Gilchrist's plea for honesty likely to fall on deaf ears

Kenya in the semi-finals of the World Cup or an Australian batsman walking. If you had asked me at the start of the tournament which was the likelier, I would have punted on Kenya. The reaction to Adam Gilchrist's decision to walk during Tuesday's semi-final against Sri Lanka, when he bottom-edged a sweep shot on to his pad and the catch was safely taken, amuses me.

Yes, the umpire Rudi Koertzen said "not out", thus giving Gilchrist every reason to stand his ground, but he was only doing what he should have done. He hit the ball with his bat and the catch was taken. As long as the ball is legitimate, in cricket this is out. It is as simple as that.

Does Gilchrist suddenly become a saint because of his noble gesture in an age when players in every team appear prepared to go to any length to win a game of cricket?

The answer is no. An honest approach may be refreshing and the game would be better off if there were more players like Brian Lara, who regularly walks, or Aravinda de Silva, who left of his own accord during this tournament. But there are still too many discrepancies for my liking.

First, is this something Gilchrist will do consistently? There have been many players in the past who have used walking as a tactic. Some would walk on 140 or when the game was won to get a good reputation but stand their ground on nought, knowing they had conned the umpire into believing that they walk if they are out. Also, four hours later Gilchrist was appealing for a caught behind off Glenn McGrath when it clearly flicked the batsman's thigh and was nowhere near the bat. There is a difference, but would he have called the batsman back if he then saw on the replay screen that the ball had missed the bat.

Gilchrist is a decent man who plays the game in the right way. He has been thinking about walking for some time though. "Ever since an incident in Adelaide in December when Justin Langer claimed a catch off Michael Vaughan, that was given not out, it has been something I have been thinking about," he said yesterday. "I thought it was all well and good [appealing] as a keeper but what would I do if I nicked one? There seem to have been so many inconclusive incidents in cricket in the recent past I have begun to think it is up to the players to start taking each other's word and be honest with each other again."

Such views are fair enough, but we do not live in an ideal world. Television coverage is so thorough now that dishonest players are exposed but the use of replays will not eradicate error until they are used for every appeal and that would be ridiculous. Players can make statements like Gilchrist's, but sadly they will quickly be forgotten by everyone.

Even though I would like to think I played the game in the right manner – hard but fair – I cannot take the moral high ground because I was as guilty as most during my career. I appealed for and took wickets that were later proved to be not out and I often needed persuading to leave the crease when I got a fine edge on one.

I can still remember an incident of not walking vividly. Middlesex were playing Warwickshire in a championship match at Lord's. We were nine wickets down and I was facing the last ball of the game from fast bowler Gladstone Small. It was a straight ball that I got a fine inside edge on before it hit me on the pad. All but one of the Warwickshire players appealed for lbw but the umpire said not out.

However, after hitting my pad the ball flew to a fielder at silly mid-off who took the catch. He said to the umpire "no he hit it, he hit it. I'm appealing for a catch." I stood my ground the not out decision remained and Middlesex got away with a draw.

I hate seeing any sportsman trying to cheat another by feigning injury or diving, but in cricket I, like most players, worked on the principle that decisions would go for and against me during a season or career, but they would roughly even themselves out. If I were to be honest and only claim the legitimate ones, in the end I would be out of pocket and this would have a detrimental effect on my career.

Sadly, I feel it would only take a couple of bad decisions before Gilchrist altered his game plan.