:17 GMT

    Looks like SLC doesn't want to upset their 'masters' and lose lucrative deals. Will these Ind vs SL tourneys ever end?

  • aniket on August 18, 2010, 14:17 GMT

    Sambit Bal if you were on 99 you would have understood it.Punishment done will guide payers to give importance to game spirit.If punishment was not done then may be tomorrow all teams would started doing same thing,which is harmful to game.

  • NaveedHashmi on August 18, 2010, 14:17 GMT

    Sadly this has long been the character of Indian fans and Indian media. They cannot stop moaning on such incidents and cannot stop boasting for the so-called "spirit of cricket". Where the "spirit of cricket" or "sportsmanship" or "ethics" were when Sehwag kicked a ball to boundary only to deny strike to Hashim Amla? Where were these traits sleeping when Eden Garden was burned (1996 SF)?.... and there are numerous instances..... So it's high time that we need to account "ourselves" first before being mad on such instances...

  • Joe V on August 18, 2010, 14:16 GMT

    Accept the apology .. move on .. sad to see Suraj suspended for one game and lose his match fees. Shewag should be more careful in the future expressing his opinions in public.

  • P Satish on August 18, 2010, 14:16 GMT

    I agree. The SLC has gone way overboard with it's reaction. It was fun to see Sangakkara do all this considering he puts himself across quite slickly with regards to various aspects of the game but that's about it for the issue.

    As you have pointed out so well, Sehwag said it as he saw it, said many(or all?) teams do that and there ends the controversy. A great knock has been overshadowed by a petty incident.

  • SundarIsaacs on August 18, 2010, 14:15 GMT

    Well said.

  • sheru on August 18, 2010, 14:15 GMT

    I think srilankan did a great job and i believe sehwag deserves it, he was playing a slow inning and why was he waiting on the last ball to do complete hundred.It was sewag fault not surajs.

  • Kalki on August 18, 2010, 14:15 GMT

    Absolutely agree with this article. The India media went overboard and I suspect the BCCI probably talked the SL board into action too.

    Petty!

  • Vivek Jain on August 18, 2010, 14:14 GMT

    Nicely written article, very balanced views. Warning should have been enough for Randiv rather than a ban, what about Dilshan? (who allegedly gave the idea of NO BALL). Well, lesser known players are punished severely. Sehwag,shrewdly, is also blowing the matter out of proportion so that Lankans have their mind off the cricket.

  • ShenMark on August 18, 2010, 14:00 GMT

    Exactly. But the issues are as follows 1. SLC is bankrupt. 2. BCCI is willing to help it. 3. And that's the last straw.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • ShenMark on August 18, 2010, 14:00 GMT

    Exactly. But the issues are as follows 1. SLC is bankrupt. 2. BCCI is willing to help it. 3. And that's the last straw.

  • Vivek Jain on August 18, 2010, 14:14 GMT

    Nicely written article, very balanced views. Warning should have been enough for Randiv rather than a ban, what about Dilshan? (who allegedly gave the idea of NO BALL). Well, lesser known players are punished severely. Sehwag,shrewdly, is also blowing the matter out of proportion so that Lankans have their mind off the cricket.

  • Kalki on August 18, 2010, 14:15 GMT

    Absolutely agree with this article. The India media went overboard and I suspect the BCCI probably talked the SL board into action too.

    Petty!

  • sheru on August 18, 2010, 14:15 GMT

    I think srilankan did a great job and i believe sehwag deserves it, he was playing a slow inning and why was he waiting on the last ball to do complete hundred.It was sewag fault not surajs.

  • SundarIsaacs on August 18, 2010, 14:15 GMT

    Well said.

  • P Satish on August 18, 2010, 14:16 GMT

    I agree. The SLC has gone way overboard with it's reaction. It was fun to see Sangakkara do all this considering he puts himself across quite slickly with regards to various aspects of the game but that's about it for the issue.

    As you have pointed out so well, Sehwag said it as he saw it, said many(or all?) teams do that and there ends the controversy. A great knock has been overshadowed by a petty incident.

  • Joe V on August 18, 2010, 14:16 GMT

    Accept the apology .. move on .. sad to see Suraj suspended for one game and lose his match fees. Shewag should be more careful in the future expressing his opinions in public.

  • NaveedHashmi on August 18, 2010, 14:17 GMT

    Sadly this has long been the character of Indian fans and Indian media. They cannot stop moaning on such incidents and cannot stop boasting for the so-called "spirit of cricket". Where the "spirit of cricket" or "sportsmanship" or "ethics" were when Sehwag kicked a ball to boundary only to deny strike to Hashim Amla? Where were these traits sleeping when Eden Garden was burned (1996 SF)?.... and there are numerous instances..... So it's high time that we need to account "ourselves" first before being mad on such instances...

  • aniket on August 18, 2010, 14:17 GMT

    Sambit Bal if you were on 99 you would have understood it.Punishment done will guide payers to give importance to game spirit.If punishment was not done then may be tomorrow all teams would started doing same thing,which is harmful to game.

  • VivaVizag on August 18, 2010, 14:17 GMT

    Looks like SLC doesn't want to upset their 'masters' and lose lucrative deals. Will these Ind vs SL tourneys ever end?