England cricket's deadly weapon: Murray Mints

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.