So much so anything improper was proverbially equated as not being `cricket`.
In the days gone by, I remember an Indian outfielder making an outstretched catch at the boundary, and the umpire raised his ñnger.Butthe Indian playerindicated that one of his feet was touching the boundary line when he caught the ball and thus the Pakistani batsman was awarded a sixer.
Now that was cricket! Today at Dubai, Ian Bell kept standing, till the third umpire declared him out forhaving been caught behind the wicket because the ball had touched his glove. Did Bell not know that the ball had touched his glove? Why did he not himself make a graceful exit before the wicket-keeper made the appeal? RiazJafri Rawalpindi
