The absolutely thunderous century from Mitch Marsh at Headingley was that most ageless winner in sport, the redemption story.

Only hours later, Andy Murray and his artificial hip walked on court at Wimbledon as cannon fodder. In no time, he was firing the cannon in one of those magnetic centre court matches where a 36-year-old suspends the march of time and goes shot for shot with young Greek superstar Stefanos Tsitsipas.

Sport is at its most invigorating in moments like these.

“Sir Andy” is a Brit story to cheer. We’re not so certain all elements of English cricket are.
Cricket has spent the past week somersaulting and twisting itself in knots to find the perfect answer to the Jonny Bairstow stumping drama when there is none.

Disagreeing in a civil fashion is certainly out the door when you can rage on Twitter almost before the first replay is shown on TV. Whatever happened to diverging points of view?

Aussies are cheats. Poms are the worst of whingers. You can pick a stance at the extremes or a shade anywhere in between.
I’ve listened most of all to those voices not taking a parochial side in the grenade throwing.

Former England captain Michael Vaughan put it this way. “I tend to think the spirit of cricket is something we lean on when we don’t feel the law suits us,” he said.

“The spirit of cricket is broken every single day in many little ways. “It was out in the laws and Australia are well within their rights, even if it might not have been the best look. They won’t care…they are 2-0 up.”

Former Test Umpire of the Year Simon Taufel took emotion out of it too. “Have you seen any umpire tell a fielding side that the keeper standing back is not allowed to attempt a stumping?” he reasoned as one of eight questions on the hot topic.

“Was there a complaint from anyone when Bairstow tried to stump Marnus (Labuschagne) exactly the same way in the first innings? “What has Jonny Bairstow said about his dismissal. He has been very quiet. Why?”

He went on but got to the heart of the issue by calling out “the hypocrisy and lack of consistency” from some people and groups.

I wish I’d thought as clearly as Vaughan with an explanation after my “mankad” moment.

The stakes in park cricket 40 years ago were far lower but a batsman repeatedly getting a metre advantage at the bowler’s end, as non-striker, in a tight run chase was the trigger.

I can’t even remember if he got a warning when taking that unfair advantage. Ran him out It’s a decision I regretted pretty quickly and have many times since but it’s in the scorebook.

If Bairstow had been stumped mid-over in the fashion he was at Lord’s I would have been totally comfortable with it as the dismissal of a batsman lacking concentration. My hesitation is it happening from a nondescript ball that had him in no trouble and it being the last ball of the over.

There was at least a blink of time there where it was “over” and move on. It’s on Bairstow that he let a grey area and the correct application of the law drown him.

Have your own viewpoint by all means. The Ashes is cage-fighting in whites and sleeveless jumpers. Don’t imagine otherwise.

The triggers in human nature most often want smell-free dismissals.

A cricket survey conducted by the EY Sweeney research firm for Cricket Australia some years ago, detailed the positive behaviours that fans most supported.

Visibly having fun, undertaking charity work, speaking to the opposition in a friendly manner, player interaction with kids, visibly celebrating after winning and body language showing concern/apology towards an opponent when hit/injured. They shared equal billing.

It only made sense for the survey to also give CA more insight into what behaviours stained the cricket brand and their players.
Those behaviours that fans found repugnant in cricket were racial sledging, sledging of an opponent’s family members, spitting on the field, not walking when knowingly dismissed, sledging of an opponent’s off-field behavior and swearing in view of TV cameras.

Interesting. “Body language showing concern/apology” was certainly absent if you were an irate England fan.

Having Bairstow dismissed by a Mitchell Starc Yorker with all stumps flying would have been the clearcut dismissal. We had to engage a whole lot of other senses for the controversial stumping.

Brendon McCullum may be the revered architect of “Bazball” or crybaby “Bazbawl” as it was rechristened after his “we won’t have a drink with the Aussies” tanty.

He’s also a coach and that leopard never changes spots in any sport. They habitually throw decoys to divert from core issues, they take heat off their players and will always see value in tossing a drama into the opposition camp before walking away.
McCullum ticked all those boxes at Lord’s.

The diversionary tactics have taken heat off the fact England are 2-0 down, have been outplayed and definitely out-caught.
The usual riot act with England 2-0 down in a home Ashes is a media carve-up with sackings trumpeted, scorn poured on wasting the new ball in perfect conditions at Lord’s Day One and scapegoats found.

McCullum has escaped almost scot-free despite all the breezy 30s, 40s and 50s scored by Harry Brook, Ollie Pope, Zac Crawley and Co.

The “Bazball” mythology is disguising what those efforts really are … wasted starts when even one substantial century from those batsmen might have meant the series was 1-all.

Australians will happily take the substance of a run-a-ball 118 from Marsh instead.

Of course, if we’re in any doubt about the laws and the spirit of the game from here, we can always sit down with Humphrey Wigbert-Porter for his take. The MCC member has a bit more time on his hands after being suspended for his abusive behavior at Lord’s.

JIM TUCKER has specialised in sport, the wider impacts and features for most of his 40 years writing in the media. He covered two Ashes tours of England as a cricket writer.