Cricket is called as gentlemen's game. Very few games in the history of outdoor sports are termed as such, and cricket is one of them. And to keep the honour of the given title, there are a flurry of rules, regulations and restrictions introduced in the game. Anything which is well within the mentioned set of rules and regulations, should be good enough to be called as ethical. And anything which violates the above will be termed as unethical and inappropriate.

Such is the clarity of the game and it's rules, and it has been followed since it's introduction. However a new term which has gained popularity amidst all this is "spirit of game". In simpler words, spirit of the game should be a term to check if rules are followed by any team or not. However, the term has been used frequently according to one's convenience, creating unnecessary controversies in the game. And the two nations which always use "spirit of the game" according to their convenience are England and Australia.

The two oldest teams to have played the beautiful game, are the most unethical teams to have played it. It's a shock to see the game called as gentlemen's game when these two were the earliest teams, and that they were the only 2 teams which played the game for a significant amount of time. The only possibility here is that the early teams of these two nations used to follow and accept everything which is written in rulebook, whether it went in their favour or not. There was no outcry about any of the decisions.

Unfortunately for cricket, times have changed. And these two nations are the one's to create unnecessary uproar on social media when anything doesn't go in their favour. The recent Bairstow Carey saga highlighted it yet again. Street smartness and great observation from Alex Carey resulted in a clever runout, and Bairstow , who was not attentive lost his wicket. It was clearly Bairstow's fault, who didn't wait inside the crease until Carey threw bowl back to any fielders. Yet, instead of blaming Johnny for his irresponsible behaviour, all the English fans, cricketers and media decided to cry speaking about "spirit of the game", when no rules were violated.

The English skipper, and one of the most important players, Ben Stokes was infuriated by this. And he went on to say that he won't do it just for a win. But then what will Ben do for a win ? Possibility try to rebound a throw off his bat, diverting the ball to go for a boundary in a world cup final ? Even if one agrees that it wasn't his mistake, then what will he do for a win? Accept the world cup because of rules, in spite of other team scoring same amount of runs even in the super over !!! If you can follow the rules for a win, they why can't you accept the rules when it goes against you?

There are many examples of Englishmen doing it. Stuart Broad, apart from being a good bowler is also a great hypocrite and crybaby. He says he doesn't regret to stand it the middle when he clearly nicked the ball , as it helped them win the game. That's not just unethical, but also illegal. But he did it with pride, and doesn't regret it. But the same guy spoke in a different tone when his own teammate was at the receiving end of it. He bashed the Aussies here stating that "Bairstow dismissal will always be talked about in the wrong way". Why are guys like these international players, when they cannot fathom the rules ?

In the above case, Australians were right. However, they are not saints either. Glenn McGrath termed the Starc's missed catch as "load of bullshit", when the decision went against Australia. But he didn't bother to speak against Ricky Ponting's one bounce claimed catch which was given out back in 2007!! That was neither was in spirit of game , nor was it ethical, but that was not "load of bullshit" for the Aussies !! Neither was the underarm bowl bowled by Aussies to New Zealand or numerous other occasions where Aussies were clearly wrong. But anything going against their team, no matter if it's well within the rules, is conventionally unethical according to them.

What further worsens the situation is the British and Australian hypocritical media, who decides to take on the further team for using the rules against their team. Only a bunch of idiots will call these stupid writers as reporters for writing rubbish against one team for just following rules, which are clearly mentioned by MCC. Instead of defending their players for lack of awareness, they criticize other team members for being clever on the field. I mean that's the reason the opposition plays, they do not play to give your team freebies !!

If only the British and Australian media understood this, world would've been a better place. Sadly, it always the opposite. That's why the British media is blaming Carey, instead of Bairstow. That's why the British as well as Australian media breaks hell loose when they see Ravichandran Ashwin attempt the non-striker's end runout. That's why the English media, players-cum-crybabies cricticized Deepthi Sharma for running out Charollete Dean, knowing that on 72 occasions, the later has taken unfair advantage of running in quickly before bowler bowled.

The British, Australian media and players do such unethical things away from the field, because they think they own the game. They do it amongst themselves when they play each other. And they combine to criticize any individual from any team who is not British or Australian. That's why the unnecessary hatred towards Ravichandran Ashwin arises in their fanbases. They have the notion that till this date, they have the right to say what is right and what is wrong, with an added convenience. They think they are still the only two teams which should rule the game, as they are the oldest one's to play it.

However, they should know that times have changed. The game is witnessed by millions of people. And the involvement of lot of teams has made it a worldwide hit. So instead of creating an outcry on selective issues which goes against them, rather they accept that the rules are designed to make game equal for everyone. Or else don't use the rules to your advantage, and then criticize the opposition for fairly using rules. As a cricket fan, it's infuriating to see these two countries crying foul on stupid occasions, instead of being mature enough to play. One can just hope to see a change. But, that's never going to change, because selective outcry is just an Aussie and English thing.