A cheat is a cheat

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Get four drinks into Burge and he'll down the rums like water IMO.

 

[Burgey]

This may well happen tbh

 

[Victor Ian]

Maybe, but on the other hand having the umpires inspect the ball after each & every delivery is bound to slow down play somewhat.

It's not so much the inspection, that is the point of it. It is the 'give me the ball and stop ****ing around with it' that is the point. You tell me what is quicker.... Wicket keep gains ball, throws it to umpire - shine pause - hands ball to bowler...or.... Wicket keeper gets ball, passes it to first slip, passes it to second slip, passes it to guy who shines it, passes it to mid wicket, passes it to bowler. each person who touches the ball has to take a brief moment to chat while rubbing the ball on some part of the anatomy. There is not much in it either way, but the umpire method wont slow things down in the slightest, the only option being perhaps a slightly quicker process. Consider also that in Austalia's case the shiner has been Warner. What better method of stopping him being a ****tard than to have him shine the ball over near the umpire rather than near the batsmen where he will have ****** words.

 

[stephen]

With a humidity level of 90%, no doubt.

60% in Brissie, fractionally lower for the next few days.

It's pretty much the perfect temperature right now.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Same with the old Chaminda.

Vaasaline?

 

[Burgey]

Yep

 

[Top_Cat]

Yeah Dubbo not a bad shout, but at least Western Plains Zoo means there's something interesting there, unlike Chennai.

Come to think of it, Darwin has that joint where you can swim with crocodiles, so that makes it a lot better than Chennai too. So that basically leaves Brisbane. I'd tend to rule out Perth tbh, as there are wineries not too far away. it has amazing beaches too, whereas the mental giants who built Brisbane decided to have a sub-tropical capital near one of the world's great coastlines built inland on a fetid, stinking river and had to actually build a man-made beach a hundred years later to make up for it.

Both still miles better than Chennai though. Australia's Chennai may well be Oodnadatta.

Never seen so much truth in a single paragraph.

 

[Daemon]

It's not so much the inspection, that is the point of it. It is the 'give me the ball and stop ****ing around with it' that is the point. You tell me what is quicker.... Wicket keep gains ball, throws it to umpire - shine pause - hands ball to bowler...or.... Wicket keeper gets ball, passes it to first slip, passes it to second slip, passes it to guy who shines it, passes it to mid wicket, passes it to bowler. each person who touches the ball has to take a brief moment to chat while rubbing the ball on some part of the anatomy. There is not much in it either way, but the umpire method wont slow things down in the slightest, the only option being perhaps a slightly quicker process. Consider also that in Austalia's case the shiner has been Warner. What better method of stopping him being a ****tard than to have him shine the ball over near the umpire rather than near the batsmen where he will have ****** words.

I really hope you're kidding

 

[Starfighter]

C'mon OP, show yourself.

 

[NZTailender]

FMD that's a low joint, isn't it? Dated a girl from there when I was in high school. It's like Pompeii for the living - not much goes on after dark.

tbf not much goes on before dark either

 

[Victor Ian]

I really hope you're kidding

I'm not. What part of 'shine the ball in front of Umpire and throw ball to umpire instead of through the fielding team is going to slow anything down? If no part slows things down then this is a very simple to implement, at no cost (unlike extra cameras, etc) solution

Process, from the moment keeper (or fielder at bowlers end) gains ball and it becomes dead.

1) Throw it to umpire. Same amount of time as throwing it to random fielder. Less time than if team insists on multiple throws as is often the case.
2) If someone is going to shine it, he will shine it next to the umpire. No time lost compared to shining it anywhere else, though shiner will have to walk to umpire and back. This will not waste time as he is always an in fielder and should go there as the umpire gets the ball, and walk back as the bowler walks to his mark.
Perhaps the umpire is holding random crap from the bowler, making it hard to catch - give the ump a bag.

Maybe you think the fielding team needs to handle the ball while it is dead as part of the fabric of the game, and that is fair enough. I don't. Otherwise, throw the ball to the umpire. Ball tampering solved! Anyways. That's it. If you think that is dumb, explain why.

 

[Daemon]

Well for starters you have sweaty ump hands.

Teams also need to make full use of the time the ball is dead to shine it instead of running up to the ump, shining it, then tossing it to the bowler before running back to their spot before the bowler is ready every ball.

 

[Victor Ian]

Well for starters you have sweaty ump hands.

So does everyone else??? The ump could just wipe his hand on his trousers just like anyone else.

Teams also need to make full use of the time the ball is dead to shine it

And nothing has changed - shine it in front of the ump for as long as you usually would

instead of running up to the ump, shining it, then tossing it to the bowler before running back to their spot before the bowler is ready every ball.

The only issue is when the player who is going to shine the ball is far away. Anything close and this is not the obstacle you make it out to be. If the player were in slips and knows the usual procedure he would be over at the ump as soon as the ball is dead. No wasted time. The time to walk back to his spot is the same as it takes the bowler to walk to his mark. He is ready as soon as the bowler starts to run in.

I feel this procedure would actually save time. One throw to ump (or shiner who is near ump) and one throw to bowler. Done.

That's two of you who play that think it would add time. I accept I might (probably) be very wrong.

 

[Starfighter]

You sound like you don't have much practical experience here. It sounds good in theory but it wouldn't work in real life.

 

[Victor Ian]

I'm just speaking of my own club experience years ago. They used to spend a hell of a lot of time between balls shining it, throwing it through 5 players to the bowler, etc. I'll be sure to pay attention this summer when it is on tv. Having just watched that other thread Imran v Lillee battle I could see how quickly the ball was passed back to Imran many times. My idea would not have worked there.

 

[Daemon]

You sound like you don't have much practical experience here. It sounds good in theory but it wouldn't work in real life.

Yeah I'm doing a poor job of explaining it but I know it just wouldn't work

 

[harsh.ag]

is a cheat

 

[Victor Ian]

Yeah I'm doing a poor job of explaining it but I know it just wouldn't work

You explained it well enough to make me concede I had poo stained glasses of optimism.

Back to the drawing board. Stay tuned for...."No pockets allowed" followed by ..."no eating on the field"

 

[Napa]

Smith Warner and Bancroft getting released early for cheating is a joke
This is another ploy by Aus Cricket win at all costs and get them back in the team
A lifetime ban would satisfy me

Every team tries to mess with the ball, it is one of the least offensive cheating. You have cricketers being banned for only 5 years when it was proven they have accepted money to bowl no-balls, and you want Smith and Warner to be given life-time bans???

 

[Tom Flint]

Am watching some old highlights from what looks like the late 80s. Aus India at the gabba.
Some bloke called Dave gilbert with 2 of the most blatent bits of cheating in the field. Telling the umpires he saved the balls reaching the boundary when the cameras clearly saw he didn't!
Umpires couldn't use the video as it wasn't available to them. Great footage though