RIP the spirit of cricket. You had your moments, and you came in handy when England complained about Alex Carey’s punching of Jonny Bairstow at Lord’s last summer.
But the sight of Matthew Potts changing a boot as England tried in vain to run back the clock and earn a rain-ruined nil result – and a 2-2 share of the ODI series – against Australia in Bristol on Sunday confirmed that the match was over. .
The Spirit of Cricket is now the game’s answer to Monty Python’s parrot: it’s an ex-spirit, it’s expired, it’s gone to meet its maker, it’s devoid of life.
And it was about time. The Spirit of Cricket, as set out by MCC in the preamble to the laws, is actually a clear guide to playing the game. It says you should respect others, and that’s pretty much it. What’s not to like about it?
But despite the simplicity of the message, the preamble has been distorted beyond recognition by both sides of the debate.
Matthew Potts changed boots as England tried in vain to turn back the clock
England tried to earn a rain-ruined clean sheet result and a 2-2 share in the ODI series against Australia
The Spirit of Cricket came in handy when England complained about Alex Carey’s punching of Jonny Bairstow at Lord’s last summer, but Sunday confirmed the game is over
One side (especially the English one) has used it to climb to moral heights: it’s more important to be a really good guy than to play by the laws, which is why Australia had their perfectly legal, blunt appeal against Bairstow must withdraw.
The sight of members of the club that wrote these laws harassing Australians for enforcing them was one of the many absurdities of that day at Lord’s.
The other side (especially Asian, and especially Indian) believes that the preamble is a means of imposing an outdated idea on the new world, a return to colonialism, a means of keeping it in place.
Both sides are wrong: the Spirit of Cricket just tells us to be kind to each other. It’s a beautiful idea – and hopelessly optimistic.
The idea that cricket has a spirit, perhaps even a soul, is evoked mainly when it suits a team to summon it, but is otherwise easily ignored. England were inconvenienced by the Bairstow stump, so they grumbled. They also knew that wasting time was their only chance of salvation in Bristol, so they parked their principles.
In fact, there was a less underhanded way to slow the overload, but Harry Brook moved on too late. Instead of giving three overs to Adil Rashid, who yielded just eight singles and were bowled in no time, the England captain should have stuck with the quicks, whose overs take longer to complete.
Instead we got the ridiculous sight of Potts pretending to have a problem with his studs and laces – just as Curtly Ambrose and Courtney Walsh did in Trinidad in 1989-90, when the West Indies cut the overage rate to nine an hour , with England on the brink of a historic 2-0 lead.
And that’s how it works. Other countries may like to point out English hypocrisy, but everyone is in on it, and it always has been.
Australia eventually achieved a 3-2 victory over England in Bristol on Sunday
Australia have traditionally argued that their batsmen do not run free as the decision rests solely with the umpire. Reasonable. Yet there is still froth at the mouth over Stuart Broad’s refusal to surrender for a big lead at Trent Bridge in 2013.
Bangladesh’s Shakib Al Hasan was happy to appeal for ‘timeout’ against Sri Lanka’s Angelo Mathews during last year’s World Cup match in Delhi as it was ‘in the law’. The same Shakib once ripped out the stumps during a domestic match because he disagreed with an lbw decision.
India, meanwhile, routinely take things to a macro level, brazenly switching pitches ahead of their World Cup semi-final against New Zealand in Mumbai despite the wrath of the ICC’s independent pitch consultant.
When the story was swept under the carpet because it didn’t suit anyone – not India, not the ICC, and none of the other cricketing nations that rely on visits from India to fund their games – it was proof that the spirit of cricket is being abused . off the field as easily as on it.
The idea that cricket has a ghost is evoked when it suits a team to summon it, but is otherwise easily ignored
If there was anything good to come out of Sunday’s shenanigans, it wasn’t just that England’s tactics failed, but that it might make them think twice before playing the Spirit of Cricket card next time.
They should also feel hurt that Australian captain Mitchell Marsh claimed not to have noticed, instead insisting he had ‘respect’ for the England team. But you can guarantee he – and Australian cricket in general – took notice and quietly filed away ‘Bootgate’ for future reference.
And that’s also how it works. Because the next time they have to indulge in a bit of gamesmanship against England, they will do so in the knowledge that the latest trickery has been perpetrated by the Poms. In other words, they have a transgression against the Spirit in store.
Needless to say, this won’t stop England from complaining. Even in the chill of autumnal Bristol, the 2025-2026 Ashes heated up.