• 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.

Should Smith have been allowed a runner?

Should Smith have been allowed a runner?


  • Total voters
    70

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!


See how the Ponting in full flight ruthlessly chases down its prey, in this case an unsuspecting nearby umpire...
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Haha look, it's been done to death during the Ashes, so I'm not going down that road again. Not quite sure why it's actually being discussed in this thread :unsure:
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Haha, I just think Ponting is pretty hard done by in general, he seems a pretty decent guy to me. Streetwise's unsuccessful trolling is pretty annoying, but he has a point- if Ponting had taken a runner for cramps, then later refused his opposite number with the words "My personal view is that you shouldn't get a runner for cramps, full stop", he'd be absolutely crucified. Just like the cricketing world is invariably harsher on England's poor ODI performances than they are on anyone else's, Ponting gets a bum deal from fans all over.
 

Johnners

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend


See how the Ponting in full flight ruthlessly chases down its prey, in this case an unsuspecting nearby umpire...
:laugh:

Haha, I just think Ponting is pretty hard done by in general, he seems a pretty decent guy to me. Streetwise's unsuccessful trolling is pretty annoying, but he has a point- if Ponting had taken a runner for cramps, then later refused his opposite number with the words "My personal view is that you shouldn't get a runner for cramps, full stop", he'd be absolutely crucified. Just like the cricketing world is invariably harsher on England's poor ODI performances than they are on anyone else's, Ponting gets a bum deal from fans all over.
Completely AWTA
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
Australia have been intimidating and disrespecting umpires pretty much throughout Ponting's tenure. Remember when he charged towards an umpire who had the gall to turn down his appeal for a catch? All the times Warne double/triple appealed after the umpire said not out. I could go on for quite a while.

Oh and as for that run out the batsman ran into the fielder. Tough titties. There's no comparison at all. Collingwood was not out and it was up to the umpires to make the correct decision. NZ's batsman was *out* and it was up to the captain to decide whether he should get another go after there's a good chance he'd have been run out anyway if he'd bothered to not run into the path of the fieldsman.
And England have been abusing the substitute fielder rule for a good 4-5 years.

I do remember when Ponting moved in the umpires direction and gesticulated for a catch when he thought the umpire was ruling on an LBW yes.

And the NZ batsman tried to avoid the fielders, was taken out, and then Collingwood let him walk. Anyone with any sense of sportsmanship wouldn't have let him walk, something Collingwood himself ended up admitting later.

I also remember that you're an almost fanatical hater of Ricky Ponting. :happy:
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
Lol. Charged. He walked towards the umpire at a pace slightly above what was considered socially acceptable.
:laugh:

Yeah, charged sounds far more impressive though. Might as well say he buzzed the umpire in a light airplane shooting cricket balls from the mounted gun turrets.
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
And England have been abusing the substitute fielder rule for a good 4-5 years.

I do remember when Ponting moved in the umpires direction and gesticulated for a catch when he thought the umpire was ruling on an LBW yes.

And the NZ batsman tried to avoid the fielders, was taken out, and then Collingwood let him walk. Anyone with any sense of sportsmanship wouldn't have let him walk, something Collingwood himself ended up admitting later.

I also remember that you're an almost fanatical hater of Ricky Ponting. :happy:
Fielder takes a direct path towards the ball, batsman moves into that path. It isn't up to the fielder to make way for them. Tough luck batsman.

As for the substitute rule England are hardly alone in abusing it. Same as all teams slow the over rate in certain situations. Teams take advantage of the rules and singling one team out for it is pretty dumb. Most of these teams don't however regularly come up with some pompous ****e about the spirit of the game..
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
I'm with Smith & the saffies here, dont see why Strauss didn't allow the runner, Smith clearly couldn't move freely.
 

zaremba

Cricketer Of The Year
And the NZ batsman tried to avoid the fielders, was taken out, and then Collingwood let him walk. Anyone with any sense of sportsmanship wouldn't have let him walk, something Collingwood himself ended up admitting later.
Not sure you're remembering this quite right, SOC. First, far from "trying to avoid the fielder", the NZ batsman changed direction onto a collision course with the fielder (in fact it's quite possible to draw the conclusion that he did so deliberately). Second, it's the batsman's job to get out of the way anyway. Third, the batsman wouldn't have made his ground if there hadn't been a collision. Fourth, I'm not sure Collingwood admitted quite what you remember him admitting.

Having said all of which, I'd have preferred Collingwood to have withdrawn the appeal.
 

Kyle

School Boy/Girl Captain
Australia have been intimidating and disrespecting umpires pretty much throughout Ponting's tenure. Remember when he charged towards an umpire who had the gall to turn down his appeal for a catch? All the times Warne double/triple appealed after the umpire said not out. I could go on for quite a while.

Oh and as for that run out the batsman ran into the fielder. Tough titties. There's no comparison at all. Collingwood was not out and it was up to the umpires to make the correct decision. NZ's batsman was *out* and it was up to the captain to decide whether he should get another go after there's a good chance he'd have been run out anyway if he'd bothered to not run into the path of the fieldsman.
Haven't Broad and Panesar been up for this in recent times? And I can't think of a recent Australian.

And Collingwood was out, if Vettori hadn't taken the high ground, he was gone.
 

Kyle

School Boy/Girl Captain
Fielder takes a direct path towards the ball, batsman moves into that path. It isn't up to the fielder to make way for them. Tough luck batsman.

As for the substitute rule England are hardly alone in abusing it. Same as all teams slow the over rate in certain situations. Teams take advantage of the rules and singling one team out for it is pretty dumb. Most of these teams don't however regularly come up with some pompous ****e about the spirit of the game..
I suggest you don't watch enough Cricket if you think England aren't abusing the law.
 

Kyle

School Boy/Girl Captain
FFS, he said they aren't ALONE in abusing it, ie. they abuse it along with other countries.
But they are the most prolific. I remember one game where I wasn't sure they were playing cricket, or having a relay race to the dressing room.
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
You know what during the Ashes when we were batting I saw a hell of a lot of Phil Hughes, I'm talking from the 3rd Test onwards
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Most of these teams don't however regularly come up with some pompous ****e about the spirit of the game..
No. But they do come up with some thrilling lines like "My personal view is that you shouldn't get a runner for cramps, full stop", having previously taken a runner for cramps when it suited them. That's much worse, really.
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
Fielder takes a direct path towards the ball, batsman moves into that path. It isn't up to the fielder to make way for them. Tough luck batsman.

As for the substitute rule England are hardly alone in abusing it. Same as all teams slow the over rate in certain situations. Teams take advantage of the rules and singling one team out for it is pretty dumb. Most of these teams don't however regularly come up with some pompous ****e about the spirit of the game..
I saw the replay of this the other day and it didn't look to me like the batsman was trying to get tripped over. He seemed to be doing his best to avoid everyone. I might need glasses though. You'd think if it was a case of tough luck batsman then the Kiwis were wrong to get angry and Collingwood should never have apologised.

I think most observers think it was pretty piss weak.

I don't recall too many teams Australia has played against struggling to spend an hour on the field. Especially somewhat conveniently straight after they've bowled. And to the advantage of someone who has come into the game injured in the first place. Yes the over-rate is slow on occasions but at least teams get fined. This sort of stuff gets ignored.

I think most team captains are a little too polite when it comes to substitutions and the like. And Ponting have every right to tell that fat turd and his mate to get off the field and bring up the clumsy attempts by England to slow things down.
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
FFS, he said they aren't ALONE in abusing it, ie. they abuse it along with other countries.
I can't recall too many that we've played against recently. When the commentators in the last series mentioned Flintoff had probably ducked off for a quick ice bath and some physio after his spell I nearly fell over.
 

Son Of Coco

Hall of Fame Member
Not sure you're remembering this quite right, SOC. First, far from "trying to avoid the fielder", the NZ batsman changed direction onto a collision course with the fielder (in fact it's quite possible to draw the conclusion that he did so deliberately). Second, it's the batsman's job to get out of the way anyway. Third, the batsman wouldn't have made his ground if there hadn't been a collision. Fourth, I'm not sure Collingwood admitted quite what you remember him admitting.

Having said all of which, I'd have preferred Collingwood to have withdrawn the appeal.
I saw the replay a couple of days ago and to me it looked like there was more than one other person around the ball and he was trying to avoid both of them. He was obviously pretty unsuccessful.

GIMH said Collingwood had since said he regretted not calling the batsman back.
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
I saw the replay a couple of days ago and to me it looked like there was more than one other person around the ball and he was trying to avoid both of them. He was obviously pretty unsuccessful.

GIMH said Collingwood had since said he regretted not calling the batsman back.
That's not quite the same as admittind that he had no sense of sportsmanship though
 

Top