Australia Cheating?????

[aziznana786]

i wanted to know everyones take on wehter Australia is cheating or not, when they really dont need to. Im sure most people in here saw this recent ODI series vs. NZ and also against Pakistan. I mean in the first match Flemming was definetly not out on that LBW yet they gave it, then against Pakistan they made hooorrrible calls in the VB Series. It always seems to be favoring Australia. I mean its really unfair because Pakistan got some defenite plumb lbws which werent called while Australia got lbws which were questionble or not close.

From teh top order of the opposing team at least 2 or 3 batsmen get called out on a crucial call or one that definetly doesnt look out. then on the other side a call for Australia is never given and they get an extra chance, lets say that one time when Ponting was out on 12 and they didnt give it and he hit 40 that day and i dont remeber who but the other team lost by less around the difference. then the otehr day, in the second match of the NZ series i think it was Clarke when on his leg side it hit his glove and McCulum caught it yet the umpire called it a wide. So then it ends up being only say 7 outs for the opposing team while with teh advantage Australia gets they get 12 outs which makes it almost a 2 to 1.

I want other peoples take on whether it is fair or not.

 

[TendulkarFan]

How is that cheating? More like saying they get more breaks than their opposition.

Even if that was the case, I don't think they get enough breaks to justify them being so much better than the rest of the world. Nothing else accounts for the huge gap that exists between them and the rest of the cricketing world, as much as their skill and work ethic.

The way I see it - whether they got the breaks or not, they would still be the #1 team in the world, by quite a distance.

 

[Jnr.]

From teh top order of the opposing team at least 2 or 3 batsmen get called out on a crucial call or one that definetly doesnt look out. then on the other side a call for Australia is never given and they get an extra chance, lets say that one time when Ponting was out on 12 and they didnt give it and he hit 40 that day and i dont remeber who but the other team lost by less around the difference. then the otehr day, in the second match of the NZ series i think it was Clarke when on his leg side it hit his glove and McCulum caught it yet the umpire called it a wide. So then it ends up being only say 7 outs for the opposing team while with teh advantage Australia gets they get 12 outs which makes it almost a 2 to 1.

Gilchrist and Hayden, respectively. At least get the players right before you make such claims!

Personally, I think the successful teams in each era gets more decisions in their favour. Whether it can be put down to cheating, as opposed to downright incompetent umpiring, is questionable.

 

[SJS]

Ludicrous claim !!

 

[Slats4ever]

oh u're going to have a short life here aziz if u carry on like that

 

[SJS]

Whats the difference between the options NO and NO its totally even ??

 

[Sehwag309]

In any case, how is it Australias Fault if umpires are favouring them?

Blame the Umpires, envy the Auzzies

 

[aziznana786]

dont know, ill change that

How is that cheating? More like saying they get more breaks than their opposition.

Even if that was the case, I don't think they get enough breaks to justify them being so much better than the rest of the world. Nothing else accounts for the huge gap that exists between them and the rest of the cricketing world, as much as their skill and work ethic.

The way I see it - whether they got the breaks or not, they would still be the #1 team in the world, by quite a distance.

Ok, lets say its not cheating but its just "breaks" then why is it that Australia always get sooo many breaks. I mean dont you think if say an opener like Flemming got out in the first over by a bad call that it not only gives them one less out but hits the team physcologically? i mean your best batsman is already out.

 

[telsor]

Aus is the Number 1 team in cricket currently, and most 'neutral' supporters would like to see them lose and therefore support the other team ( fair enough too ). That means that there are more likely to be significantly more anti-aus posts on forums than pro-aus.

Winning makes you forget the bad breaks you got during the game, losing makes you think about the 'if onlys'.

All of this means that whatever the truth of the matter, there will be a lot more posts about Aus getting the breaks than whoever Aus are playing, giving the perception that there is a massive discrepancy.

I'm not saying there isn't a bias towards Aus ( and I'm not saying there is ), but I suspect if there is it's a lot less than a lot of people seem to think.

 

[Slats4ever]

ah stop trying to rubbish australia's domination of cricket!

Telsor u on the other hand will have a future here

 

[SJS]

And why, may one respectfully ask, would the umpires indulge in this less than honourable behaviour ??

 

[Slats4ever]

Whats the difference between the options NO and NO its totally even ??

word

 

[aziznana786]

aigh look yall got me as if i hate Australia or something, i think they are the best team in Cricket in the world. I love their bowling attack although they are not my favorite team, but i dont hate them. i just want to know your take because how i see it, they always get favorouble calls. i was also hoping that someone would bring up the topic of Hawk Eye but i guess most of teh people here are Ausi lovers and are so busy gunning me down they wont look at the whole situation, especiallly from another percpective.

 

[TendulkarFan]

dont know, ill change that





Ok, lets say its not cheating but its just "breaks" then why is it that Australia always get sooo many breaks. I mean dont you think if say an opener like Flemming got out in the first over by a bad call that it not only gives them one less out but hits the team physcologically? i mean your best batsman is already out.

If your opener getting out in the first over "hits the team psychologically" enough to lose then you are probably not good enough to beat a mentally strong team like the Aussies. Let's face it, no team is as opportunistic and ruthless as the Aussies are.

Like I said before, it's a futile argument so I don't want to carry on with it. Breaks or not, they would still be the best team in the world by quite a distance.

 

[honestbharani]

I believe in the old adage "you make ur own luck". I think the Aussies play so well that when close decisions happen, they generally go their way. It isn't anyone's fault, really. Plus, given how much the Aussies dominate this game, I think whenever they get these "lucky breaks", they are highlighted much more than when the other teams get these "lucky breaks". But I DEFINITELY don't think there is any amount of cheating involved here. It is just pure domination and whatever lucky breaks the Aussies get, it is just that they are reaping the rewards for being so much better than everyone else.

 

[aziznana786]

If your opener getting out in the first over "hits the team psychologically" then you are probably not good enough to beat a mentally strong team like the Aussies.

Let's not go on about this - like I said, it's a futile argument. Breaks or not, they would still be the best team in the world by quite a distance.

well if they are the best team in the world by far, why do they need these "breaks", im not saying they arent, because they are the best team but they dont need these breaks. u see my point????

 

[TendulkarFan]

well if they are the best team in the world by far, why do they need these "breaks", im not saying they arent, because they are the best team but they dont need these breaks. u see my point????

That's my whole point - they don't need the breaks but they use them better than any other team in the world.

Yes, I see your point but it's still futile. I'm done with this discussion.

 

[telsor]

aigh look yall got me as if i hate Australia or something, i think they are the best team in Cricket in the world.

And yet you start a thread the title of which implies they're cheats.....

 

[C_C]

i personally think that the umpires subconciously favour Australia.....the top order batsmen of other teams get a helluva lotta more bad breaks than the aussie top order.
I can recollect a DOZEN lbw shouts that were not given in the case of aussie batsmen only for a near identical delivery being given for an opposition.
I beleive it comes from psychology.
Umpires are human too and they feel the overawing presence of the Aussies....especially in the days of neutral umpires, since there isnt a disposition of every home umpire to favour the home players.
Plus the Aussies build a very good rapport with the umpires and they rotate umpires a lot less in the case of the aussies....thus familiarity amplifies that overawed feeling and comfort level with the team.
Soon you start to identify with the aussie team more than the others, as you see them a lot more frequently.that leads to an 'us vs them' feeling subconciously.

but this is a doomed debate. The 'aussies get favouritism from umpires' brigade cannot prove their case but neither can the 'aussies dont get favoured by the umpires'.
Either way, this is one of the PRIME reasons i am pro-technology.
Apart from superior performance from technology, this is the biggest perk of it.
Come what may, no one can accuse technology of being biassed....atleast not until they develop FAR better AI than what we have going around today.

 

[SJS]

One word : Bull
Two words : Sour Grapes
Three words : *** **** ***