Walk or not walk

[Howe_zat]

How do you work that one out?

What I think Furball's getting at, not without merit, is that if you're going to put yourself in a position where you're openly disagreeing with the umpire, you may as well do so in your favour

The Spirit of Cricket - in the guise that it appears in the laws - actually says you should always go with the ump's verdict

 

[The Battlers Prince]

Broad is, to be fair, very easy to dislike

Perhaps he's a polarizing personality, but I've enjoyed watching him bowl for several seasons now. I never felt Broad should have walked when he edged Agar. The umpire missed the biggest edge, but that's how it goes.

 

[Furball]

How do you work that one out?

If you walk if you know you nick it then you should stand your ground when you know you haven't.

Walking undermines the decision of the umpire which is why I don't agree with it.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

I had a very simple philosophy at a batsman. I believe batsman should walk when they know they're out. But I would only be prepared to do so if bowlers stopped appealing when they know it's not out.

 

[Compton]

I agree batsman should walk when they know they're out.

They know they're out when the umpire says they're out.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

God help us. What is the point?

 

[Gnske]

It's because the Australian public have the collective brainpower of an amoeba.

You give us far too much credit.

 

[fredfertang]

If you walk if you know you nick it then you should stand your ground when you know you haven't.

Walking undermines the decision of the umpire which is why I don't agree with it.

Walking after you've been given not out is a totally separate issue in my book, and I couldn't agree with you more on that one

 

[NUFAN]

How come people can't spell Nevill?

Also I'd never walk. Why would I spend 20+ years of my life trying to bat for my country only to give up batting and going against the umpires decision.

 

[OverratedSanity]

The whole "Broad cheating" thing was a load of old bollocks, quite frankly. I'd walk personally, but how the Australian cricket team managed to convince the Australian public that Broad was some kind of pariah and that the Australian cricket team stood on some higher plane with respect to walking is one of the great psychological sporting heists of the modern era.

And the Australian captain was the same guy who smashed it to first slip straight of the bat once and stood there like a dumbass waiting for the umpire's decision. Thankfully, he admitted Broad did nothing wrong but still.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Quite comical to see people claiming they wouldn't walk out of respect for the umpire. It does the umpire no favours at all. He's has to adjudicate on something he shouldn't have to with the added bonus of being made to look stupid if he gets it wrong. If you don't want to walk that's fair enough if that's how you want to play the game, but don't pretend it's for anything other than selfish reasons.

 

[LegBeforeWatson]

As long as the umpire isn't Shakoor Rana, I've always been happy to accept that a batsman is out or not out 'if in the opinion of the umpire'. walking or standing is a personal choice but i'd advocate standing and allowing the umpire to decide after all in the spirit of the game it's not whether he's 100% spot on but his opinion that matters, as an addendum DRS (dont review shane ) shows how bloody good umpires are making decisions in a split second

 

[Cabinet96]

By that logic you should stand your ground if you smash it into your pads and get given lbw.

Not in low level club cricket, no. Though umpires are very cautious at such a level.

 

[Cabinet96]

Somewhat inadvertently walked in a game with panel umpires a couple weeks ago. Kind of pissed off.

 

[dfrinku]

I think walking is now an even stranger issue because of DRS. We are obviously moving forward to try and make more correct decisions to alleviate (or put more) pressure on umpires and it's odd when you can see the correct decision within several seconds but nothing can be done about it. But for every Stuart Broad nick that isn't given, there's 100 faint nicks and gloves that aren't given and there should be no difference in the reaction. Such a hypocritical view after 2013 when it honestly would come close to happening once a test match just not as obviously.

I really don't think batsman should walk (or at least, there shouldn't be any negativity towards batsman who don't walk) but, yeah, I suppose my frustration is with decisions are immediately obvious to millions watching and wouldn't necessarily take that much time out of the game to overturn. Slipper slope and all that, though. If you overturn obvious ones, you have to check everything and it would become a farce.

 

[Howe_zat]

With the DRS as it is there's no place for walking. When you have no reviews left it's a result of poor tactical play - if you review often in an attempt to get every possible wicket, you're running the risk of losing them. You had the option to be 'defensive' and save your reviews for a sure thing, but you didn't. So when a batsman stands his ground it's not outside of the game any more - it's the opposition punishing poor tactics.

 

[dfrinku]

With the DRS as it is there's no place for walking. When you have no reviews left it's a result of poor tactical play - if you review often in an attempt to get every possible wicket, you're running the risk of losing them. You had the option to be 'defensive' and save your reviews for a sure thing, but you didn't. So when a batsman stands his ground it's not outside of the game any more - it's the opposition punishing poor tactics.

Not all reviews are created equally.

 

[Compton]

With the DRS as it is there's no place for walking. When you have no reviews left it's a result of poor tactical play - if you review often in an attempt to get every possible wicket, you're running the risk of losing them. You had the option to be 'defensive' and save your reviews for a sure thing, but you didn't. So when a batsman stands his ground it's not outside of the game any more - it's the opposition punishing poor tactics.

This.

DRS was designed to overturn howlers from the umpire. If you wasted your reviews 'having a look' at something daft, it's your own fault that you don't have the ability to check something more concrete later.

Saying that, Australia and England should each get three reviews, so that they can entertain Shane Watson and Stuart Broad.

 

[Furball]

Quite comical to see people claiming they wouldn't walk out of respect for the umpire. It does the umpire no favours at all. He's has to adjudicate on something he shouldn't have to with the added bonus of being made to look stupid if he gets it wrong. If you don't want to walk that's fair enough if that's how you want to play the game, but don't pretend it's for anything other than selfish reasons.

So I've been mistaken when believing it was the umpire's responsibility to make decisions?

 

[SteveNZ]

This thread reminds me of the time I walked when given not out to an lbw decision. I'd be surprised if anyone can match that level of idiocy on a cricket field