In the UK and AUS the big deal would be questioning the umpire: it's OK in the UK to break rules (or, as Blair said this week, to make mistakes) but what is neither forgotten nor forgiven is failing to set an example in the field: what Inzi did is basically regarded as petulance, a betrayal of the game that let down the punters at the game, the viewersat home and everyone hoping that their sporting superstars would act as role models on the field, accepting the umpire's decision as final even when it might be wrong.

It's OK in most UK sport to push the fine line between acceptability and unacceptability: Rugby eventally changed the laws on line outs because lifting players up and holding them in the air was so common... and the error of getting caught in any UK sport is often greeted by a wry smile rather than with anger - as if it's OK to try and get away with stuff so long as you take the rap if you are caught.

The rules as they stand appear to suit the UK outlook. In county cricket the five run penalty would be entirely in keeping with the notion that very little seperates working the ball legally from affecting the ball illegally... and few would expect the matter to warrant more than a mild reprimant that is soon forgotten. By contrast, in county cricket the disrepute charge might lead to a player being heavily fined or even dismissed by his club: players found guilty of taking illegal recreational drugs, for instance, have been treated pretty severely.

At least this incident highlights just how far from universal certain British outlooks might be!