Needle

What was I saying? Oh yes - cricket - it's stressful enough without even playing.

So having arrived at the ground an hour into the game to watch the team play I'm informed by the spectators and batsmen waiting to go in that there's 'a bit of an atmosphere'. The short story, it seems, is that two of our batsman have nicked it behind and neither have walked nor been given out. The unusual thing about this is that there doesn't seem to be any questioning from our team: both of the men in bat were out, and yet both are still out in the middle. How on earth can that even happen? Surely at least one of them must have walked? 

The full story emerges by degrees. It goes like this....

In the first instance both umpire and batsman didn't think there was an edge. Once the umpire saw the fielders' reaction he knew he'd made an mistake, but there wasn't much he could do. The batsman still claims he hit his pad rather than the ball. However, no one else on the team agrees with him. Frankly said batsman is not a great judge of a cricket ball's whereabouts at the best of times. It was pure incompetence on batsman and umpire's parts. It's embarrassing and certainly annoying for the opposition, but frankly, my view would be that shit happens, especially at our level. 

The second instance is less innocent. Here the umpire wasn't sure if the batsman was out, and expected him to walk. Said batsman has only recently joined from higher level cricket overseas and to him walking isn't the done thing. Now this isn't great. Clearly words have to be had. I'm not claiming to be Adam Gilchrist, but if I think the harmony of a game's under threat and I know I'm out then I'll piss off. Evidently this chap has no such qualms.  

The real problem with both these events is that they happen within about ten minutes of each other. The opposition are massively fucked off, and it's understandable. Their captain calls me over for a chat even though I'm only there to watch. All I can really do is say I didn't see what happened - I didn't - but that the consensus is both batsmen were out, and we're sorry.

It doesn't help. Now from this point on the opposition take it too far, in my view. One of their batsmen goes out to umpire and refuses to give a thing. Every batsman who comes back seems to rant and rave about how we're a bunch of cheating cunts. One batsman plays a stunning innings and the game goes down to the final over, but the entire match is marred by a spiteful atmosphere. At least half our players apologise to their players, and the apologies are grudgingly accepted at best.

I never used to get rattled by this kind of stuff. Certainly back when I played league this kind of thing was de rigeur. Sledging, bowlers chucking the ball at batsmen's heads in their follow-through, near-fist fights - I've seen it all, and sometimes I was relatively near the middle of it. You cross the white line, go hell for leather and that's the end of it. You don't have to see each other till next year and if people are really offended then the league authorities can deal with the discipline.

But friendly cricket requires different behaviour. If this fixture is abandoned - which I think is quite likely - then the fall-out makes my life, as fixtures secretary, much more difficult. I have to find a new couple of opponents. A new team willing to host us in May. It doesn't help our reputation - this lot play a lot of the teams we do - which could make finding said new opposition harder.

The annoying thing is that in the cold light of day there was nothing malicious in what transpired - there hardly ever is in such cases. It's very, very rare that there's deliberate cheating. Test umpires get things wrong all the time. It's cricket. But if you put someone out there to umpire who a) Might not be that good at it and b) Is from the batting team, it's surprising there aren't more arguments. And on top of that cricketers - no, sportsmen and supporters generally - always take a ridiculously subjective view of what's playing out before their eyes. 

Maybe I feel my description of yesterday's events is objective for the simple reason I just don't care as much as some people involved. Maybe it's because I wasn't actually playing in the game. Or maybe - just maybe - my view is as biased and deluded as anyone else's. I don't know. But I do know I'm not alone in that regard.