From the BBC:
Bizarre. What is worse I ask, putting a squash ball in your glove or Muralis bowling action? Sri Lanka would be well advised to drop this one.
Gilchrist 'did not break rules'
Cricket's lawmakers have rejected Sri Lanka's complaints about Adam Gilchrist using a squash ball as a batting aid during the World Cup final.
Gilchrist had the ball inside his left glove to improve his grip on the bat as he smashed 149 off 104 balls to help Australia to victory against Sri Lanka.
Sri Lanka Cricket said he had broken the "spirit and tradition of the game".
But the MCC, which is responsible for cricket's rules, said Gilchrist had not contravened the game's laws or spirit.
Sri Lanka Cricket officials intend to raise the matter at next month's meeting of the International Cricket Council, cricket's governing body.
Mathivanan said: "We are of the opinion that it was unethical for Gilchrist to use a squash ball to give unfair advantage.
It's just a little bid sad some people think there's something sinister in it
Bob Meuleman, Adam Gilchrist's batting coach: "I am not trying to say it is illegal. All I am saying is that the game should be played in a better spirit.
"We want to enlighten all the members of the ICC about our views and we don't approve such acts. That is the purpose of wanting to discuss it at the ICC."
But the MCC said in a statement: "In this case, apparently the addendum to the inside of the batting gloves was not for protection from injury, but to improve the way the batsman gripped the bat handle.
"This should not be considered unfair. Similarly, it has never been considered unfair for batsmen to use two grips on the bat handle.
"The glove manufacturers might, for added protection against jarring, have put an extra pad of some cushioning material as an integral part of the inside of the palm.
"This would be entirely legal, but have the same effect on his grip for a batsman who wore such gloves.
"In conclusion, the incident could not be classed either as contravening the law or as breaching the spirit of the game."
Cricket Australia spokesman Peter Young played down the issue, describing Gilchrist as "highly principled".
He said: "It's no different to, say, putting two or three grips on the bat handle, batting with two pairs of gloves or having inserts sewn into the palm of the gloves.
"All these are things which now happen. This is in the same category."
He added: "You're going to have to go a long way to find a cricketer with higher moral standards than Adam Gilchrist."
Gilchrist had a modest World Cup by his standards prior to the final in Barbados, with just two fifties in the previous 10 matches.
But he came good when it mattered as Australia beat Sri Lanka by 53 runs.
He made no attempt to conceal the use of the squash ball in the final, a tactic worked out with his batting coach Bob Meuleman in Perth prior to the team's departure for the Caribbean.
And in an interview with the Australian newspaper following the final, Meuleman explained that the ball prevented Gilchrist's bat from turning in his hand.
Cricket's lawmakers have rejected Sri Lanka's complaints about Adam Gilchrist using a squash ball as a batting aid during the World Cup final.
Gilchrist had the ball inside his left glove to improve his grip on the bat as he smashed 149 off 104 balls to help Australia to victory against Sri Lanka.
Sri Lanka Cricket said he had broken the "spirit and tradition of the game".
But the MCC, which is responsible for cricket's rules, said Gilchrist had not contravened the game's laws or spirit.
Sri Lanka Cricket officials intend to raise the matter at next month's meeting of the International Cricket Council, cricket's governing body.
Mathivanan said: "We are of the opinion that it was unethical for Gilchrist to use a squash ball to give unfair advantage.
It's just a little bid sad some people think there's something sinister in it
Bob Meuleman, Adam Gilchrist's batting coach: "I am not trying to say it is illegal. All I am saying is that the game should be played in a better spirit.
"We want to enlighten all the members of the ICC about our views and we don't approve such acts. That is the purpose of wanting to discuss it at the ICC."
But the MCC said in a statement: "In this case, apparently the addendum to the inside of the batting gloves was not for protection from injury, but to improve the way the batsman gripped the bat handle.
"This should not be considered unfair. Similarly, it has never been considered unfair for batsmen to use two grips on the bat handle.
"The glove manufacturers might, for added protection against jarring, have put an extra pad of some cushioning material as an integral part of the inside of the palm.
"This would be entirely legal, but have the same effect on his grip for a batsman who wore such gloves.
"In conclusion, the incident could not be classed either as contravening the law or as breaching the spirit of the game."
Cricket Australia spokesman Peter Young played down the issue, describing Gilchrist as "highly principled".
He said: "It's no different to, say, putting two or three grips on the bat handle, batting with two pairs of gloves or having inserts sewn into the palm of the gloves.
"All these are things which now happen. This is in the same category."
He added: "You're going to have to go a long way to find a cricketer with higher moral standards than Adam Gilchrist."
Gilchrist had a modest World Cup by his standards prior to the final in Barbados, with just two fifties in the previous 10 matches.
But he came good when it mattered as Australia beat Sri Lanka by 53 runs.
He made no attempt to conceal the use of the squash ball in the final, a tactic worked out with his batting coach Bob Meuleman in Perth prior to the team's departure for the Caribbean.
And in an interview with the Australian newspaper following the final, Meuleman explained that the ball prevented Gilchrist's bat from turning in his hand.
Oh dear
Comment