should sledging be banned?

[open365]

Ban it?

What cricket needs is more sledging,a lot more,i'm talking dressing rooms hanging funny pictures of the opposition over the balcony or ironing an insulting photo onto their whites.....

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Three close fielders should be allowed to jump on the batsman and set fire to his hair while the bowler is walking back to his mark.

 

[Pratters]

Imagine two golfers abusing each other. Or better skill two chess players playing and throwing verbal volleys at each other.

Sledging shows insecurity in ability which shows the need to use other means to try and win. If I am good at my job, why should I need to abuse, insult an opponent. Shouldnt the craft be good enough?

Do we want to see cricket and a contest between the bat and the ball - a gripping contest in itself or a bunch of adults acting like kids and abusing each other?

Sledging is stupid.

Sport is all about trying your best and if the opponent plays better than you, appreciating that and trying your best again.

There is no place of sledging, abuses as far as I am concerned.

 

[vic_orthdox]

If you're playing against an opponent and see a technical weakness, you should be looking to exploit it. If you're playing against an opponent for the first time, you need to test out how his technique handles the outswinger, the yorker, the short ball.

If you're playing against an opponent and notice a mental weakness, you should be looking to exploit it. If you're playing against an opponent for the first time, you need to find out how willing he is for the battle, against the ball and against his own mind.

 

[Buddhmaster]

Yes, sledger should be banned

 

[Top_Cat]

Imagine two golfers abusing each other.

Golf ain't exactly the bastian of sportsmanship you think it is. Plenty of mind games go on between the players and you're deluding yourself if you think otherwise. Ditto for any high-level competitive sport and I defy anyone to come up with an example otherwise. Sledging is a reality of sport and wishing it go away will achieve diddly-squat.

If I am good at my job, why should I need to abuse, insult an opponent. Shouldnt the craft be good enough?

At even mid-level sport, it's not. Sorry.

Sport is all about trying your best and if the opponent plays better than you, appreciating that and trying your best again.

At a professional level, it's far different to that. Even at club level, it's different. Trying your best is all well and good but if you invest heavily in physical and emotional terms in playing a sport by sacrificing much of the others things you might enjoy, putting-in on the training track, etc. do you seriously expect someone who has done all that to just accept when the opponent plays better and do nothing else? Professional sport is a battle of the minds and wills as much as the physical aspects of the game. You just characterising it as 'insecurity' shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what sledging actually is. It's not just two guys going at each other, screaming and spitting insults in various languages. It's about getting into the mind of your opponent too.

If you beat a batsman a few times outside off-stump and it's because he's nervous, do you honestly expect peopel to just sit-back and wait for him to get himself out? Come on. In Tests, a little battle like that can swing a series. A well-put dig (not too insulting) like "Mate, what are you doing out here? Just get out already and stop wasting our time." followed-up by a short-and-wide ball could mean the difference between that batsman getting through the tough period and scoring a ton vs them getting into a mental muddle and getting out to the sucker-punch. Surely you're not advocating scrapping this sort of stuff because if you are, why not just build robots to play the game, program in their various skill levels and let the game decided on skill only?

If you're playing against an opponent and see a technical weakness, you should be looking to exploit it. If you're playing against an opponent for the first time, you need to test out how his technique handles the outswinger, the yorker, the short ball.

If you're playing against an opponent and notice a mental weakness, you should be looking to exploit it. If you're playing against an opponent for the first time, you need to find out how willing he is for the battle, against the ball and against his own mind.[/b

Nicely put.

 

[andyc]

There's nothing wrong with the bowler and batsmen exchanging a bit of banter after a delivery - eg Randall and Lillee in the Centenary Test. But I don't think the constant baiting of the batsmen by the wicketkeeper and close fielders adds anything to the game.

It doesn't detract anything from it though.

 

[C_C]

The entire objective of sports, ultimately is entertainment. It is irrelevant in large scheme of things- there are far more important things in life than whacking a ball with a wooden/aluminum/carbon fibre stick.
And malicious behaviour flies fundamentally in the face of entertainment. There is absolutely no place in sports for mental disintegration or sledging. It is entertainment, not warfare. And those who treat sports as warfare need to chill out and find better things to do in life.
The spread of maliciousness in professional era is a disturbing new western trend.

 

[andyc]

Ban it?

What cricket needs is more sledging,a lot more,i'm talking dressing rooms hanging funny pictures of the opposition over the balcony or ironing an insulting photo onto their whites.....

 

[open365]

The entire objective of sports, ultimately is entertainment. It is irrelevant in large scheme of things- there are far more important things in life than whacking a ball with a wooden/aluminum/carbon fibre stick.
And malicious behaviour flies fundamentally in the face of entertainment. There is absolutely no place in sports for mental disintegration or sledging. It is entertainment, not warfare. And those who treat sports as warfare need to chill out and find better things to do in life.
The spread of maliciousness in professional era is a disturbing new western trend.

Why is sledging any more malicous than bowling a lethal bouncer at a tail-ender?

Yes,sport is ultimately entertainment,but to me and a lot of people,sledging adds to the game,it creates an atmosphere,its makes it feel more intense and important.

My favourite cricketers are allways the ones up for a battle,ready to take on the challenge,not afraid of anything.

Why do you think that there is no place in sport for mental dis-intergration(not that i really believe it)? Cricket is a battle of the mind,not just a competition for text-book perfection.

 

[C_C]

Why is sledging any more malicous than bowling a lethal bouncer at a tail-ender?

Yes,sport is ultimately entertainment,but to me and a lot of people,sledging adds to the game,it creates an atmosphere,its makes it feel more intense and important.

My favourite cricketers are allways the ones up for a battle,ready to take on the challenge,not afraid of anything.

Why do you think that there is no place in sport for mental dis-intergration(not that i really believe it)? Cricket is a battle of the mind,not just a competition for text-book perfection.

Well sports *ISNT* very important in the grand scheme of things. It is passtime and leasure and exists only to entertain humans.

For two, there is a difference between testing someone's ability and being an obnoxious git.
Bowling bouncers is testing your ability and if you are found wanting, you are found wanting. But all the sledging and abuse in the sport makes it a toxic atomosphere and not a pleasant one- which is the entire purpose for the existance of sports- to be pleasing and entertaining. People keeping their yaps shut and just testing their abilities against each other without malicious behaviour is far more preferrable than barbaric behaviour.
You can do battle of the mind by pitting your analytical qualities vs another cricketer and leave out the negetive and malicious atmosphere.
Malcolm Marshall was one of the best planners and mentally strong players and he played without creating an abusive atmosphere by chatting *****.
I prefer players of that sort ( or Tendulkar for example) than the mouthy insecure ones who take it too seriously.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

It doesn't detract anything from it though.

If it doesn't add or detract anything from the game, surely that renders it rather pointless.

 

[open365]

Well sports *ISNT* very important in the grand scheme of things. It is passtime and leasure and exists only to entertain humans.

For two, there is a difference between testing someone's ability and being an obnoxious git.
Bowling bouncers is testing your ability and if you are found wanting, you are found wanting. But all the sledging and abuse in the sport makes it a toxic atomosphere and not a pleasant one- which is the entire purpose for the existance of sports- to be pleasing and entertaining. People keeping their yaps shut and just testing their abilities against each other without malicious behaviour is far more preferrable than barbaric behaviour.
You can do battle of the mind by pitting your analytical qualities vs another cricketer and leave out the negetive and malicious atmosphere.
Malcolm Marshall was one of the best planners and mentally strong players and he played without creating an abusive atmosphere by chatting *****.
I prefer players of that sort ( or Tendulkar for example) than the mouthy insecure ones who take it too seriously.

Oh give over,this is test cricket for christ sakes,and sledging isn't as bad as you say it is,i certainly don't see any professional players quitting cricket because Shane Warne thinks you can't bat.

 

[C_C]

Oh give over,this is test cricket for christ sakes,and sledging isn't as bad as you say it is,i certainly don't see any professional players quitting cricket because Shane Warne thinks you can't bat.

True. But it is unecessary and unwanted by large.
If you ever go to Bhutan, you'd see what sports is really supposed to be played like.
You'd have to see their archery competitions to get the hang of what i am saying - it is basically a straightforward archery competion, testing accuracy. But the competitors, spectators, etc. all intermingle freely, lots of laughing around, joking around , drinking ( even the competitors themselves drink) and competitors egging each other on, interspersed with moments of intense concentration, pin-drop silence and perfect form ( not so perfect when the competitors get drunk).

The point of sports is to derive entertainment without getting overly biassed for a player or a team- for ultimately, the entertainment is simply a skill-based one and only when you throw in ego ( my team, player from my country, my bet, my bragging rights, etc) does it become an undersirable and unpleasant experience.
And from a player's perspective, the point of sports is to entertain people by performing to the best of your abilities without getting obnoxious and offensive, while enjoying the game yourself.
All this crap called sledging and mental disintegration, etc. take away from the enjoyment, simply because it breeds an antagonistic atmosphere.

 

[swede]

Its wrong to think that cricket was so much a gentleman´s game in the past.
sledging has certainly been there since the 70s and to some degree probably always.

Bowling at batsmen´s bodies began in the 20´s I think (and was very unfair compared to today because of rule changes, helmets etc)

I believe that in the 1870´s or 80´s Some England teams were unsure of playing in matches in Australia after on one occassion having had to use the stumps as weapon against pitch invasions.
This also happened in England sometimes, and the Lord´s pavillion was even burned down after an Eton v Harrow game, a particular rowdy fixture.

Some professional players rebelled against the amateur rule of the game, going on strike for better pay or setting up rival fixtures. It wasnt all that different from today.
In the early 1800´s cricket were a gamblers sport, most games just set up for a stake with lots of match fixing going on

 

[open365]

^Skating and most extreme sport competitions are the same and i love the atmosphere there,but i would hate cricket to be like that.

Cricket is entertaining,but the competition and rivalry enhances it,as IMO does sledging.That is where we differ i suppose.

When i hear players talking heatedly to each other or Andre Nel looking demented i enjoy it,i enjoy watching the charged atmosphere,but only as long as i know the players don't carry it off the pitch with them,which they don't.

 

[C_C]

Never said cricket was excellent before either. But i think most people miss the point of sports- it exists to entertain and be entertained.

 

[C_C]

Cricket is entertaining,but the competition and rivalry enhances it,as IMO does sledging.That is where we differ i suppose.

I suppose. I just dont consider anatagonistic behaviour to be very endearing.

When i hear players talking heatedly to each other or Andre Nel looking demented i enjoy it,i enjoy watching the charged atmosphere,but only as long as i know the players don't carry it off the pitch with them,which they don't.

The question you should ask is, why do you enjoy that.

 

[open365]

I suppose. I just dont consider anatagonistic behaviour to be very endearing.



The question you should ask is, why do you enjoy that.

Because i don't think it is very antagonising.

In my view,it adds to the drama of the match and makes it feel important.

The super series for example(just and example)on of the reasons it was a failure is because it didn't really have any importance and the world 11 weren't as commited as they would be for their countries. I enjoy watching different charcters with different personalities and ethics that they play the game by.

I find nothing realy more exciting or intriuging in cricket than Andre Nel bowling to Graham Thorpe. Nel beats his inside edge,runs down the wicket and stares manically at him,Thorpe looks at him in dis-dain and goes on to score a 100. It makes acheivements sweeter.

 

[C_C]

Because i don't think it is very antagonising.

In my view,it adds to the drama of the match and makes it feel important.

The super series for example(just and example)on of the reasons it was a failure is because it didn't really have any importance and the world 11 weren't as commited as they would be for their countries. I enjoy watching different charcters with different personalities and ethics that they play the game by.

I find nothing realy more exciting or intriuging in cricket than Andre Nel bowling to Graham Thorpe. Nel beats his inside edge,runs down the wicket and stares manically at him,Thorpe looks at him in dis-dain and goes on to score a 100. It makes acheivements sweeter.

If something extra is required to make you 'feel' its important, maybe then, it isnt important in the reality and you are deceiving yourself ?

As per your Nel comment- i dont see how it makes it any sweeter or ( conversely) sourer- the point of playing sports is to enjoy. Not to feel vindicated in any oblique fashion.

And yes, i do find hostility anatagonistic behaviour.
Its not much to ask for people to be just a wee bit nicer to each other- even in the middle of a stadium. Like i said, if you ever get to visit Bhutan and see their archery competition, you'd get the idea of what it is to be extremely competetive and extremely friendly at the same time.
That concept is alien to many.