• 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.

Blood rules

shaka

International Regular
I guess the batsman has the choice of whether to go off or stay on is basically all I can think of.
 

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
Monty said:
is there a blood rule in cricket like in most other sports
No - the reason there is a blood rule is to ensure that HIV strains can't be spread. Therefore it is usually restrained to contact sports - of which cricket is not one. It would be expected though that the batsman would get the blood cleaned up, just for his own health and risk of infection.
 

cpr

International Coach
The blood rule is the same as the hit in the groin rule.... try and get fixed up whilst everyone is laughing at you.... Puts all other sports to a wussy shame :)
 

cbuts

International Debutant
vic_orthdox said:
No - the reason there is a blood rule is to ensure that HIV strains can't be spread. Therefore it is usually restrained to contact sports - of which cricket is not one. It would be expected though that the batsman would get the blood cleaned up, just for his own health and risk of infection.
in many contact sports it was brought in even before they knwe of the risk of infections from blood
 

Somerset

Cricketer Of The Year
cbuts said:
in many contact sports it was brought in even before they knwe of the risk of infections from blood
To be fair though, even if blood was known to have infections or not, would you like to tackle a rugby or football player with areas of blood on them?

Out of interest, does anyone know what's happened to Ponting, whether the scar from his helmet that caused the initial blood caused any more problems?
 

Somerset

Cricketer Of The Year
In fact I have just heard on Radiosport that he's had eight stiches in his cheek but is fine to take the field this morning - all I can say is thank godness helmets were invented.
 

King_Ponting

International Regular
Somerset said:
In fact I have just heard on Radiosport that he's had eight stiches in his cheek but is fine to take the field this morning - all I can say is thank godness helmets were invented.
Yep he would have suffered the same fate as dean jones otherwise
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Somerset said:
In fact I have just heard on Radiosport that he's had eight stiches in his cheek but is fine to take the field this morning - all I can say is thank godness helmets were invented.
Amazing thing, of course, is that Ponting took an equal blow from an even faster bowler in Sami in that series played in unfit conditions where he couldn't wear his helmet because it was too hot.
And all he got was a gashed jaw.
 

King_Ponting

International Regular
Richard said:
Amazing thing, of course, is that Ponting took an equal blow from an even faster bowler in Sami in that series played in unfit conditions where he couldn't wear his helmet because it was too hot.
And all he got was a gashed jaw.
Just shows the difference between a bowler who skids the ball through, sami, and a bowler who hits the deck hard, harmison
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Well... not really.
Only way we'd know was if Ponting wasn't wearing a helmet when hit by Harmison.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
It had more to do with Alan Border's idiotic impetuousness and failure to realise that the life of one of his players is far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far more important than one piddling Test-match.
 

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
Richard said:
It had more to do with Alan Border's idiotic impetuousness and failure to realise that the life of one of his players is far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far more important than one piddling Test-match.
Are you indicating that Jones' career was terminated because of his innings in Madras? :huh:

Although it might give him an excuse for referring to it once every 10 minutes.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
No, I don't think it was... was it?
Still played 49 Tests after it.
Just that Jones' most famous innings was only played because Allan Border had grown tired of the idea that cricketers were human and were entitled to be in an unfit state to play.
 

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
Richard said:
No, I don't think it was... was it?
Still played 49 Tests after it.
No, not at all. I thought you were inferring that for some reason that innings did have some sort of effect on his career.

The only reason that Jones was dropped from the side - somewhat prematurely in some (read: Victorians) eyes - was Dean Jones and his attitude/ego himself. Notoriously selfish and hard to get along with, and worth noting how poorly Victoria went once he started playing for them for whole seasons after being dropped from both forms.
 

Top