• 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.

*Official* Second Test (Lord's, London) 28 June–2 July

S

SteveNZ

Cricketer Of The Year
Neil Young said:
I genuinely don't get posters bringing up Broad not walking. Most cricketers don't walk, and any line you (one) draw(s) between one nick and another is arbitrary.

And him sledging Carey is noise. I am fairly certain it's not the worst thing he's ever seen on a cricket field.
Click to expand...
I can only answer for me that hypocrisy is my least favourite human trait. When he says it's the worst thing he's ever seen on a cricket field, I know it's overwhelmed by emotion...but a) it's a ridiculous statement how a guy who played 15 years plus of international cricket thinks a dismissal that follows the letter of the law is the worst thing he's seen and b) Broad stood there, as Carey et al did, and watched his dismissal on a big screen. He had the opportunity to walk. He knew he hit it. Yet he waited for the umpire to make a decision and accepted it, as did Carey/Cummins. So why is this awful but he can live with that one? Makes no sense and further blurrs the spirit line. To me, it's hypocrisy. So is Glenn McGrath flapping his wings about the Starc decision but not this.

To me, if you're not OK with a decision going against your side, you shouldn't be OK with one going against the other side.
 
F

Fuller Pilch

Hall of Fame Member
SteveNZ said:
I can only answer for me that hypocrisy is my least favourite human trait. When he says it's the worst thing he's ever seen on a cricket field, I know it's overwhelmed by emotion...but a) it's a ridiculous statement how a guy who played 15 years plus of international cricket thinks a dismissal that follows the letter of the law is the worst thing he's seen and b) Broad stood there, as Carey et al did, and watched his dismissal on a big screen. He had the opportunity to walk. He knew he hit it. Yet he waited for the umpire to make a decision and accepted it, as did Carey/Cummins. So why is this awful but he can live with that one? Makes no sense and further blurrs the spirit line. To me, it's hypocrisy. So is Glenn McGrath flapping his wings about the Starc decision but not this.

To me, if you're not OK with a decision going against your side, you shouldn't be OK with one going against the other side.
Click to expand...
Also the fact that his most famous innings was in a match after which fixers went to jail
 
S

SteveNZ

Cricketer Of The Year
jcas0167 said:
Had to look up the MCC laws. The problem for Bairstow is the fielding side have to have regarded it as dead too and they didn't. Where debate arises whether it's reasonable to consider the ball is in play where a batter has ducked a bouncer, scratched their crease and wandered out to do some gardening.

20.1 Ball is dead

20.1.1 The ball becomes dead when

20.1.1.1 it is finally settled in the hands of the wicket-keeper or of the bowler.
....
20.1.2 The ball shall be considered to be dead when it is clear to the bowler’s end umpire that the fielding side and both batters at the wicket have ceased to regard it as in play.

20.2 Ball finally settled

Whether the ball is finally settled or not is a matter for the umpire alone to decide.
Click to expand...
Wow, thanks mate. That is so vague. Because it had settled in the hands. And based on that wording, the umpires had the right to rule it out. So those people in the Long Room should've been directing their vitriol at the umpires...no they shouldn't have, but that's who ultimately made the decision.

You could make that rule very clear, very quick. The ball is deemed settled and dead when it is in the wicketkeeper's (or bowler's) hands, and the batsmen is seeking no advantage (ie batting out of crease) and is not setting off for a run. That's so easy to adjudicate and involves no spirit vagaries.
 
dontcloseyoureyes

dontcloseyoureyes

BARNES OUT
Neil Young said:
I get this view. But the spirit of the game is what differentiates cricket from other sport. Yeah, I get ultimately it's all about the winning, but cricket played in the right way - for me - is far superior than the bollocks from Carey today. And I'll happily be accused of being a dinosaur for holding this view. I can't abide football for all the underhand nonsense that goes on within the 'laws' of that particular sport. It's ugly.
Click to expand...
Uhhhhh if you think other sports don't have the same dumb arguments about the "spirit of the game" then I can only really conclude that you don't follow many sports.
 
F

Fuller Pilch

Hall of Fame Member
SteveNZ said:
And now England are trying to dictate how the game is played. What right do they have to tell Australia how to hold themselves? McCullum is clawing for the moral high ground and says his guys won't have a beer with Australia.
Click to expand...
Did BMac seriously say that after what he did to Mpofu and Murali??!!
 
S

SteveNZ

Cricketer Of The Year
Fuller Pilch said:
Did BMac seriously say that after what he did to Mpofu and Murali??!!
Click to expand...
www.bbc.com

I wouldn't want to win in that manner - Stokes

England captain Ben Stokes says he would not want to win with such a contentious dismissal as Jonny Bairstow's in the second Ashes Test.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com

Asked if the incident will impact the relations between the teams, McCullum said: "I can't imagine we'll be having a beer with them any time soon.

"We have three Tests to land some blows and try to win the Ashes. That is where our focus will be."

Yep. He'll say he learned from those incidents...but again, he's trying to push his moral stance onto others and that's not his place.
 
S

SteveNZ

Cricketer Of The Year
dontcloseyoureyes said:
Uhhhhh if you think other sports don't have the same dumb arguments about the "spirit of the game" then I can only really conclude that you don't follow many sports.
Click to expand...
I follow many sports, but I can't think of any that have much of a spirit of the game argument or certainly to the extent of cricket. Football with the simulating/diving crap, I get it. What others?
 
Neil Young

Neil Young

State Vice-Captain
SteveNZ said:
Yep. He'll say he learned from those incidents...but again, he's trying to push his moral stance onto others and that's not his place.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and just like Cummins speaking out against Ashwin, I can see a time when Stokes breaches the spirit of the game after saying today very similar to what Cummins said back whenever.
 
S

SteveNZ

Cricketer Of The Year
Fuller Pilch said:
Golf.
Click to expand...
At an amateur level, 100%. The higher up you go, the less that exists. There's no place or relevance for it at the highest level. If you're in a major, and all of your shots are televised/on video, it doesn't exist - unless you're talking about walking on someone's line or some other type of gamesmanship. There doesn't need to be because there's laws and video evidence. Same for cricket. Does spirit of cricket need to exist in the amateur game? Maybe...but not when so much technology is available at Test level.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top