Patrick Kidd
Get 20% off your bill at Pizza Express
The Australians have rumbled us. England's cricketers, all appointed MBEs by the Queen, apparently cheated when they won the Ashes in 2005. It wasn't superior bowling or more dogged batting - or even luck - that won England the little urn. Instead, it was their secret weapon: Murray Mints.
According to Marcus Trescothick, the opening batsman, England's bowlers used the sugary saliva from sucking on the sweets to moisten the surface of the cricket ball, making it swing through the air. Trescothick was the go-to man when a gobbet of spittle was needed and always kept a packet of mints in the pocket of his whites for such occasions.
Once this became known through the serialisation of Trescothick's autobiography in a Sunday newspaper, the Australian media gleefully leapt on the news. “The secret behind the devastating swing bowling that took England to its historic 2005 Ashes win has been revealed. They cheated,” wrote The Australian. Former players were dredged up to complain about perfidious Albion.
But bowlers have always tried to give themselves an advantage and generally, unless it has been blatant, umpires have turned a blind eye. Suncream-laden sweat or lip balm has the same effect on leather as mint-infused saliva. Why do you think so many bowlers in the 1950s wore Brylcreem? In 1921, Johnny Douglas, the England captain, threatened to report Arthur Mailey, the Australia leg spinner, for using resin to grip the ball. Mailey countered by pointing out that Douglas's thumbnail was worn to the bone by picking at the ball's seam to aid his own bowlers.
England's Murray Mint strategy is a continuation of a long history of bowlers trying to get away with it. And why not? Cricket is a battle between poachers and gamekeepers. The laws of the game, aided by modern pitches, are biased towards the batsmen, so bowlers have to be cunning, even dastardly, in finding ways to get them out.
Seventy-five years ago England invented Bodyline - bowling fast at the batsman's head - to counter the batting of Don Bradman (born, coincidentally, 100 years ago today). That was against the spirit of the game but not the rules as they then stood. Attacking a ball with mint-spit is against the rules, which say you can't use any artificial substance on the ball, but not the spirit.
Anyway, the Sunday newspaper got the story wrong. As Trescothick's autobiography makes quite clear, the mischief with the Murray Mints did not happen in 2005 but during the Ashes summer of 2001. England lost that series 4-1, proving that when it comes to cheating, we suck.
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Explore your passion for food with the delights of Thai, Indian & Chinese cooking
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
05/2005
£13,500
08/2008
£109,950
2006
£10,750
Great car insurance deals online
£100k
The National Skills Academy for Social Care
London
£49,229 - £62,035 pro rata
Charity Commission
London/Liverpool/Taunton
£75k - £85k
Confidential
London
Six Figure
Rolls Royce
Midlands/Europe
From £89,950
Great Investment, River Views
$3.5 million
Also avaliable for rent
Times Online Property Search will help you find it
Amazing Far East Offers - Visit Hong Kong
from £499pp
Cruise the Islands of Hawaii - Pride of America
List your property with two leading travel websites
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths
News International associated websites: Globrix | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
can anyone let me know somewhere in melbourne aust where i can buy murray mints?
matthew bardsley, richmond, australia
If you want to see some cheating watch a game of football. Any game of football. In fact lets change the name to cheat instead. Leave cricket alone.
jdpriddle, Bath,
So, what the Pakistanis did using bottle caps was also right ? I cant recall a single article that argued that there was nothing wrong with it.
Sam, Singapore,
First of all I'm fiercly Australian. EVERY country challenges the limits of gamesmanship. England DID use the mints in 2005, and it could have been the difference as the series was that close. But Eng were the best side and worthy winners. Last year against IND we challenged these limits too and won
Django, Brisbane, Australia
Mate - dunno of a single Aussie cricketer who serriously thinks it affected the result - so whats with this 'up in arms' stuff? Its all a bit of an old wives tale on the county circuit (minties) and fair play to England. We won the last one 5 zip anyway so who cares? Bring on the next one!
Richard, Cambridge,
I like how you sweep things under the rug. Decades of criticizing and lambasting other nations for cheating or supposedly cheating and finally when it is shown to be the good old English boys as the cheats it's treated as nothing more than jolly mischief, nothing sinister. Carry on the propaganda.
Joey, London, Peru