Cricket Thread

[Gundoggin]

None of these supposedly clever little video finds and examples stated are anything remotely similar or in context to yesterday's disgrace. Quoting the rules ad nauseum - for the last time, legal - yes - sportingly right - no.
I'm reminded in these times of the 80/20 rule - no matter how glaringly obvious the moral right and factual right - 20% will always seek to disagree.

Agreed and well put .

 

[bigstanhibbert]

Either when the umpire calls it or, failing that, when the umpire acts like it's done

Really? acts like its done? what does that mean?

 

[Gundoggin]

Can remember a similar incident Cheshire County League Division One Grappenhall v Urmston around 1994 . Batsmen given out mid over after patting down a divot on the pitch mid over , it all kicked off ! Animosity levels unprecedented after the incident and the game finished early .

 

[M18CTID]

Really? acts like its done? what does that mean?

What do you think it means?

 

[Jesus H Gabz]

To give it full context, some people are claiming that Bairstow’s was different because Labuschagne was taking guard outside the crease.

I personally just think that’s looking for any excuse to differentiate between the two, for people already committed to bad sportsmanship point of view.

I’m more annoyed at Bairstow than any of the Australians.

Thats trying to gain an advantage by forcing the bowler to change his line & length, Bairstow sought no advantage in his actions (unless someone can think of any?) which separates the two incidents. The problem I had with Bairstow was he didn’t fight his corner enough, he should have approached Cummins and the umpire on the pitch. In his defence he looked so up for it and focused he forgot one tiny little detail, I’ve no doubt he apologised to the team in the locker room, so fault lies with him in the end, the Aussies always skate close to the line of decency and he knows that.
I called out the umpires actions at the time of the dismissal on ere, his body language suggested ‘Over’ and he certainly wasn’t looking at the incident, he appeared to be as surprised as anyone, he should’ve had a chat with his colleague and together agreed it was the end of the over, in the end it was a very football/VAR resolution and the on field umpires hid behind the tech, I wonder if stump mics picked anything up from the umpire?
I’d also like to understand why an umpire wouldn’t be looking at play when the ball wasn’t considered dead ?

 

[homerdog]

Really? acts like its done? what does that mean?

It's pretty obvious in this case - the umpire was no longer looking at the batsman, wicketkeeper or ball, because, like everybody else in the ground, apart from the despicable Australians, he had decided the over had finished.

 

[heslops barnet]

Can’t we just say the umpire is a ****?

 

[Jesus H Gabz]

Can’t we just say the umpire is a ****?

Only if him & Gary Neville can share the honour

 

[bigstanhibbert]

What do you think it means?

I don't know that's why I am asking

 

[Gray]

I hope the Aussies get it big time from the Yorkshire crowd, cheating twats.

 

[Edghill OG]

Stuart Broad has no regrets over not walking at Trent Bridge

Seamer looks back on the controversy of 2013, and the sequence of events it kicked off

www.espncricinfo.com

Think he made the point a few of the Aussies nicked the ball and didn’t walk in that series either too.

The Aussies are notorious not walking. I remember Gilchrist (who to his credit always walked) saying the rest of the dressing room couldn't understand it and even disliked his sportsmanship.

The Broad delivery is highlighted so much as it's probably the most blatant edge I've ever seen that wasn't given by the umpire.

 

[Postman Pep]

Of all these precedents that are not comparable this is pretty desperate ..... Murali didn't even wait for the ball to be returned !

 

[heslops barnet]

The Aussies are notorious not walking. I remember Gilchrist (who to his credit always walked) saying the rest of the dressing room couldn't understand it and even disliked his sportsmanship.

The Broad delivery is highlighted so much as it's probably the most blatant edge I've ever seen that wasn't given by the umpire.

More blame on the umpire than Broady

 

[peter.evans]

So a number of situations where the situation was indeed “end of over” right there in the rules . That’s why it is not in the game’s interest or unsporting behaviour what the Aussies did , basically you just don’t go there but the Aussies did to manipulate the situation. The Aussies could have easily just warned Bairstow or even called him back but they didn’t which is why the situation is still toxic for many this morning. It is 100% cheating but bizarrely within the rules of cricket an area where 95% of cricket captains would not venture but Cummins chose too . Sadly we now live in a world where cheating is applauded by many ,and many no longer have morals or dignity in today’s world nor sportsmanship.

Absolutely spot on ! The other thing that nobody seems to have mentioned as far as i can see, is that what the keeper did should be against the rules and deemed as dangerous play. I know he only threw the ball underarm but if he had got that wrong and Bairstow had turned towards him he could have caught him in the eye and caused a serious injury to a player who was not watching. Having played a lot of amateur cricket over the years I have seen many an over enthusiastic keeper constantly flinging the ball at the stumps for no reason or annoyingly not being able to resist knocking the bails off " just in case ", etc, and it really gets on my nerves. The umpires should discipline keepers for doing that, it is totally against the spirit of the game and also wastes a lot of time. The keeper, Cummins and the umpires are culpable for what happened there and the cheating Roos should be ashamed of themselves, at very least Cummins should have called Bairstow back. Whilst in no way condoning any crowd misbehaviour, you can see what this kind of blatant cheating can lead to, in this case things could have got very ugly, thanks to the behaviour of these cheats ! The umpire had started to reach in his pocket for a cap or something for the bowler, surely that is a signal for end of over too !?

 

[Uncle Wally One Ball]

So a number of situations where the situation was indeed “end of over” right there in the rules . That’s why it is not in the game’s interest or unsporting behaviour what the Aussies did , basically you just don’t go there but the Aussies did to manipulate the situation. The Aussies could have easily just warned Bairstow or even called him back but they didn’t which is why the situation is still toxic for many this morning. It is 100% cheating but bizarrely within the rules of cricket an area where 95% of cricket captains would not venture but Cummins chose too . Sadly we now live in a world where cheating is applauded by many ,and many no longer have morals or dignity in today’s world nor sportsmanship.

He gave a small clue in his post match interview when he referenced the Starc catch. The interviewer did not pursue it at all. Cummins should have been directly asked if that catch led to some perceived grievance they wanted to level up, but Sky just left it

 

[Gundoggin]

He gave a small clue in his post match interview when he referenced the Starc catch. The interviewer did not pursue it at all. Cummins should have been directly asked if that catch led to some perceived grievance they wanted to level up, but Sky just left it

As mentioned earlier in the thread the Sky commentators and pundits were pathetic and actually pampered the Aussie audience tuned in .

 

[M18CTID]

I don't know that's why I am asking

Well it was subsequently explained to you by @homerdog

 

[Gundoggin]

 

[Jesus H Gabz]

Absolutely spot on ! The other thing that nobody seems to have mentioned as far as i can see, is that what the keeper did should be against the rules and deemed as dangerous play. I know he only threw the ball underarm but if he had got that wrong and Bairstow had turned towards him he could have caught him in the eye and caused a serious injury to a player who was not watching. Having played a lot of amateur cricket over the years I have seen many an over enthusiastic keeper constantly flinging the ball at the stumps for no reason or annoyingly not being able to resist knocking the bails off " just in case ", etc, and it really gets on my nerves. The umpires should discipline keepers for doing that, it is totally against the spirit of the game and also wastes a lot of time. The keeper, Cummins and the umpires are culpable for what happened there and the cheating Roos should be ashamed of themselves, at very least Cummins should have called Bairstow back. Whilst in no way condoning any crowd misbehaviour, you can see what this kind of blatant cheating can lead to, in this case things could have got very ugly, thanks to the behaviour of these cheats ! The umpire had started to reach in his pocket for a cap or something for the bowler, surely that is a signal for end of over too !?

Maybe Bairstow should just go full coconut shy at the stumps next game, every ball of an over

 

[bigstanhibbert]

Well it was subsequently explained to you by @homerdog

Just because the ball is in the keeper's hands it doesn't mean that it has finally settled. If that was the case, then stumping will not be possible at all.

Three times JB left his crease. Carey watched him every time. The fourth time Carey caught the ball & threw at the stumps in the same action. Out. Had Carey missed the stumps the batsman may have taken overthrow runs.

Also: 20.2 Ball finally settled Whether the ball is finally settled or not is a matter for the umpire alone to decide