Here’s something I wrote
early last year. It’s the next in my list of things to think about in a year when there
has been no real school sport
Good men, not good players. That's what it's really all about
I, like many I guess,
didn’t know why the running out of Jos Buttler at the bowler's end by Ravi Ashwin in the Indian
Premier League recently is called a “mankad”.
So, I Googled it, and
found out that this type of dismissal was named after Indian bowler Vinoo Mankad, who dismissed
Australia’s Bill Brown in this fashion during the second Test in Sydney in
1947. It was the second time he got Brown out in that way on that tour and it
caused a mighty uproar. The name stuck after that.
I’d never heard the
term before, although I have come across incidents where backing up batsmen
have been warned by the bowler for stealing a few yards and I always thought
the laws of the game required that to happen before the batsman could be
dismissed in this way.
It turns out that
there’s nothing in the laws, or in the MCC guidance notes on the Spirit of
Cricket, saying that there has to be a warning, so the dismissal in the IPL was
perfectly legal and that’s the end of it.
It’s not really the end
of it though, is it? Cricket, in particular, is a game that teaches life
lessons all over the place, that’s why it’s such a good sport to play in
schools.
The expression “it’s
just not cricket” is what that’s all about and although it may be an old-fashioned
concept with a bit of a paternalistic, colonial tint to it, the principles
behind it are not.
It means just what the
mankad debate is all about – sometimes the right thing to do is not governed by
the laws, but it is the right thing to do. If you don’t do it it’s, well, just
not cricket.
Cricket’s a good game for teaching values
to children, but any game will do the same, it all depends on the way it’s
coached and managed.
I firmly believe that the real reason we
include sport in the school curriculum is to develop the young people involved
into good human beings who can go out into the world one day and make a
positive contribution.
It may be that they do that as
professional players, but that’s incidental, that’s not the reason why we run
sporting programmes at schools.
Any teacher or coach responsible for the
running of a school sport programme who doesn’t have in mind that the most
important task is to teach children to behave honourably and according to the
values and ethics that are included in both the laws of the game and the
ephemeral “spirit of the game” is not, in my opinion, doing his or her job.
And a cricket coach who teaches a bowler
to mankad a batsman, or for that matter, tells a batsman that it’s OK to steal
a yard backing up because there’s no chance that he will be mankaded, should be
fired.
Let’s send young people out into the world
who do good because it’s the right thing to do, because it’s just not cricket
to do otherwise.
Can I add an example from the weekend past that, for me
illustrates what I’m talking about?
The players, just hours after what must have been a devastating, narrow defeat that afternoon, sprung to the assistance of two different mothers struggling with babies, prams and bulky luggage in the strong wind, and cheerfully saw them on and off the plane and onto the airport bus.
There were no real losers in that team – they have been taught, and they have learnt, the more important lessons that, in this case, rugby is meant to teach.
No comments:
Post a Comment