India wins; cricket loses

India win battle on negative bowling," screams the Times of India. The laws of the game have been altered. Ashley Giles's "negative tactics" are now history.

The BCCI is rejoicing. It has won the battle; the ICC has succumbed again. If the Mike Denness affair was a starter, then the BCCI seems to be mid-way through a five-course meal. However, is it doing any good to the game?

The Mike Denness affair could have been handled more professionally; all that was needed was some cool, collective thinking. But Indians, a majority of them, resort to knee jerk reactions when aspersions are cast on religious figures…. and yes, Sachin Tendulkar is a "god" in this part of the world.

Again, the issue of Giles's "negative bowling" has been highlighted only due to Sachin Tendulkar's impotency when it came to countering Giles's leg stump line.

A player of Tendulkar's class could have easily found a way out of Giles's vice-like grip. For someone who has cover driven Warne's leggies from the rough outside the leg stump, Giles's bowling must have been more like powder puffs. However, Tendulkar remained uncharacteristically subdued…. as if he had built a wall around himself…. ensconced comfortably in his shell. The media then went ranting about Giles's "negative" line and when Ganguly echoed the media’s sentiments, the matter was blown hugely out of proportion.

The game of cricket is all about the batsmen giving answers to the questions posed by the bowlers. Some are easy… others tough. There surely is a way out. And yes, Sehwag would subscribe to this view at a premium. In his knock of over 60 against England, he not only annulled Giles’s leg stump line but also managed to get the bowler thinking. Unfortunately, when Sachin tried to follow suit he succumbed and the men in the media stood vindicated.

The ICC ruling is a body blow to the spinners, who rely heavily on the 'rough' when the wicket does not offer much purchase. Sunil Gavaskar’s proposal to declare such deliveries as wide is shocking to say the least. There is also talk of re-wording the law on wides. A negative line need not necessarily constitute a wide ball.

A wide ball is defined as follows: (LAW 25) "If the Bowler bowls the ball so high over or so wide of the wicket that, in the opinion of the umpire it passes out of reach of the striker, standing in a normal guard position, the umpire shall call and signal "wide-ball" as soon as it has passed to line of the striker’s wicket."

The umpire can always call such a delivery a wide ball if the Striker has no chance of making contact with it. The argument of "widing" a leg stump line seems ridiculous to me when the Striker can make contact with the ball standing in a normal guard position.

The leg stump line is difficult to score off and the pace of the game does get a bit slow. It not only offers the fielding team with “God-sent Brakes” on the scoring but also forces the batsman to think. True, the spectators want to see plenty of runs scored and these "tactics" are not in congruence with the spectator interests. The true test of a batsman lies in his ability to triumph in the most adverse conditions. Complaining about the leg stump line (I hate to call it negative) is like an attacking batsman whining when the field is defensive. The leg stump line is a fascinating facet of this game and there surely are methods of countering it. VVS Laxman's innings against Warne was probably the best exhibition of countering this style of bowling. These battles are to be won on the field rather than off it.

The game of cricket needs these battles… which brings out the best from the players…. a test of technique and character. After all, isn’t the longer version of the game called "Test" cricket for similar reasons?

Editor's note: Rediff believes that like its own editorial staffers, readers too have points of view on the many issues relating to cricket as it is played.

Therefore, Rediff provides in its editorial section space for readers to write in, with their views. The views expressed by the readers are carried as written, in order to preserve the original voice.

However, it needs mentioning that guest columns are opinion pieces, and reflect only the feelings of the individual concerned -- the fact that they are published on Rediff's cricket site does not amount to an endorsement by the editorial staff of the opinions expressed in these columns.

Mail Ganesh Krishnamurthy