Big Cricket Thread

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
What were the comments? I don’t mean loved by the public, I mean the team and coaching staff etc.

Bancroft alluded to the bowlers knowing about the ball being doctored. The bowlers released a group statement to vehemently deny the supposed allegation. It was alluded to in a pretty soft way but the media grabbed it with both hands.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Bancroft alluded to the bowlers knowing about the ball being doctored. The bowlers released a group statement to vehemently deny the supposed allegation. It was alluded to in a pretty soft way but the media grabbed it with both hands.

Considering that bowlers instruct captains and fielders how they want the ball prepared and they can obviously tell with one quick glance or feel which side is being worked on and which isn't - I find it difficult to believe professional cricketers did not know something was going on.

Maybe not the sandpaper itself, but surely they would have noticed the ball being different than when there was no sandpaper.
 
Considering that bowlers instruct captains and fielders how they want the ball prepared and they can obviously tell with one quick glance or feel which side is being worked on and which isn't - I find it difficult to believe professional cricketers did not know something was going on.

Maybe not the sandpaper itself, but surely they would have noticed the ball being different than when there was no sandpaper.

As a former fast bowler I can say with 100% certainty you can tell anytime a ball has been tampered with. The bowlers not knowing is bullshit.
 
Considering that bowlers instruct captains and fielders how they want the ball prepared and they can obviously tell with one quick glance or feel which side is being worked on and which isn't - I find it difficult to believe professional cricketers did not know something was going on.

Maybe not the sandpaper itself, but surely they would have noticed the ball being different than when there was no sandpaper.

I can't remember the specifics of the time between the break in play and then the camera on Banners and whether play continued for some time thereafter by which stage the ball had been tampered with.

The idea was orchestrated during the lunch or tea break, right? It's unclear whether Cam was saying the bowlers knew from the inception of the plan or whether they would have known once they got hands on the ball.

From there I'm also unsure as to whether the plan was able to be executed or he got caught immediately on his first try. If that was the situation then he would be suggesting the bowlers found out during the change room break, which is far more serious.
 
I can't remember the specifics of the time between the break in play and then the camera on Banners and whether play continued for some time thereafter by which stage the ball had been tampered with.

The idea was orchestrated during the lunch or tea break, right? It's unclear whether Cam was saying the bowlers knew from the inception of the plan or whether they would have known once they got hands on the ball.

From there I'm also unsure as to whether the plan was able to be executed or he got caught immediately on his first try. If that was the situation then he would be suggesting the bowlers found out during the change room break, which is far more serious.

You seem to be assuming it was the first time they'd done it.
 
I can't remember the specifics of the time between the break in play and then the camera on Banners and whether play continued for some time thereafter by which stage the ball had been tampered with.

The idea was orchestrated during the lunch or tea break, right? It's unclear whether Cam was saying the bowlers knew from the inception of the plan or whether they would have known once they got hands on the ball.

From there I'm also unsure as to whether the plan was able to be executed or he got caught immediately on his first try. If that was the situation then he would be suggesting the bowlers found out during the change room break, which is far more serious.
Isn't the implied story that Warner had been tampering with it for ages, we'd gotten reverse swing in the home Ashes that summer which is not what happens in Aus normally, but they suspected SA were onto them that tour which is why Bancroft took over instead.
 
You seem to be assuming it was the first time they'd done it.

Fair.

Isn't the implied story that Warner had been tampering with it for ages, we'd gotten reverse swing in the home Ashes that summer which is not what happens in Aus normally, but they suspected SA were onto them that tour which is why Bancroft took over instead.

I wasn't aware of this.
 
That we don’t really know exactly what happened and who knew what is why the story still lingers like an unflushable turd.

The full explanation has never been provided and the nonselection of Bancroft would indicate he’s the only one still being punished for his involvement
 
'Bailey was also categoric in denying that Bancroft's non-selection, despite being the leading run-scorer in Shield cricket over the last two years, had been for anything other than cricketing reasons, in reference to his infamous interview in England in 2021 following the Sandpaper incident in 2018.

' "I'm glad you asked that because I wanted to touch on it. It's categorically no," Bailey said. "And I've shared this with Cameron on a number of occasions. That has never at any stage been discussed from the panel's perspective. It's purely a cricketing decision. There is not a member of the team that would have an issue with Cam playing. We certainly don't have an issue with it. I think a lot of people tend to forget the fact that Cam's actually played Test cricket since returning from the ban. It was a long time ago. We've all moved well past that. I'd be disappointed if people were looking to that as a reason. All I can do is reiterate to you and to Cam that's not the case. Never has been and never will be." '

George, I don't believe you...
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

'Bailey was also categoric in denying that Bancroft's non-selection, despite being the leading run-scorer in Shield cricket over the last two years, had been for anything other than cricketing reasons, in reference to his infamous interview in England in 2021 following the Sandpaper incident in 2018.

' "I'm glad you asked that because I wanted to touch on it. It's categorically no," Bailey said. "And I've shared this with Cameron on a number of occasions. That has never at any stage been discussed from the panel's perspective. It's purely a cricketing decision. There is not a member of the team that would have an issue with Cam playing. We certainly don't have an issue with it. I think a lot of people tend to forget the fact that Cam's actually played Test cricket since returning from the ban. It was a long time ago. We've all moved well past that. I'd be disappointed if people were looking to that as a reason. All I can do is reiterate to you and to Cam that's not the case. Never has been and never will be." '

George, I don't believe you...

He might have played since the ban, but he hasn't played since those comments.
 
'Bailey was also categoric in denying that Bancroft's non-selection, despite being the leading run-scorer in Shield cricket over the last two years, had been for anything other than cricketing reasons, in reference to his infamous interview in England in 2021 following the Sandpaper incident in 2018.

' "I'm glad you asked that because I wanted to touch on it. It's categorically no," Bailey said. "And I've shared this with Cameron on a number of occasions. That has never at any stage been discussed from the panel's perspective. It's purely a cricketing decision. There is not a member of the team that would have an issue with Cam playing. We certainly don't have an issue with it. I think a lot of people tend to forget the fact that Cam's actually played Test cricket since returning from the ban. It was a long time ago. We've all moved well past that. I'd be disappointed if people were looking to that as a reason. All I can do is reiterate to you and to Cam that's not the case. Never has been and never will be." '

George, I don't believe you...

Bancroft played the first two tests in the 2019 ashes series in England when Paine was captain and Langer was coach. Hasn’t played since Harris replaced him in that series after the second test

Scores by openers for Australia in that series

Warner - 2,8,3,5,61,0,0,0,5,11
(95@9.50)
Bancroft - 8,7,13,16
(44@11.00)
Harris - 8,19,13,6,3,9
(58@9.66)
 
That we don’t really know exactly what happened and who knew what is why the story still lingers like an unflushable turd.

The full explanation has never been provided and the nonselection of Bancroft would indicate he’s the only one still being punished for his involvement

Bancroft will be forever haunted by this as a sliding 'but for' doors moment.

And I can emphasize with his pain after choosing bros over hos at the UWA tavern when a certain Miss West Coast suggested we leave and go back to my room at a uni college.

Probably not in the same ballpark, so luckily he will eventually be able to move on from his hard luck story.
 
Bancroft played the first two tests in the 2019 ashes series in England when Paine was captain and Langer was coach. Hasn’t played since Harris replaced him in that series after the second test

Scores by openers for Australia in that series

Warner - 2,8,3,5,61,0,0,0,5,11
(95@9.50)
Bancroft - 8,7,13,16
(44@11.00)
Harris - 8,19,13,6,3,9
(58@9.66)
Ok, but since that time Renshaw has scores of 5*, 0, 2 and 2, for an average of 3.00.
 
Also loved Bailey bringing up Renshaw playing in India, like that wasn't a WTF selection and he didn't fail miserably (in fairness to Matt, he was batted out of position - by the same selection panel and captain).

You thought he was a better choice than Head in fact, George, despite Head's form. How did that pan out?
 
c09677fad721b4a41eb9b96b23b2cabe.jpg

Always makes me laugh how bad the CA XI side is to face touring teams during the BBL. A few of these guys have barely played any first class matches, let alone internationals.
 
Bancroft alluded to the bowlers knowing about the ball being doctored. The bowlers released a group statement to vehemently deny the supposed allegation. It was alluded to in a pretty soft way but the media grabbed it with both hands.
Bowlers 100% had to know. Anyone who's played at a decent level knows this. Bancroft is the most convenient fall guy. Simple as that.

On SM-G970F using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Liam Haskett looks to be the pick of the bowlers, another WA pace bowler to watch from the never ending production line.

I'm surprised Brad Hope didn't end up with a BBL contract, he's a 4th/5th bowling option who bats at 7. Perfect spot filler that these teams need to resort to.
 
Umpires also expected that ball not long afterwards and found no sign of tampering too

this gets forgotten a lot in the 'they were always doing it, the bowlers had to know' arguments

I personally think, that Warner with his taped up hands had been ball tampering for ages and the level of wear and tear on the ball from this level of ball tampering was basically accepted as normal.

I can see a universe where Warner has a brilliant idea during the lunch break, recruits Bancroft and casually mentions having something up his sleeve to Smith, while not mentioning it to anyone else. The only thing making this plausible for me is the fact the ball was not doctored enough to warrant replacement after being caught and they were so bad at hiding it.

So yeah, I can see the bowling unit being aware and party to the usual Warner bandaid hands ball tampering but not what happened in Capetown.

Pretty unlikely though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top