MCC: Gilchrist breached neither Law nor Spirit of Cricket

Date released: 8 May 2007

MCC, the Guardians of the Laws of Cricket, has today issued a response to the claims that Adam Gilchrist acted against the Laws and Spirit of Cricket when he used a squash ball inside his batting gloves during the ICC Cricket World Cup Final.

Gilchrist’s use of a squash ball was designed to alter his grip on the bat whilst at the crease, something which he was perfectly entitled to do under Law 3.6(c), which specifies only what external protective equipment is permitted for certain players.

MCC’s Laws Sub-Committee has issued a statement in which it concludes that “the incident could not be classed either as contravening the Law or as breaching the Spirit of the Game.”

MCC’s Laws Sub-Committee statement in full:

Additional material inside batting gloves

"The Law specifies only what external protective equipment is permitted for particular players. The only item for which any specification is given is wicket-keeper’s gloves. Helmets, external leg guards (batting pads), batting gloves and forearm guards (if visible) are all listed as permitted for batsmen. None has any definition or prescription. Since there is no restriction in Law even on the external form of batting gloves, let alone the interior thereof, no Law has been breached.

The umpires are responsible under Law 3.6(c) for seeing that no player uses equipment other than that permitted. Currently permitted equipment is limited to external items. Consequently there is no failure by either the umpires or others in charge of the players if they do not extend their observation to non-external items.

Most players, including batsmen, wear other items for protection, but they are not visible and so not classed as external. Wicket-keepers traditionally wear ‘inners’ inside their gloves. No objection is raised to their doing so. It is not considered unfair that, for instance, players wear chest protectors. Indeed, the authorities could be held responsible if serious injury occurred because such items had been banned.

In this case (Adam Gilchrist in the ICC Cricket World Cup Final), 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."

MCC’s Laws Sub-Committee is chaired by Head of Cricket, John Stephenson.