View Poll Results: Should Smith have been allowed a runner?

Voters
70. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    33 47.14%
  • No

    34 48.57%
  • andyc is my favourite CW moderator

    3 4.29%
Page 12 of 13 FirstFirst ... 210111213 LastLast
Results 166 to 180 of 185

Thread: Should Smith have been allowed a runner?

  1. #166
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,227
    Quote Originally Posted by DIRK-NANNES View Post


    Not sure if you're serious or not If so, you might have missed the point.
    "What is this what is this who is this guy shouting what is this going on in here?" - CP. (re: psxpro)

    R.I.P Craigos, you were a champion bloke. One of the best

    R.I.P Fardin 'Bob' Qayyumi

    Member of the Church of the Holy Glenn McGrath

    "How about you do something contstructive in this forum for once and not fill the forum with ****. You offer nothing." - theegyptian.

  2. #167
    U19 Debutant
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    391
    The runner is one the dumbest rules in cricket. You can't run, you can't bat. As simple as that. It might have made sense when cricket was a leisurely gentlemen's game. But it has no place in international cricket.

  3. #168
    Hall of Fame Member Smudge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Deep, deep south
    Posts
    16,647
    Quote Originally Posted by zaremba View Post
    in fact it's quite possible to draw the conclusion that he did so deliberately


    You can't be serious! Why on earth would a batsman deliberately run towards a collision rather than complete a run? That makes utterly no sense. So, no, it's not "quite possible" to draw such a conclusion - unless you're, say, Scaly.

  4. #169
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Rolling right Inuit
    Posts
    8,894
    Quote Originally Posted by Voltman View Post


    You can't be serious! Why on earth would a batsman deliberately run towards a collision rather than complete a run? That makes utterly no sense. So, no, it's not "quite possible" to draw such a conclusion - unless you're, say, Scaly.
    It makes sense for a batsman who realises that he's not going to make it to safety. If you can't get home, get in the fielder's way. Ever seen a batsman deliberately get in the way of the throw? Same sort of thing. Elliott knew that there was a pretty high chance of being run out, and his change of direction was an act of desperation.

    Anyhow even if I'm wrong about that (and I don't expect many of the Kiwis here to agree with me), the fact remains that the bowler has the right of way, and it's the batsman's job to get out of the road. So the batsman has little cause for complaint if there's a collision.
    Last edited by zaremba; 02-10-2009 at 04:40 PM.


  5. #170
    U19 Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    h
    Posts
    543
    Quote Originally Posted by Son Of Coco View Post


    Not sure if you're serious or not If so, you might have missed the point.
    I was just itching to use that animation

  6. #171
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,227
    Quote Originally Posted by DIRK-NANNES View Post
    I was just itching to use that animation


    That's fair enough!

  7. #172
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,227
    Quote Originally Posted by zaremba View Post
    It makes sense for a batsman who realises that he's not going to make it to safety. If you can't get home, get in the fielder's way. Ever seen a batsman deliberately get in the way of the throw? Same sort of thing. Elliott knew that there was a pretty high chance of being run out, and his change of direction was an act of desperation.

    Anyhow even if I'm wrong about that (and I don't expect many of the Kiwis here to agree with me), the fact remains that the bowler has the right of way, and it's the batsman's job to get out of the road. So the batsman has little cause for complaint if there's a collision.
    If I remember it correctly from the replay the other day the batsman tried to avoid the players coming in for the ball and the bowler. Missed a couple but not all of them.

    If Elliott can think quick enough to take off for a run, sum up the situation and assume that he won't make it and the fielder will hit the stumps, and then engineer a collison he's a genius.

  8. #173
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Rolling right Inuit
    Posts
    8,894
    Quote Originally Posted by Son Of Coco View Post
    If I remember it correctly from the replay the other day the batsman tried to avoid the players coming in for the ball and the bowler. Missed a couple but not all of them.

    If Elliott can think quick enough to take off for a run, sum up the situation and assume that he won't make it and the fielder will hit the stumps, and then engineer a collison he's a genius.
    I couldn't find the clip when I looked for it yesterday but my recollection is different. Perhaps someone will dig it out for us - and if it shows I'm wrong then I will eat a big fat slice of humble pie (being wrong about matters cricketing is a constant state of being for me ).

    I think you underestimate the ability of batsmen to "sum up the situation" almost instantaneously. When the bowler is delivering the ball the batsman often has much less than a second in which to assess the flight of the ball, to decide on a stroke and to execute it; they then are often able to decide in a split second whether to take a run once they've hit the ball. It probably takes something in the order of 3 seconds to complete a run, and a batsman who's not going to make it can be fully aware of that fact at a pretty early stage. That's why batsmen change direction to get in the way of the throw, which happens all the time. As for engineering a collision, it's not rocket science - you just aim for the area where the ball and/or fielder is heading. It doesn't take a genius.

  9. #174
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,227
    Quote Originally Posted by zaremba View Post
    I couldn't find the clip when I looked for it yesterday but my recollection is different. Perhaps someone will dig it out for us - and if it shows I'm wrong then I will eat a big fat slice of humble pie (being wrong about matters cricketing is a constant state of being for me ).

    I think you underestimate the ability of batsmen to "sum up the situation" almost instantaneously. When the bowler is delivering the ball the batsman often has much less than a second in which to assess the flight of the ball, to decide on a stroke and to execute it; they then are often able to decide in a split second whether to take a run once they've hit the ball. It probably takes something in the order of 3 seconds to complete a run, and a batsman who's not going to make it can be fully aware of that fact at a pretty early stage. That's why batsmen change direction to get in the way of the throw, which happens all the time. As for engineering a collision, it's not rocket science - you just aim for the area where the ball and/or fielder is heading. It doesn't take a genius.
    It'd be very unusual for a batsman to back himself for the collision rather than trying to run the line of the throw. If he'd have stayed upright then the fielder would have been shying at the stumps while slightly off balance rather than lobbing it back over the stumps at the bowler's end.

    When I saw the video the other night nothing suggested to me that he'd tried to run into anyone.

  10. #175
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Rolling right Inuit
    Posts
    8,894
    I found it

    It shows that Elliott had much less time to react than I'd remembered.

    Only the bowler is involved - the other fielders aren't really involved.

    Elliott doesn't change direction, but it's fair to say that he does set off at a strange angle across the bowler's path and with the result that he gets between the bowler and the ball.

    I'm still not 100% convinced, but I admit, it doesn't look particularly deliberate.

    [contemplates humble pie]

  11. #176
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,227
    Quote Originally Posted by zaremba View Post
    I found it

    It shows that Elliott had much less time to react than I'd remembered.

    Only the bowler is involved - the other fielders aren't really involved.

    Elliott doesn't change direction, but it's fair to say that he does set off at a strange angle across the bowler's path and with the result that he gets between the bowler and the ball.

    I'm still not 100% convinced, but I admit, it doesn't look particularly deliberate.

    [contemplates humble pie]
    Great, I was looking for it to watch it again too.

    What I thought was another fielder the other night at first glance is the other NZ batsman. He doesn't set off at a strange angle, but it's evident he sees Sidebottom coming and is limited to how wide he can go due to the other batsman coming through. His only other option is to go the other side of Sidebottom and run down the middle of the pitch. Given it would take him changing angle completely as well as going against the batsman's first instinct to get off the pitch that was never going to happen.

    The commentators seem fairly certain it wasn't a great thing to do.
    Last edited by Son Of Coco; 03-10-2009 at 01:29 AM.

  12. #177
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    .
    Posts
    23,455
    Remember now why I thought England were completely in the wrong after the incident.

    Also, Elliot probably wouldn't have been out if the collision hadn't occured- Sidebottom still had to hit the stumps, there was no one there to break them if he missed.
    Quote Originally Posted by zaremba View Post
    The Filth have comfortably the better bowling. But the Gash have the batting. Might be quite good to watch.

  13. #178
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Rolling right Inuit
    Posts
    8,894
    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    Remember now why I thought England were completely in the wrong after the incident.

    Also, Elliot probably wouldn't have been out if the collision hadn't occured- Sidebottom still had to hit the stumps, there was no one there to break them if he missed.
    This is the central impossibility at the heart of your argument

  14. #179
    Hall of Fame Member age_master's Avatar
    Plasmanaut on Fire Champion!
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    15,777
    I have seen other international batsmen get runners for lesser reasons.
    Member of CW Green
    Kerry O'Keefe - Worlds funniest Commentator

  15. #180
    Virat Kohli (c) Jono's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    54,554
    Having watched that footage again, I don't think you can blame Elliot one bit.

    a) He did nothing wrong
    b) There was no guarantee he would have been out had he not collided with Sidebottom.

    But what I will always remember from that incident is Benson putting his arms around Collingwood.
    "I am very happy and it will allow me to have lot more rice."

    Eoin Morgan on being given a rice cooker for being Man of the Match in a Dhaka Premier Division game.

Page 12 of 13 FirstFirst ... 210111213 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Could Graeme Smith break all captaincy records?
    By Richard in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 01-01-2008, 07:22 AM
  2. Teams of players all sharing a name.
    By pskov in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 07-06-2007, 09:59 PM
  3. The Smith and Vaughan Saga
    By Scaly piscine in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 15-10-2005, 06:16 AM
  4. Hinds and Smith in confrontation
    By Richard in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 09-05-2005, 12:53 PM
  5. JME01-Succesion Game
    By Jamee999 in forum General
    Replies: 115
    Last Post: 06-11-2004, 02:30 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •