The ethics of walking

This link will take you to a long, but fascinating, article on the ethics of walking. It raises some very interesting points about the way cricket is played, the most fascinating point for me is a reminder that cricket is a game ruled by Laws not rules and an umpire can only give a player out if someone appeals. It is a game played by means of a judicial process in which a plantiff, who makes his case by appealing, makes an accusation against a defendant which is considered by a neutral figure who then passes judgement. The author of the piece, Mukul Kesavan, points out that the defendent, the batsman, has a right to silence - a right not to incriminate him or herself. Equally interesting is his point that modern walkers may simply be reacting to modern technology which can better pick up when a batsman has nicked a ball. Failing to walk is becoming harder to defend from an ethical standpoint because television means the public can make an instant judgement on the appeal for themselves, and this judgement impacts on their impression of the batsman's moral character.