• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Who do you agree with?

Who do you agree with?


  • Total voters
    42

The Foxtrot

U19 12th Man
Watching the start of the cricket today and slater and tony greig(?) was discussing about players walking. i am sure you are all familar with the issue, but what do you think?

i agree with slats, because you can't protest against the bad decisions and have to go, plus it is always nice to get some good luck.
 
Last edited:

Poker Boy

State Vice-Captain
I think players shouldn't walk - as long as they don't scream like babies when they are given out when they are not out. And can I play devil's advocate: some players might walk when the edge is so blatatly obvious anyone can see it...but for the hard-to-detect edges they might stand their ground and rely on their reputation as walkers to be given the benefit of the doubt by the umpire. IMO that would be worse than not walking at all...
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
I think players shouldn't walk - as long as they don't scream like babies when they are given out when they are not out.
Seriously, though, how often does that happen?

Virtually never.

Non-walkers are hypocrites in many ways, but that is the worst of them.
 

Dick Rockett

International Vice-Captain
I don't really mind either way. Kudos to those who walk if they know they're out, but I certainly don't have a problem with the vast majority of batsmen who make the umps earn their crust. They're not breaking any rules.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Obviously not but how on Earth do you enforce a rule "you must walk if you know you're out"?
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Exactly, so therefore "they're not breaking any rules" is hardly anything which can come to the defence of non-walk-ism.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
I haven't voted because I'm comfortable with non-walkers, but respect those who do.

That said the depiction of Gilchrist as some latter day saint doesn't quite wash given some of the appeals he makes. Dalrymple barely got within a foot of McGrath's bouncer in the ODI @ Melbourne but Gilly went up like a thirteen-year-old's willy at the sight of a bra despite barely a flicker from Pidge. I've no issue with anyone appealing (within reason), but I'd like people to remember occasions like that next time they're tempted to buff his halo.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Gilly went up like a thirteen-year-old's willy at the sight of a bra
:blink:

Oh, and on the subject of Gilchrist and unfair appeals - ever kept wicket? No? Seen rear-angle replays? If so, you'll know how easy it is to be unsighted compared to the bowler. Sometimes it can look for all money like there's a touch from behind when it can be obvious nothing of the sort from the front.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
:blink:

Oh, and on the subject of Gilchrist and unfair appeals - ever kept wicket? No? Seen rear-angle replays? If so, you'll know how easy it is to be unsighted compared to the bowler. Sometimes it can look for all money like there's a touch from behind when it can be obvious nothing of the sort from the front.
Never competitively, no. Have done it in knock abouts tho, obv.

I'm not disputing keepers have a different angle, but really this one looked clear as day. I suppose that he may've been appealing to negate the possibility of a wide too as the ball was on the high side.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
My perception of Gilchrist is someone who would never cheat. That's garnered not just from his recent trend of walking but from listinging to him throughout the last 6 years. I think if he appealed for that, he thought Dalrymple had hit it. I haven't seen every single angle, but I've seen countless similar cases where different angles paint completely different pictures. Enough for me to give him the benefit of the doubt unless there's really no doubt at all.
 

Dick Rockett

International Vice-Captain
Obviously not but how on Earth do you enforce a rule "you must walk if you know you're out"?
What? I said kudos to those who walk if they know they're out. I never said that they must, and I certainly wouldn't advocate changing the rules to make it so.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
And I didn't say you did...

I said that saying "they're not breaking any rules" is no defence of the non-walkers. Because it'd be completely impossible to bring in a rule pertaining to said circumstances.
 

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
I thought Gilchrist's appeal was pretty half-hearted to tell you the truth, Dale. I think that the proximity of the ball to being a wide had a fair bit to do with why he went up.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
There's being consistent and being consistent.

There's consistently not walking and consistently making a fuss when you get a bad decision.
 

Dick Rockett

International Vice-Captain
I said that saying "they're not breaking any rules" is no defence of the non-walkers.
Whatever. If my sentence was lazy, it's because of my apathy about the topic at hand. It was silly of me to not take into account your tendency to leap on any point - no matter how insignificant - and use it to contradict someone. Well done again.
 

Top