Forum

Login        Register

It is currently 15:50 on Wednesday 22 October 2014



Board Index » Archive » Summer 2013 (inc. Home Ashes Series + Ireland away)


Post new topic Reply to topic Page 1 of 2 [ 13 posts ] Go to page 1, 2 Next
Author Message
Maidenover
Post subject: Clearly out, but doesn't walk ...
PostPosted: 19:18 on 12th Jul 2013

Joined: 09:13 on 23rd Apr 2008
Posts: 2913
... but this time it's not an Ausie ...
Top
Reply with quote
stonesfan
Post subject: Re: Clearly out, but doesn't walk ...
PostPosted: 21:39 on 12th Jul 2013

Joined: 23:40 on 9th Feb 2013
Posts: 83
As Boycott said "Australians NEVER walk, Broad has every right to stand his ground".

Truly appalling umpiring though. But, as has been pointed out, these decisions even themselves out over a series. I do not believe that there are any cheating umpires in this day and age, but there's certainly a few who are incompetent!
Top
Reply with quote
samcrewe
Post subject: Re: Clearly out, but doesn't walk ...
PostPosted: 01:12 on 13th Jul 2013

Joined: 20:35 on 23rd Apr 2008
Posts: 657
stonesfan Wrote:
As Boycott said "Australians NEVER walk, Broad has every right to stand his ground".

Truly appalling umpiring though. But, as has been pointed out, these decisions even themselves out over a series. I do not believe that there are any cheating umpires in this day and age, but there's certainly a few who are incompetent!


Agreed. This levels up the Agar decision in my opinion, now it is up to Broad to be good enough to make them pay like Agar did with us.

The Root one was Cook's fault, so you can't blame the umpires for that one, but we're still owed for Trott's shocker ;)

Hussey made an entire career out of not walking and getting lucky.

I remember at the Gabba in 10'. Strauss used his last review on a blatant out on Clarke. All the commentators even said it was clearly out, yet hotspot showed nothing and so was given not out. A few balls later Hussey is smashed on the pads plum in front by Anderson and given not out, Strauss had no more reviews left and Hussey went on to make a big century!
Top
Reply with quote
addtamx
Post subject: Re: Clearly out, but doesn't walk ...
PostPosted: 04:03 on 13th Jul 2013

Joined: 21:02 on 9th May 2008
Posts: 955
Location: Australia
Batsmen shouldn't walk, there is no place for it in this game.......when you have 21 other players in a game that won't, why on earth should you??

It does everyone a disservice, let the umpires do their job and if they f#$k it up like this then such is life.....you cop it on the chin and move on.

I would have been fuming if Broad had of trotted off on his own free will. He did the right thing.
Top
Reply with quote
Airliebird9
Post subject: Re: Clearly out, but doesn't walk ...
PostPosted: 06:22 on 13th Jul 2013

Joined: 02:04 on 24th Apr 2008
Posts: 970
Location: East Yorkshire
Tis really a moot point. I also find Michael Holdings comments with regard to the Dinesh Ramdin's 'fake' catch in the champions trophy being comparible interesting. He was banned for 2 matches for not playing within the spirit of the game. Incidentally the match referee who dished out the 2 match man........ Chris Broad!! :o But if Ramdin is basically cheating then isn't Stuart Broad??

I however, do agree that the umpire is there to do a job and nobody is obliged to walk and more often than not dont walk. Tough one for me.......
Top
Reply with quote
addtamx
Post subject: Re: Clearly out, but doesn't walk ...
PostPosted: 07:19 on 13th Jul 2013

Joined: 21:02 on 9th May 2008
Posts: 955
Location: Australia
Airliebird9 Wrote:
Tis really a moot point. I also find Michael Holdings comments with regard to the Dinesh Ramdin's 'fake' catch in the champions trophy being comparible interesting. He was banned for 2 matches for not playing within the spirit of the game. Incidentally the match referee who dished out the 2 match man........ Chris Broad!! :o But if Ramdin is basically cheating then isn't Stuart Broad??

I however, do agree that the umpire is there to do a job and nobody is obliged to walk and more often than not dont walk. Tough one for me.......


I think there is a big difference between claiming a grassed catch and standing your ground if you've nicked one (or smashed the cover off it in Broads case)

The former is a deliberate attempt to deceive the umpire, the other is simply being non committal and telling the Ump to make his own mind up.
Top
Reply with quote
blueandy1mac
Post subject: Re: Clearly out, but doesn't walk ...
PostPosted: 12:38 on 13th Jul 2013

Joined: 12:30 on 14th Jul 2008
Posts: 2150
Location: Preston UK
Basically protocol, our Australian friends were largely responsible for introducing the concept of 'not walking', now is the hour of their discontent. As mentioned previously, the adoption of 'wait and see' with regard to whether a player is out or not is now widely, if unfortunately accepted. Claiming a decision when one palpably KNOWS it is not so is cheating. The saddest part is that the game, as with virtually all other 'games' is rife with cheating.
If we do not heed the message that this incident broadcasts, then we are headed down a one way track that football has trodden so easily and contemptibly. We all laughed at the Aussie discomfort yesterday, would we laugh as easily when the tables were turned.
What would have been the reacton at your local club if a visiting batsman had got a similar 'result'? Not sure it would have been very nice at ours.
Funny yes, disturbing certainly.
Top
Reply with quote
the.fat.controller
Post subject: Re: Clearly out, but doesn't walk ...
PostPosted: 14:15 on 13th Jul 2013

Joined: 04:09 on 27th Nov 2010
Posts: 171
I essentially concur with the majority of sentiments expressed here.

To stand one's ground after edging a catch is clearly dishonest and in an ideal world, would never be done or condoned. However, such practice is now so widespread as to be almost universally accepted and within such a culture, unilaterally to take a moral stand would not only place one at a huge disadvantage but would make no significant contribution towards altering the accepted culture and would be viewed simply as tilting at windmills.

Rightly or wrongly, a prevailing culture has been created, in which batsmen do not walk. It cannot be ignored that Australian players of previous generations must bear a significant proportion of the responsibility for creating such a culture and now have no justification to feel aggrieved when this culture is adopted against them.

In an ideal world, such a culture should not exist, but the sad fact is that it does. To try to change such an ingrained culture with grand gestures would be not only be costly, but futile.
Top
Reply with quote
bladesman 2
Post subject: Re: Clearly out, but doesn't walk ...
PostPosted: 21:47 on 13th Jul 2013

Joined: 16:25 on 28th May 2013
Posts: 32
blueandy1mac Wrote:
Basically protocol, our Australian friends were largely responsible for introducing the concept of 'not walking', now is the hour of their discontent. As mentioned previously, the adoption of 'wait and see' with regard to whether a player is out or not is now widely, if unfortunately accepted. Claiming a decision when one palpably KNOWS it is not so is cheating. The saddest part is that the game, as with virtually all other 'games' is rife with cheating.
If we do not heed the message that this incident broadcasts, then we are headed down a one way track that football has trodden so easily and contemptibly. We all laughed at the Aussie discomfort yesterday, would we laugh as easily when the tables were turned.
What would have been the reacton at your local club if a visiting batsman had got a similar 'result'? Not sure it would have been very nice at ours.
Funny yes, disturbing certainly.

Where's that like button? I feel really uncomfortable that we are no longer gentlemen and do the right thing, but that's fine if we were ALL gentlemen, regrettably, Stuart you did what you had too. :(
Top
Reply with quote
Airliebird9
Post subject: Re: Clearly out, but doesn't walk ...
PostPosted: 01:19 on 14th Jul 2013

Joined: 02:04 on 24th Apr 2008
Posts: 970
Location: East Yorkshire
addtamx Wrote:
Airliebird9 Wrote:
Tis really a moot point. I also find Michael Holdings comments with regard to the Dinesh Ramdin's 'fake' catch in the champions trophy being comparible interesting. He was banned for 2 matches for not playing within the spirit of the game. Incidentally the match referee who dished out the 2 match man........ Chris Broad!! :o But if Ramdin is basically cheating then isn't Stuart Broad??

I however, do agree that the umpire is there to do a job and nobody is obliged to walk and more often than not dont walk. Tough one for me.......


I think there is a big difference between claiming a grassed catch and standing your ground if you've nicked one (or smashed the cover off it in Broads case)

The former is a deliberate attempt to deceive the umpire, the other is simply being non committal and telling the Ump to make his own mind up.



Stuart Broad will almost certainly know he has hit that ball, similarly Dinesh Ramdin knew he did not take a clean catch. I personally do not see a difference! Whilst we all crave consistency I see none here when one gets punished and the other doesn't, especially if the charge is 'not in the spirit of the game'.
Top
Reply with quote
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 1 of 2 [ 13 posts ] Go to page 1, 2 Next