There has been of late a spirited debate between The Times’s distinguished present and former cricket correspondents about the meaning of the Spirit of the Game. Not surprisingly there has been a divergence of opinion among them. It is a difficult concept to nail down, but none the worse for that.

The point of the Spirit of Cricket is not to override the Laws of the game. It is there to supplement the Laws and assist in their interpretation, application and development by players, officials and administrators. In some instances, it will not be in the Spirit of the Game to rely upon the strict rigour of the law — a formalistic adherence to the letter of the law may result in an injustice being done to an opponent. Players should have regard to this in the way they conduct themselves on the field of play.

The game is heavily institutionalised, with governing bodies, cricket boards, countless committees and members’ clubs. At this level, too, the Spirit of the Game should mandate particular decisions — decisions that are designed to conserve and enhance the best interests of the game. This would include a consideration of the extent to which the traditional structure of cricket is at risk of being changed at the behest of commercial interest designed to produce a soap-opera spectacle rather than the consolidation and maintenance of the essential hallmarks of the game.

The Spirit of Cricket is an attempt to define how the game should be played having regard to its rich history, traditions and practices. “It’s not cricket” has taken on a meaning synonymous with fair play but it has other connotations that relate to the intrinsic nature of the game and that can be applied to other areas of human activity.

That is a significant insight into the perception of what cricket is and how it ought to be played. To many it is a fundamental aspect of its attraction. The Spirit of the Game is an applied concept — it varies from sport to sport in its content and interpretation. But it is nonetheless an essential characteristic of all true sporting activity that should be the very nature of all sports — fair competition, respect for the game, its traditions, practices and for all those who participate in it respecting that spirit. The word “spirit” is key. It connotes more than a formalistic application of laws. It conjures up more than the playing of a game in accordance with its rules. It extends to not only how a game is played, but the context of the game itself.

All games have a spiritual element to them. The connection between sport and religion has often been pointed out. That relationship lives on even in our largely secular society. Games are played in places set apart from our everyday lives. These areas are often regarded as sacred and very special. They embody the spirit of the game played there.

So what is the essence of the Spirit of Cricket? In my opinion cricket has its own logic and morality. It represents equality of arms and opportunity on and off the field so as to ensure there is a balance between bat and ball, fair competition between opponents chosen on merit and that the Laws are applied in accordance with equitable principles.

Historically this may not always have been the case — witness apartheid, D’Oliveira and Zimbabwe. The Spirit of Cricket is not necessarily an is, but what we should strive to achieve as an ought.

• Robert Griffiths, QC, is a practising barrister and author of a forthcoming book on the concept of sport. He is also chairman of the MCC Laws sub-committee, responsible for the guardianship of the Laws of cricket, and chairman of the MCC development committee. The views expressed are his own, and not necessarily those of the MCC.