Every so often a clever episode gives sledging a quaint roguishness. Like Australian Mark Waugh (twin of Steve) telling bowler Jimmy Ormond: "You're not good enough to play for England," only to be met by the quip: "At least I'm the best player in my family."
Those are rare. Each to their own, but sledging can morph into alpha male muppets demonstrating a lack of cerebral fitness.
Still, it's an established part of contemporary cricket, even if the preamble to the laws state it is against the spirit: to direct abusive language towards an opponent or umpire; or seek to distract an opponent verbally or by harassment with persistent clapping or unnecessary noise under the guise of enthusiasm and motivation of one's own side. Lip service, anyone? Interestingly, under Law 37.1 a batsman can be given out for obstructing the field if, according to the umpires, he wilfully obstructs or distracts the fielding side by word or action.
3. No walking
Batsmen literally get a chance to walk the "spirit of the game" talk when they knowingly get wood on a ball which is caught and the umpire does not raise his finger.
Yet walkers are as rare as a Chris Martin boundary. The vast majority will stay at the crease, claiming they are respecting the umpire's decision.
International players will argue technology provides a ready solution to such dilemmas, while club players will maintain they are putting the team first to preserve wickets. Regardless, cricket is essentially a selfish game and most would prefer to accept the "what goes around, comes around" mantra than stride off prematurely (but honourably) for a duck.
4. Excessive appealing
The prospect of getting an lbw or an edge behind can cause bowlers to do strange things. The gentlemanly query of "Howzat?" to an umpire in a bygone era is often replaced by a modern-day Tarzan-like "Aaaaaaaaargh!" It has turned into a demand rather than an appeal.
Players seem to work on the basis that the louder their effort, the more likely they are to trigger an umpire's reaction. A prolonged stationary star jump is added for good measure. Australia's James Pattinson provided ample evidence against India this summer when umpire Marais Erasmus gave him a warning.
5. Ball modification
Modification, tampering, synthetic leather massaging, whatever ... if you're using more than sweat and saliva to polish a ball, it's just not cricket. Players have consistently come up with creative ways to get that extra bit of shine and hopefully make the ball swing longer.
In the 1950s, extra Brylcream on the short, back and sides did an effective job but over the years sweetened saliva from mint-sucking, dirt in the pocket and even Shahid Afridi's teeth have all played their part.
Inventive mechanisms? Sure. Within the spirit of the game? No. Let's not kid ourselves.
6. Mankad hypocrisy
There is nothing unethical about a bowler running out a batsman who has backed up too far.
Backing up is as much a cricketing skill as the forward defence or the outswinger. Stealing a few yards because a bowler is preoccupied with his action is preposterous. Runs are valuable commodities and anyone getting a head start knows they are pushing the law.
Where was the spirit of the game in Sri Lankan batsman Lahiru Thirimanne bolting while Indian spinner Ravi Ashwin was bowling in the recent Brisbane one-dayer? He then had the cheek to repeat the dose after his reprieve.
Ashwin was right to appeal and stand-in captain Virender Sehwag should have followed through. As it stands, no lesson has been learned.
7. Obstruction
In a possible run out situation, players will do anything in the heat of the moment to preserve their wicket or effect a dismissal. Survival generally shadows integrity.
The other night's one-dayer between Australia and India had two well-documented examples. Australian David Hussey looked like he could have ducked or weaved to avoid a ball thrown in to the stumps rather than putting his hand out to stop it.
He claims it was to prevent injury but can it really be a coincidence that the throw looked mighty accurate.
The umpires consulted and he was lucky not to join a select club marched off for obstruction or handled ball.
Similarly dubious was bowler Brett Lee running into Sachin Tendulkar's way for what was, to be fair, a risky drop-and-run single from Gautam Gambhir. Tendulkar deserved a reprieve.
8. Grounded catches
These are less of a problem with video technology but nothing screams short-term pragmatism over long-term sportsmanship more than a player claiming a grounded catch.
Any cricketer knows 99 per cent of the time whether they caught the ball legitimately, otherwise the benefit of the doubt (something not actually written into the laws of the game) applies. Yet the prevalence of such referrals is surprising.
9. Gutless send-offs
These have formed a special sub-species to sledging. Gratuitous arm-swinging fist pumps, gobfuls of invective and the odd thrusting of loins have maligned the cricketing landscape when a batsman is dismissed.
Is there anything more cowardly, belligerent or reeking of false bravado?
Arguably the all-time No 1 would be Shane Watson (Australia's current stand-in one-day captain no less) running to the batting crease before jumping up and down and screaming like a petulant child at Chris Gayle after dismissing him in 2009.
Doug Bollinger would feature on the charts too after thrusting his hips and motioning Dan Christian towards his inner groin during a domestic match.
There were some mitigating circumstances: Christian had walked in front of his stumps and tried a cute little scoop to the legside of the keeper. Bollinger's delivery crashed into middle stump.
10. Cash
Like any sporting industry, cricket is driven by money which ultimately dictates how decisions are made. Consequently the spirit of the game has become archaic when measured against the tangible interest of ensuring stakeholders (players, fans, franchise shareholders, national administrators) are rewarded with value for investment.
Players need runs, wickets and catches to maintain their livelihoods; fans want drama and entertainment; and those running the game need a combination of those elements to make a profit.
The spirit of the game does not have a dollar sign in front of it; it is too intangible to quantify.
