Exactly.
I had to rush out on the stroke of tea and, like everyone else, assumed that was the end of Bell. I wasn't blaming India, I thought they were pretty within their rights, but I was pretty concerned about the effect the incident would have on the series, on the forum and on cricket as a whole. The thing about cricket is, there are all kinds of opportunities to take a wicket through deception (not that this was an example of that) or on a technicality. There's an understanding that not everything needs to be set in stone, and in the long run it's better for the players, and the spectators, if that's the case. Although I didn't assign much blame to India personally, I couldn't have blamed the English if they'd reacted by trying to mankad every other delivery or snap the bails off before the umpire calls over. And then the next series would be the same. And the one after that. I'm not aware of anyone other than the bat****-crazy SS who actually wants the game to be played that way.
Judging from Dravid's interview after the match, the players understood this. They knew they had every right to claim the dismissal. It wouldn't have gone down too well in some quarters, but for my money, all of the blame should have been assigned to Ian Bell and none of it to the Indian team. They couldn't have been sure whether England would have rescinded the appeal or not in the same situation, which always makes it very, very difficult psychologically to cut your opponent some slack. But they did it anyway. And in doing so, they put the future of the game above themselves. To me, that just makes them legends. So, so much respect for the Indian cricket team right now.
