Tuesday’s squabble on the Oval square between Gautam Gambhir and Lee Fortis looked unequal on paper: the coach of the world’s most powerful team – and a former MP for India’s ruling BJP party – versus a local groundsman, armed with little more than a metaphorical rake.
But it touched on a broader truth: these days, the cricket communities of India and England need little excuse to get under each other’s skin. And that skin, on both sides, can be surprisingly thin.
The animosity began, this time round at least, with Zak Crawley’s timewasting at Lord’s, spilled over in the build-up to the fourth Test at Old Trafford where Shubman Gill accused England of breaching the ‘spirit of the game’, then peaked last Sunday, when Ben Stokes’s team threw a hissy fit because Washington Sundar and Ravindra Jadeja chose to complete centuries rather than accept the draw.
In between, the flashpoints have included Mohammed Siraj’s send-off to Ben Duckett, and Jofra Archer’s to Rishabh Pant; India’s own timewasting, encapsulated by the sight of Gill enjoying a massage on the Lord’s outfield; and Brendon McCullum’s instruction to his players to get stuck into Sundar after his prediction of an Indian win in a third Test they went on to lose by 22 runs.
The showdown between Gambhir and Fortis, then, provided a focal point for an old dynamic, stretching back not just weeks, but decades – even centuries – and still apt to rear its head when the pressure is on.
England v India is about the cricket, for sure. And yet it is about so much more.
India captain Shubman Gill (left) and head coach Gautam Gambhir (second left) have clashed with the Oval’s head groundsman Lee Fortis (right) in recent days
Gill and Zak Crawley went head to head in the third Test at Lord’s, when India accused England’s opening batsmen of timewasting, starting what has been a feisty few weeks
Jofra Archer sent Rishabh Pant on his way at Lord’s after sending his off stump flying
On Monday evening at the Indian High Commission in central London, Gambhir told the gathering that ‘touring this part of the world has always been exciting and challenging because of the history between the two countries, which can never be forgotten’.
Perhaps deliberately, his words invited interpretation. Was he offering an olive branch to his opponents? Or was he, above all, alluding to the iniquities of colonial rule?
Gambhir, signed off with ‘Jai Hind’ – literally, ‘victory for India’ – once the rallying call for his country’s independence movement from the British, now a casual index of patriotism.
Indian cricket has been politicised in a manner that the English game has not, but imagine McCullum ending a talk with ‘Rule Britannia’, and you get the drift.
Without understanding the history, the present makes little sense. Indian cricket has always felt patronised by England, who with Australia ruled the game for most of the 20th century. Scandalously, both countries retained a veto at boardroom level until as recently as 1993. It was a model that entrenched the status quo, and bred resentment
Now, it’s the turn of India, who generate around 85 per cent of the game’s global wealth. A regular refrain from the BCCI’s offices at the Wankhede Stadium in Mumbai is that England and Australia have had their go at the wheel: time for us to take control. The BCCI have the ECB over a barrel – and both sides know it.
On the field, things are more equal, with inevitable consequences. Put simply, England regard India as pampered and entitled, and India regard England as arrogant, encumbered by the colonial mindset.
Sometimes, the tension has stemmed from a sense-of-humour difference. When Andrew Flintoff ripped off his shirt to celebrate a series-levelling victory in a one-day series in Mumbai in 2002, India did not forget.
England and Australia have ruled the roost for a very long time in cricket – now it’s India’s turn
India did not forget the image of Andrew Flintoff wheeling away with his shirt ripped off after sealing victory in an ODI in Mumbai in 2002
So when they chased down 325 to return the favour at Lord’s a few months later, their captain Sourav Ganguly did the same on the pavilion balcony – a gesture interpreted back in India as glorious revenge.
And when Ian Bell deposited a jelly bean on a good length at Trent Bridge in 2007, Indian tailender Zaheer Khan regarded it as a show of disrespect.
On other occasions, a mutual suspicion has set in, with England depicted as whingers if they criticise India’s turning pitches, and India acutely sensitive to slights, both real and imagined. Did Crawley and Ben Duckett really walk out 90 seconds late at Lord’s, as Gill alleged? If so, why didn’t the umpires step in?
As one senior Indian broadcaster told Mail Sport: ‘Our antennae are always up here, because of the stereotype of the arrogant Englishman.’ No doubt arrogance exists, whatever its cause. But some are more adept than others at spotting it.
Things have got worse, too, since the teams resumed five-match series in 2014, after 30 years in which they settled for three or four. The longer the series, the greater the chance of a simmering grievance.
It was no coincidence that it was in the fifth Test of England’s last visit to India, in early 2024, that Gill told Jimmy Anderson it was time to retire. (Anderson, as he has a knack of doing when opponents are ‘chirping’ at him, dismissed him moments later.)
And when Stokes came up against his fellow alpha male Virat Kohli, it was as if rutting stags had locked horns. England were incensed when Kohli sent Stokes on his way in Mohali in 2016 without any redress from the match officials, while Stokes later mocked Kohli’s favourite ‘shushing’ gesture because it looked as if he was picking his nose.
The IPL, in theory, ought to have brought the teams closer together, with players from both countries mingling in franchise dressing rooms. But few of the current England team are IPL regulars.
Zaheer Khan complains to umpires about England throwing jelly beans on the wicket in 2007
Virat Kohli shushes Ben Stokes after the England batsman was dismissed in Mohali in 2016
One of the few, Harry Brook – who led England’s sledging on the final day in Manchester – became a public enemy in India after scoring a century for Sunrisers Hyderabad two years ago, then declaring: ‘There were a lot of Indian fans slagging me off. I’m glad I could shut them up.’
Nor have India forgotten Ben Duckett’s suggestion – a joke, he later insisted – that the turbocharged innings of Yashasvi Jaiswal against England last year, when he blasted a pair of rapid double centuries, was an imitation of Bazball.
It was once said that cricket is an Indian sport accidentally invented by the British. For much of Test history, England have successfully kept this thought at bay. But India’s administrative might has percolated down.
No pushovers to start with, Gambhir and Gill feel emboldened, if not obligated, to stand up for themselves and their country, especially given the size of the Indian diaspora in the UK. There will no quarter given or asked over the next few days in south London. Times have changed, and England have to suck it up.
