How did the underarm bowling incident of 1981 impact the laws of cricket and perceptions of sportsmanship?

The underarm delivery that shook cricket

On 1 February 1981, Australian bowler Trevor Chappell rolled the ball along the ground for the final delivery of a one-day international against New Zealand – on the instruction of his brother, captain Greg Chappell [1][28]. The Kiwis needed six runs to tie, and the underarm ball made a big hit impossible [28]. Oddly, the move broke no written rules at the time [18][19], but it sparked an uproar that changed the laws and left a permanent stain on the sport’s reputation for fairness [4].

How the laws were tightened up

Before the incident, the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) still permitted underarm bowling [18][19]. The delivery was technically a fair ball – Greg Chappell did not violate any existing rule [10]. However, administrators moved rapidly to close the loophole:

• Underarm bowling was banned almost overnight in limited‑overs cricket [3][12][23].
• The International Cricket Council (ICC) was forced to rewrite the rules [8][11][15][20].
• The feeling that the act was legal but against the spirit of the game drove the official change [6][9][10].

The outrage that followed gave officials no choice but to amend the international laws [15][16]. Today, the position is crystal clear: “Underarm bowling shall not be permitted except by special agreement before the match” [7]. The incident created a direct, permanent ban.

How it reshaped sportsmanship

The underarm bowl was immediately slammed as unsportsmanlike [13][24] and outside the spirit of the game [6][9][22]. Greg Chappell was widely pilloried for giving the order [2], and even Australia’s Prime Minister at the time labelled it “contrary to the traditions of the game” [13]. Years later, Greg himself admitted he was at fault, and the moment is still called the most disgraceful incident in cricket history [21].

More than just a scandal, the event became the textbook case whenever cricket’s “Spirit of Cricket” is debated [14][26]. It continues to be held up as proof that playing by the rulebook isn’t enough – ethics and fairness matter more [14][26]. The controversy sparked lasting debates about sportsmanship [25] and still hangs over Australia’s sporting image decades later [5][27].