Ok a bit of devil's advocate here.
There seems to be a common consensus that the OP is completely wrong, the writer's head is in the clouds, cricket has been Total War for a hundred years or more, and maybe even that the OP is by a wind-up merchant. Well, all that may be true. The author was a banned multi and the OP a bit too long to bother reading fully.
But I have two questions:
1. Is it really the case that the sort of sledging and behaviour that we see now, and that's been seen since the 1970s onwards, has always been there? I'm sure that in the 1900s there would have been the odd comment passed ("a fine ****ing way to start a series" etc), but my impression is that it's nothing compared with what we see nowadays. I'd be interested in what our more historically-minded folks (I'm thinking archie and fred, but there are many others) have to say about this.
2. Why is it that sledging - "mental disintegration" or whatever you want to call it - is regarded by everyone as so fundamental to this sport? I mean, isn't it meant to be a test of batsman against bowler? Of how these players execute their skills? Instead, it seems to have become a test of how they execute their skills while the opposition is trying to put them off. Now you can say, "it's a man's game and if you want to be a ****ing pansy you can try needlework", as if that's some kind of answer. But is it really somehow more manly to try to put your opponent off when you're playing sport?
Now I like a bit of needle* as much as the next guy (and have enjoyed a fair amount of on-field banter in my time), but I am genuinely interested in the answer to those questions.