Some factoids and feelings about Deangate/Deeptigate/Sharmagate – whatever.

Firstly, I’m bored by it and bored by the *suggestions* and *implications* of this and that… and the bellowing in and out of pomp and prejudice and smart-arsery. Going to deliberately fail to name as many external protagonists as possible so as to try to steer a course towards level-headedness; coz that finger-pointing – nah. Those ‘personality tweets’ – nah.

In no particular order, then. Would bullet-point for brevity (and to suggest my increasing irritation at the whole circus) if I could see how the **** to do that on this wordpress editor thingy. Imagine bullet-points between these chunks of opinion and grief.

Heather Knight and Deepti Sharma were magnificent, together, when Western Storm won the KSL in a brilliant finale some years ago. They nicked it, together. I was there. It was great.

Almost painfully long twitter thread seems to be pret-ty conclusive about Charlie Dean repeatedly leaving her crease early.

Law junkies, though? That whole anorak thing. Discuss?

Deepti’s Sharma’s predilection for fake bowling – i.e. sauntering up but then abandoning, as though there was some issue with her run-up – is irrelevant to the actual run out in question, but is plainly about getting in the heads of the batters. In short, she winds the oppo’s up, a good deal, deliberately. This may be relevant in terms of relationships, not rules (or laws), but historical shithousery, however it may offend opponents and onlookers, plays no part in the adjudication of this single incident. Ideally.

As an old-school sports-bloke I’m here to tell you both that the nature of the universe is changed, such that the Spirit of Cricket is transparently problematic to the point of being obsolete and that sport does and should have what we might call a moral dimension. (Eeeek!) There is sporting behaviour; it can make things better; it just doesn’t need to be inextricably associated with daft blazers and ‘good families’.

We can’t go on calling what Sharma did ‘against the S of C’, not because it doesn’t possibly transgress something, but because we have to find a better, less loaded phrase. *That one*, unfortunately, smacks of weird, longtime English Exceptionalism: the kind of hand-me-down ‘humility’ that has largely (and let’s be honest, deliberately) kept people of colour and low income out of the game, or out of its spheres of influence.

Zoom on and in: Mankads are perfectly legit under the laws – laws which were recently tweaked (and improved, in fact), to try to demilitarise and indeed demystify some of the harrumphing and counter-blasting around those Moral Issues. No warnings are required. Batters know when they have to stay until. Bowlers know when they are entitled to strike back at the stumps.

On this occasion, Deepti’s (likely) intention to never let go of that ball (and therefore to run out the batter) is a complexity for some – I get that. Argue about the ‘fakeness’ of this moment but be clear that Mankads are legit, generally, if the batter has departed before the proscribed instant.

And yet I sympathise with the idea that it’s somehow a shame that Mankads exist. Ideally and in the abstract, I’m thinking can’t we just warn people and then those batters stop? The umpire ‘have a word?’ Then if the batter goes early she/he/they are fair game. If they transgress that notice, then bye, no issues. But money and telly and life being more complicated make this more complicated. Shame.

Some folks think that regret’s feeble and folksy in itself. That the batter has obviously been cheating so wtf?!? Why burden the Innocent Bowler Playing Within the Rules/Laws with all our post-imperialist angst? (If that’s what it is?) They have a point. It really may be the batter that’s cheating. It may be simple. It’s why the rules were sharpened.

A classic Twitter Rage has stirred. We the Digital Ones are prone to misinterpretation and even bile. FWIW I’m anti-imperialist twitter fiend feeling bit down about all this. My own brand of hurt isn’t about tradition, or one so patently heaving with assumptions. I hope for people to respect the sport as well as the rules: but hey, half of you think that reeks of another age. I would have publicly warned Dean, if I was Sharma – drawn the umpire’s attention to it and maybe the camera’s. Then if she shifts early again, I run her out. We’ll never know but I think the England player would’ve stayed put.

Final thought is about those relationships. I do regret (at 17.23, GMT, on Sep 26th) that wider foulness might erupt – by that I mean beyond the playing camps – as it seems that Knight and Sharma/Kaur move towards accusations of outright untruths. That level of bitterness ain’t good. Deep breath. Let’s consider. And move on.