It seems rather ironic that those that invented the great game of cricket have forgotten how to play it.

On a day that should have been remembered for a champion bowler Anil Kumble's achievement of reaching 300 Test wickets, there was ill feeling aplenty on the field of play. After putting a more than handy 336 on the board, England set out looking to make early inroads into the Indian batting line-up.

The tourists dismissed Deep Dasgupta and VVS Laxman quickly but were then held up by the pair of Shiv Sunder Das and Sachin Tendulkar.

The response from England captain Nasser Hussain was as negative as anything seen recently in international cricket.

Handing left-arm spinner Ashley Giles the ball, Hussain instructed him to bowl far outside the leg stump, ball after ball, over after over. With field settings that were designed to prey on the patience of the batsmen, Hussain reduced the pace of the game until it almost ground to a halt. What the creators intended to be a staccato thump of willow on leather was reduced to the drip-by-drip numbing of Chinese water torture. There was nothing new about the approach however - England have been using this tactic all series.

Much has been said about the rival captains this series. Hussain has been portrayed as the general shrewdly marshalling his limited resources while Sourav Ganguly is talked of as the arrogant child, the spoilt brat even.

The second day's play showed, however, that there was little difference between the two. But then Hussain is an honourable leader, and would never do anything that went against the spirit of the game.

Things began to boil over soon after the tea interval when Giles took his instructions to heart and began to bowl the ball so far outside the leg stump that there was no chance of playing a shot. Every ball was either kicked away, if the batsman could reach it, or left well alone. Approaching the final drinks break, there was an exchange of words between the players and umpires.

Perhaps Tendulkar was reminding the umpires of a certain law in the rule book that deals with negative bowling. Asoka de Silva was the man standing at the BEML End, from which Giles operated. The law in this case is fairly clear. Referring to the ICC Test match conditions, one finds the following extract:

Law 25.1 - Judging a Wide.

Law 25.1 will apply, but in addition:

For bowlers attempting to utilise the rough outside a batsman's leg stump, not necessarily as a negative tactic, the strict limited over wide interpretation shall be applied.

For bowlers whom umpires consider to be bowling down the leg side as a negative tactic, the strict limited over wide interpretation shall be applied.

One wonders if Asoka de Silva really believed that bowling at least a foot and a half outside the leg stump was not a negative tactic. If he did, then he certainly should have called wide as this would not be permitted as a fair delivery in any circumstances in a limited overs international.

Well, it might have been an umpiring oversight and no more, but it certainly did the game no good at all. It's the kind of thing that leaves a bad taste in the mouth and shows the game up in very poor light. But then Hussain is an honourable leader, and would never do anything that went against the spirit of the game.

Just yesterday, Michael Vaughan caused a stir at Bangalore after being dismissed handled the ball. Speaking to pressmen he said, "Probably it is against the spirit of the game." One wonders who appointed Vaughan the guardian of the spirit of the game of cricket.

He went on to add, "I understand that, in the laws of the game, it is out. I am a bit disappointed that someone in the team appealed, and obviously the umpire had to give me out." In doing so, Vaughan exposed his ignorance on two counts. Firstly, the fact there was nothing to debate in his dismissal. Any batsman who uses his hand to pick up or deflect a ball that is still in play does not know the rule that pertains to being dismissed handled the ball. If a Test cricketer does not know the rules, it is a crying shame.

Secondly, when a game is still in progress, players are forbidden by the ICC from speaking about the decisions taken by umpires, match referees and the like. Perhaps Vaughan is unaware of this too and will be taken to task by the match referee.

In an interesting side-bar, one should look at the Indian team's response when England were nine wickets down. Sarandeep Singh had just taken a wicket and was taken out of the attack to give Kumble a crack at the number eleven batsman. The Indian skipper's decision was as much motivated by the fact that he needed Kumble to be under no pressure in the second innings as his generosity to the leggie. When Kumble took his cap off and made his way to the wicket, Sarandeep Singh applauded him all the way there. That was a rare moment of astute captaincy, one that is sure to pay off before five days of this Test match are played out.

Perhaps the arrogant brat, described as 'Lord Snooty' by one British journalist, had grown up all of a sudden?

The members of the England team have been perfect tourists in many ways on this tour. There have been no complaints about food, hotels facilities and all the usual subcontinental punching bags. Hussain had coached his boys well on the aspects of being gracious guests. Perhaps it is time to sit them down and teach them a few things about the rules and the spirit of the game.

© CricInfo