• 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.

Would you have upheld the appeal?

Would you have upheld the appeal?


  • Total voters
    56

Redbacks

International Captain
To me, the body language exuded by Kumar is seen on amateur fields around the world and it indicates a boundary. That's always been the way I've taken it. But in no way would I suggest Kumar was purposefully trying to be deceitful.
True, that's a 4 in club cricket no doubt. Probably shows another fault in the Indian fielding mentality. Most other players, unless they were absolutely sure it was a 4, would have sprung to their feet and tried to whistle the ball in ASAP and let the TV cameras decide. Just a bizarre set of event all round.
 

Cevno

Hall of Fame Member
No. No he didn't. If that's him "accelerating" his top speed must be near 2 mph. It's a fallacious arguement that's making you silly now.
He turns and then starts to jog a little and then constantly looks at Praveen and the ball before stopping after seeing Morgan.
And accelerated is from walking speed from which he was on.

He wasn't obviously running or attempting a run for the whole while but see the video -

‪bell and morgan run out england vs india‬‏ - YouTube

What is Bell doing from 0.03 of this Video quickening his pace and then looking at the fielder unsure and signalling to Morgan with his left hand?
 

SteveNZ

International Coach
AWTA. If Kumar was faking that then he may have a future in Bollywood. And Bell thought of a run for a while and thus accelerated before thinking it was four after looking at Praveen.

Btw, what would happen say if a fielder fakes a midfield and then runs the batsman out and the batsman runs as a result ? Fair game?
He had a fleeting moment of uncertainty, jogged out a bit and set off to walk off with Morgan. I wouldn't call that seeking a fourth run. I saw someone before put out the ridiculous notion that Bell wouldn't have jogged off after a whole session if he wasn't attempting a fourth. He'd be high on emotion, just hitting a four, scoring a ton and putting England in a magic position. Of course he'd get a bit fired up and do more than meander off.

There's no signailling to Morgan. It's simply his running style.

Your last sentence doesn't make sense.
 
Last edited:

Cevno

Hall of Fame Member
He had a fleeting moment of uncertainty, jogged out a bit and set off to walk off with Morgan. I wouldn't call that seeking a fourth run. I saw someone before put out the ridiculous notion that Bell wouldn't have jogged off after a whole session if he wasn't attempting a fourth. He'd be high on emotion, just hitting a four, scoring a ton and putting England in a magic position. Of course he'd get a bit fired up and do more than meander off.
That is what i was referring to, when he turns and Jogs he sees Morgan on the other end not running and then he signals him with his left hand and looks at the fielder unsure before stopping.
If Morgan had ran would he have completed the run?

As for Jogging pace the previous run was also taken at the same pace.

Your last sentence doesn't make sense.
Referring to say a fielder acting he didn't knew where the ball was for a while to fool the batsman into running and then running him out after quickly recovering?
 
Last edited:

Redbacks

International Captain
Btw, what would happen say if a fielder fakes a misfield and then runs the batsman out and the batsman runs as a result ? Fair game?
It would be seen as bad sportsmanship but given out. In ODI cricket we already see the fake slides by the ring fielder just before the man in the deep collects the ball in as attempt at slight deception for the batsmen. No hard and fast rules for these things.
 

SteveNZ

International Coach
I honestly don't see the hand signal. All I see is his left arm hanging out a bit, as per a running style.

Incidentally, I thought they outlawed the fake slide?
 

Cevno

Hall of Fame Member
I honestly don't see the hand signal. All I see is his left arm hanging out a bit, as per a running style.
At 0.6 to 0.7 he pats his hand down as to ask Morgan or the Umpire whether it is OK to stop and stops after that.

Wonder what would have happened with his Jog had Morgan ran too as they ended the previous run at the same pace?
 
Last edited:

hazsa19

International Regular
Indeed, and as you said before, practically every English poster said it was a terrible decision by Colly. So the basic point being made here by 8anjitk is twaddle.
Lets be honest, the essence of his post is not twaddle. I'm afraid to say that the cricket puritans of this forum do not represent the vast majority of people, even those at the grounds in England and India I bet.

If England had appealed for Sachin's wicket in front of 100,000 at Eden Gardens, i'm sure the crowd would have reacted in a similar way to the TB crowd, and Strauss probably would have made the same decision.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Steve, don't try and argue with Cevno, he sees so many things in incidents that nobody else does. Pretty soon he'll probably be telling us what Bell and Morgan were thinking at the time as mind-reading is another of his specialities.
 

Cevno

Hall of Fame Member
Steve, don't try and argue with Cevno, he sees so many things in incidents that nobody else does. Pretty soon he'll probably be telling us what Bell and Morgan were thinking at the time as mind-reading is another of his specialities.
:yawn:

I thought mind reading was your speciality? I never claimed anything without any evidence whatsoever based on mind reading.
 
Last edited:

Cevno

Hall of Fame Member
:blowup:
Give it a break ffs.
I didn't bring it up:p

It is Marc who pops into various threads to have sly digs without contributing anything with respect to the conversation on hand based on distorted facts and hyperbole.
 
Last edited:

SteveNZ

International Coach
Here's a different scenario:

I don't hear an appeal on that audio, at least initially. Rauf seems to call over. So if there isn't an appeal before over is called, does that not mean it's tea? Surely an appeal cannot come after play is temporarily closed?
 

Cevno

Hall of Fame Member
Here's a different scenario:

I don't hear an appeal on that audio, at least initially. Rauf seems to call over. So if there isn't an appeal before over is called, does that not mean it's tea? Surely an appeal cannot come after play is temporarily closed?
Tea wasn't called before the bails were taken off though. He hands over the sweater to him afterwards and hasn't removed the bails yet which is done after the official signal so there is no way to tell for sure.

And the appeal was to the square leg umpire and any of the fielders could have appealed,i beleieve. Even the ones standing near him.
 
Last edited:

Jacknife

International Captain
Praveen genuinely thought it had gone for 4 as shown by the throw IMO. Bell genuinely thought it'd gone for 4 as shown by the fact he gave up running half way though the third run.
Agree, the give away for Kumar is, when he eventually gets up off the floor, which he did very slowly and then locates the ball, he slowly walks to it and picks it up and gently throws it in, in the mean time Raina had gone to pick up the helmets for the end of the session.
I just wouldn't have even appealed for it, it's something I've seen on a number of occasions when it's lunch or tea break, batsmen meandering off before the umpires called the play dead.
The nearest incident to this one that I've read about is the Tony Greig and Alvin Kallicharran incident, when it was the last ball of the day's play at Port of Spain in 1973-74 and Kallicharan walked off assuming it was stumps and then Greig ran Kallicharan out.
All the stadium kicked off and after talks, England decided to drop their appeal.
 

grecian

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Lets be honest, the essence of his post is not twaddle. I'm afraid to say that the cricket puritans of this forum do not represent the vast majority of people, even those at the grounds in England and India I bet.

If England had appealed for Sachin's wicket in front of 100,000 at Eden Gardens, i'm sure the crowd would have reacted in a similar way to the TB crowd, and Strauss probably would have made the same decision.
He actually mentions the posters here though, so I don't get your argument.
 

SteveNZ

International Coach
Calling time (tea, whatever) is the signal for the interval. Not bails. Especially when there's a run-out, when bails are already off.

Law 27 (Appeals) - Laws - Laws of Cricket - Laws & Spirit - Lord's

Read No.3. I'm not saying there hadn't been an appeal, I just couldn't hear it. And if there wasn't before Rauf called time, then it isn't out. I'm just saying that's another thing to think about.

And I really like Dravid's comment that they wouldn't want it done to them, hence why they overturned it. That is the best way to look most things in life. Can't blame the players for making the decision in the heat of the moment, under the pump and 1-0 down in the series, and they made the right call with clearer heads in the changing room. Well played India.
 

hazsa19

International Regular
He actually mentions the posters here though, so I don't get your argument.
The nub of his argument (lawyer court room technicality bull**** aside) was that whoever was on the wrong side of the run-out would have been 'outraged'. Whatever ground in the world, whatever country, if the home side was afflicted there would have been boos and scandal.
 

Cevno

Hall of Fame Member
Calling time (tea, whatever) is the signal for the interval. Not bails. Especially when there's a run-out, when bails are already off.

Law 27 (Appeals) - Laws - Laws of Cricket - Laws & Spirit - Lord's

Read No.3. I'm not saying there hadn't been an appeal, I just couldn't hear it. And if there wasn't before Rauf called time, then it isn't out. I'm just saying that's another thing to think about.
Ball wasn't dead though.

2. Call of Time
The bowler’s end umpire shall call Time when the ball is dead on the cessation of play before any interval or interruption and at the conclusion of the match.

Law 16 (Start of play; cessation of play) - Laws - Laws of Cricket - Laws & Spirit - Lord's
Law 23 (Dead ball) - Laws - Laws of Cricket - Laws & Spirit - Lord's

I believe the umpires and the match referee were sure the correct decision was made according to the rules. And Bell said that too himself.
 

Top