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 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 185

Thread: Should Smith have been allowed a runner?

  1. #76
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,227
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyle View Post
    It was unsporting. It is the same law, so Shah should not have been allowed a substitute fielder, he clearly had no injury. England are one of the most prolific abusers of the substitute fielder.England now have a series in South Africa. You can bet if there's a runner needed by England, there'll be an argument.
    Yeah I agree with this, it's farcical. You'd almost think the poor dears are incapable of staying on the field for an hour stretch at times. They're better than they were though.
    Last edited by Son Of Coco; 28-09-2009 at 08:11 PM.
    "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. #77
    Cricket Web Staff Member Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    41,458
    Quote Originally Posted by Son Of Coco View Post
    Yeah I agree with this, it's farcical. You'd almost think the poor dears are incapable of staying on the field for an hour stretch at times. They're better than they were though.
    Back in 05 they had to continually leave the field in order to get a fresh supply of mints.

    Everyone knows that.
    WWCC - Loyaulte Mi Lie
    "People make me happy.. not places.. people"

    "When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life." - Samuel Johnson

    "Hope is the fuel of progress and fear is the prison in which you put yourself" - Tony Benn

  3. #78
    International Debutant Black_Warrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    TEF
    Posts
    2,641
    Cramps can happen to any player at any time...it has very little to do with pre match fitness level of the player..Most batsmen do get a runner..That certainly was unfair to deny Smith a runner at that stage of the game. I am sure Strauss would have no problems if South Africa were 100 runs short!

  4. #79
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Anyone But England
    Posts
    20,003
    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    That's just Healy being ignorant. Cramp is far more complex than "if you're unfit you get it, if you're fit you don't". I'm as unfit as they come at the moment but I never, ever get cramps as a result of fatigue. Likewise at school I knew rugby players who spent their entire lives doing cardio and weights every day but who regularly cramped up 60-odd minutes into a game.

    If Mickey Arthur and Smith's waistline are to be believed, the guy's fitter than he's ever been. Yet he's scored massive double centuries with a massive belly and there's been no sign of cramp whatsoever. There's no way you can make a statement like "if he was conditioned properly it wouldn't have happened." Cramp doesn't necessarily work like that.
    Wasn't being entirely serious.

    However, particularly in the middle to latter stages of an ODI, running between the wickets is a hugely important part of batting. If you're not fit enough to run, then IMO you're not fit enough to bat. Either man up and bat and run through the pain, or get your arse off the field.


  5. #80
    Hall of Fame Member Sanz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    16,230
    I am kind of confused here reading the law in this regard :-

    Law 2 (Substitutes and runners; batsman or fielder leaving the field; batsman retiring; batsman commencing innings) - Laws - Laws of Cricket - Laws & Spirit - Lord's


    (ii) a runner when batting.
    Any injury or illness that occurs at any time after the nomination of the players until the conclusion of the match shall be allowable, irrespective of whether play is in progress or not.
    (b) The umpires shall have discretion, for other wholly acceptable reasons, to allow a substitute for a fielder, or a runner for a batsman, at the start of the match or at any subsequent time.
    (c) A player wishing to change his shirt, boots, etc. must leave the field to do so. No substitute shall be allowed for him.
    2. Objection to substitutes
    The opposing captain shall have no right of objection to any player acting as a substitute on the field, nor as to where the substitute shall field. However, no substitute shall act as wicket-keeper. See 3 below.
    3. Restrictions on the role of substitutes
    A substitute shall not be allowed to bat or bowl nor to act as wicket-keeper or as captain on the field of play.

    ---------------------

    the above doesn't say anywhere that the opposing captain has the powers to deny the request for a runner.

  6. #81
    International Regular JBH001's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    3,245
    This was my point earlier about umpires foisting the responsibility onto Strauss.

    Although, partly it may also be, that informally fielding captains have begun to give permission in cases where the umpires were uncertain.

    Again, I think Strauss is being hard done by.

  7. #82
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,227
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    Wasn't being entirely serious.

    However, particularly in the middle to latter stages of an ODI, running between the wickets is a hugely important part of batting. If you're not fit enough to run, then IMO you're not fit enough to bat. Either man up and bat and run through the pain, or get your arse off the field.
    Yeah agree with this, by all means retire hurt and if you have to get some treatment in the changerooms and come back out later that's fine. You don't have a right to a runner because you cramp up though.

  8. #83
    Hall of Fame Member Smudge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Deep, deep south
    Posts
    16,656
    Quote Originally Posted by Burgey View Post
    I'm interested in this, as many years ago a fellow played at our club for a team at a reasonable level who had polio as a child, and as such could hardly walk. He batted at 11 and stood at slip (when he fielded). I don't think he was ever refused a runner by another team.

    I realise this is a very different situation to the one involving either Smith or the fella you're talking about, but I wonder whether it comes down to the level you're playing at when deciding these things.

    The other issue was that this particular batsmen was ****ing boring, and a **** of a man to go with it - which made our decision easier.

  9. #84
    International Coach pup11's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    India
    Posts
    12,146
    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    Yeah. Cramping can be ****ing agony. It's unsporting to ask someone to keep running in extreme pain, and comments like "it's just because he's unfit!!" just seem mean-spirited to me. Having a runner puts you (and the guy at the other end) at a big disadvantage regarding running between the wickets anyway.
    No, I'm with Struass on this one, cramping is a conditioning and fitness issue and it has been a consatnt problem with Smith in particular, a lot of times he has played a longish innings he has eventually cramped up, so Strauss was well within his rights to deny him the runner.

    Anyways, I just don't like the idea of having a runner, as a batsman if despite an injury if you are willing to stay out there and bat, then you should also try to run your own runs, and if you are not in the condition of doing that, then just come off the field, it should be just as simple as that.

  10. #85
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,690
    Just a small point to counter the Strauss attack here, remember Edgbaston this year?

    He could've easily refused to let Manou play - yes it would've a harsh call, but there'd have been nothing that anyone could've done about it if he'd said no.

    OK, not strictly speaking the same as a runner here as in that case, Haddin was actually injured, but if events prior to that in the series can be used to attack him, surely this can be used to defend him?

    Unfortunately this furore is beginning to overshadow what actually happened on Sunday (in terms of SA failing yet again when the expectation was on) - and the margin of victory does suggest to me that it was an irrelevant point.
    marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!

    Anyone want to join the Society?

    Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.

  11. #86
    International Coach pup11's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    India
    Posts
    12,146
    Quote Originally Posted by marc71178 View Post
    Just a small point to counter the Strauss attack here, remember Edgbaston this year?

    He could've easily refused to let Manou play - yes it would've a harsh call, but there'd have been nothing that anyone could've done about it if he'd said no.

    OK, not strictly speaking the same as a runner here as in that case, Haddin was actually injured, but if events prior to that in the series can be used to attack him, surely this can be used to defend him?

    Unfortunately this furore is beginning to overshadow what actually happened on Sunday (in terms of SA failing yet again when the expectation was on) - and the margin of victory does suggest to me that it was an irrelevant point.
    I don't think there is any need to count Strauss' good and bad deeds here, the thing is Strauss was well within his rights to deny Smith a runner there and I'm glad he did that, because its high time that this topic was discussed within the ICC, and I hope they scrap the use of runners completely from the game.

  12. #87
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    2,823
    Just for the record, I thought Strauss was extremely sporting when he called Angelo Mathews back the crease, and deserves all the kudos coming his way for upholding the spirit of the game in the match against Sri Lanka....

    However, the opposite has happened here, and Strauss deserves any criticism coming his way. Especially since England batsmen have used runners for batsmen who've suffered from cramp this decade, including Trescothick and Bell, as far as I can remember. There is also a columnist on the BBC who recalls an ODI last year in India when Shah and Prior developed cramps and used Bell as a runner.

    So, this sudden change of attitude by Strauss towards using a runner for cramp is a bit disingenuous, and it will be interesting to see how long he and his team maintain that stance....

  13. #88
    U19 Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    h
    Posts
    543

  14. #89
    International Captain
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    england
    Posts
    5,700
    Being backed by the ICC doesn't add to an individual's credibility.

  15. #90
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,227
    Quote Originally Posted by pup11 View Post
    Anyways, I just don't like the idea of having a runner, as a batsman if despite an injury if you are willing to stay out there and bat, then you should also try to run your own runs, and if you are not in the condition of doing that, then just come off the field, it should be just as simple as that.
    Yeah I agree, Smith does have a choice and he wasn't asked to continue in agony. His other option is to retire hurt. He obviously thought it was important for him to be there at that stage and so he didn't want to do that. If I was him I'd be cursing the cramp for coming when it did, not Strauss.

Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... 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
  •