Looks like there is a lot of talking going around about Gilchrist and his little squash ball adventure. He had revealed after his amazing century that resulted in a hat-trick of World Cups for Australia that he had a squash ball in his glove that ensured a better grip and now there is lot of hue and cry going on about the legalities of what he did. Not exactly the legalities but apparently it was unethical for Gilchrist to have done it. Atleast that is what Kangadaran Mathivanan, the Sri Lanka Cricket secretary believes : (From Cricinfo)
"We are of the opinion that it was unethical for Gilchrist to use a squash ball to give unfair advantage," Mathivanan told AFP. He said Sri Lanka could call on the ICC's cricket committee for stringent application of Law 42 on fair and unfair play to ensure only the approved protection equipment was used. He said that SLC would discuss the issue before deciding whether to raise it in London.
But then the rule-makers reportedly feel "It is no different to wearing inners, etc".
I dont know about the legalities of the issue but I certainly feel ICC needs to make some strict rules about what type of safety equipment cricketers can wear. If the squash ball was no different from glove inners then Gilchrist could have as well used those. Maybe the rule needs to be out before someone can think of how to misuse its non-existence. Something like what Greg Chappell and Trevor Chappell did in the famous 'under-arm bowling' incident.
But of course nothing will change the fact that the Lankans were outplayed by some brilliant batting by Gilchrist. Squash ball or not.