The diplomatic spat has broken out after the slow left-arm orthodox spin bowler, occasional fielder and number-12 batsman was unaccountably overlooked in the players’ auction for the short-format contest earlier this week.

He was excluded from the list of 11 English players who took part in the auction, of which only one – Eoin Morgan – was offered a place with a franchise.

The rejection of Tufnell, who also dances a bit, is being seen as a deliberate snub by politicians and cricketers alike who are pointing in astonishment to the previous long history of good sporting relations between the two countries.

One former England player, who asked not to be named, said: “If they were still concerned about that silly incident in the New Zealand bathroom, then they should have said something earlier. As for availability, well, it’s not as if Bangladesh and the TMS crew are a million miles away from India, is it? What are they worried about?”

“They need to realise that England’s commentators are national sporting heroes after the Second and Fourth Tests against South Africa – and no-one more so than “Two Sugars” Tuffers. To be honest, the decision is an absolute insult.

“The IPL may be a commercial enterprise but this is an important matter involving the pride of an entire nation.”

The ECB is understood to be considering lodging a protest with the ICC. It has added publicly that, in retaliation for the snub, it will be broadcasting the unedited innings of Geoffrey Boycott on the popular video-sharing website YouTube at the same time as the promised live IPL matches.

It predicts that the opportunity to actually watch the great man stood at the crease for hours muttering: “Just because ‘e chucks it at me don’t mean I ‘ave to hit it” could revolutionise the way sport is viewed in the UK and across the world.

And for why, you may ask? Are we not stout enough of heart to listen to our side being put under the cosh? Are we mere fair-weather supporters? Is our love of the game not sufficient for us to enjoy see it being practised so finely by our opponents?

Well, frankly, no. Just as a successful Test match leaves you elated, and a narrow draw leaves you feeling like you have been a back-seat passenger in a joyridden car (speaking purely in theoretical terms, you understand), a poor day’s play by Strauss and his men can be a terrible depressant on the spirits. Especially in January, with less than eight hours of daylight, and important anatomical bits like ears and fingers nearly frozen off every time one ventures outside.

When these inevitable awful sessions happen we seek out the Corporation’s live text. Then, when finally exasperated beyond measure by the children running around unsupervised, we retreat to the bare scorecard, supplemented by Twitter. And here is the specific problem with TMS that usually drives us to stop listening.

All the commentators and summarisers are broadcasting professionals that pride themselves on their neutrality, and rightly. But most of them are either former England cricketers themselvers or in some way closely associated with those who are. We would imagine that professional neutrality is quite a hard-won stance for all of them and we admire how successfully they achieve it.

One of the ways this neutrality is most commonly expressed is through an explicit regard for the game of cricket as an entity separate from those teams playing it. So, when England are making a horlicks of even the simplest of shots, or failing to get the ball to deviate in the slightest, a fine innings by Graeme Smith or Ricky Ponting becomes a talking point and a matter for praise and celebration. As do a beautiful bowling spell by Dale Steyn or Ben Hilfenhaus, or any particularly sharp or athletic piece of fielding.

And it almost goes without saying that when England are failing to prosper the opportunities for such praise and such talking points are always presented by the opposition. It sometimes also feels as if the broadcasters do vent a little implicit frustration with the England team by praising their opponents’ cricket to the skies, while at the same time by being unflinchingly and brutally honest in their assessment of England’s fading prospects.

Whereas sometimes fans need to indulge in a little bit of gold-tinged hope and flighty optimism. Just a little bit. We’re not obliged to be even slightly impartial, although we do like to try and remain fair here at Nurdler Towers, as far as we can.

This is not to imply any criticism of the broadcasters, quite the opposite in fact. It is a tribute to how well they do their jobs. It is a terrific balancing act to be as recent a graduate from the team to the microphone as Michael Vaughan or Matthew Hoggard and still to be able to offer the clear-headed assessments that both of them do.

But it can’t half be hard to listen to sometimes.

Which is why, sometimes, the company of other fans (whether online or in person) is more apposite than the of the professionals. When outcomes can fluctuate so wildly as happens over the five days of a Test match, dramatic reverses do happen. And undoubtedly they will again. Maybe today is the day.

Or maybe England have got themselves off the hook so often that we have simply come to rely on it. If that is refusing to happen, and listening to it not happening is becoming unendurable, sometimes the thing to do is simply to turn the radio off.

Read the full story here.

Read his full piece here.

Read the full piece here.

Support the bid here.

Read the full article here.

More here.

More here.

More here.