His sports editor, Michael Donaldson, had no such qualms. He blamed Muralitharan. "Muttiah Muralitharan was a fool," he charged. "He more than anyone knows that cricket is a ruthless game for professionals hell-bent on winning and you cannot give anybody an inch lest they run you out by a mile."

Former New Zealand wicketkeeper Ian Smith, now the foremost television commentator here, suggested that such issues could be diffused by more common sense umpiring. "At moments like this and in the spirit of the game, wouldn't it be better if umpires stepped in and asked captains: `Are you really keen to keep this appeal going? Is your appeal to have that man run out serious?' ", he wrote.

"That would put it back on the captains." For those defending McCullum's action, Geoff Longley posed a significant question. "It is interesting to speculate what the reaction would have been if the roles had been reversed," he wondered in the Press of Christchurch. It was a question that needed no response for the answer was obvious — and embarrassing.

Terrorism has ripped holes in the delicate fabric of Kashmir's beauty. It has dried up investment and employment opportunities that may otherwise have come the state's way. That India is taking its place as a global economic power is not lost on young Kashmiris, who are ready to take risks to better their lot.

Sher-i-Kashmir continues to languish: the wicket lies barren; the stands are the ones that were installed for the first time in 1983; the scoreboard is lost among the branches of the beautiful Chinar trees that circle the ground; there are no toilets or drainage facilities, no dressing room for the players, no showers. The B ground adjacent to the main one has two practice wickets, but both of cement.