Gilchrist, walking, appealing and sportsmanship

[netmatrix]

OK, after watching Gilchrist's appeals behind the stumps over the years, this has been bugging me for a while. But I decided to give Gilchrist the benefit of the doubt and believed that Gilchrist was an all round good sportsman and bloke because everyone said so. Until yesterday.

Everyone loves to talk it up about how Gilchrist is such a great sportsman because he is a "walker". He's just living off that one incident in 2003. I reckon nearly everyone has walked once in their career. Even Yuvraj did yesterday.

Let's face it, Lara started walking much earlier than Gilchrist ever did, but you don't see everyone bring that up every time this debate comes up do you?

And yesterday, two blatant cases where Gilchrist demonstrated that he is no different to the non-walkers.

First the Dravid appeal. Besides Dravid, Gilchrist would have had the second best view in the ground about whether that hit the bat or not. I need not say no more as I'm sure most of you have seen the incident.

Next, the appeal for Dhoni, that was referred to the thrid umpire. Replays showed that it clearly bounced before Gilchrist. There was even a puff of dust from the bounce. And here's what Cricinfo had to say about the incident:

55.2 Hogg to Dhoni, no run, loud appeal for a catch off the boot, Bucknor walks across to Benson and asks for the third umpire, Dhoni came on to the front foot and tried to drive, he got an inside edge into the ground near the heel of the front boot, it then bounced towards Gilchrist who appealed for the catch

Some of you guys are going to say that walking is not the same as appealing. You're right, but isn't the central principle of walking, sportsmanship?

They say that walkers who walk when it suits them are worse than non-walkers. I agree and I think the same thing can be applied to sportsmanship.

They say that you see the true side of sportsman when the pressure is on. Yesterday Australia was pushing desperately for a victory. I think we saw the true side of Gilchrist yesterday.

 

[kolchak]

OMFG, it's like this is the first test that a cricketer appealed for a wicket that may not have been there....FFS the indians are the best at doing that. A few dodgy decisions both ways, it's not like the Aussies have never lost a series due to bad umpiring. As for playing the indians out of the game, go back to the last test match at the SCG between these two teams, it was the most boring and non result minded display from the Indians I've ever seen, atleast the Aussies tried to make a go of it and got reasonably close to the target. India is fast becoming like England.

 

[skipper kelly]

OMFG, it's like this is the first test that a cricketer appealed for a wicket that may not have been there....FFS the indians are the best at doing that. A few dodgy decisions both ways, it's not like the Aussies have never lost a series due to bad umpiring. As for playing the indians out of the game, go back to the last test match at the SCG between these two teams, it was the most boring and non result minded display from the Indians I've ever seen, atleast the Aussies tried to make a go of it and got reasonably close to the target. India is fast becoming like England.

Mate its just another alias troll. Best of ignoring and they may go away.

 

[Crazy lad]

I dont know what is better, Australia winning or watching the losers go balistic.

 

[JKCeagle]

OMFG, it's like this is the first test that a cricketer appealed for a wicket that may not have been there....FFS the indians are the best at doing that. A few dodgy decisions both ways, it's not like the Aussies have never lost a series due to bad umpiring. As for playing the indians out of the game, go back to the last test match at the SCG between these two teams, it was the most boring and non result minded display from the Indians I've ever seen, atleast the Aussies tried to make a go of it and got reasonably close to the target. India is fast becoming like England.

Really? I can't remember any other such vital, series-clinching match being railroaded by such poor umpiring before. We were robbed of what should have been a real spectacle by the umpires, no doubt about it.

 

[scottydeewah]

I didnt see the incidents but:

He has walked more than once back in 2003 and has dont it a couple of times when even the replays on TV were not conclusive, once (I can remember) he did it when he wasnt even out and he has done it as some important times in matches.
It is a lot different knowing when you hit the ball than knowing when someone else hit it.
It can be very tough knowing when you have taken a bunt ball when fielding close in behind the stumps. If the ball comes at the right angle (i.e. not hard back up at you) you dont actually SEE it right before it goes into your hand.

I havent see the incidents but I have watched Gilly for many years and he has never done anything I have question on the cricket pitch. So you should think long and hard about what you are excusing him of doing

 

[kolchak]

Really? I can't remember any other such vital, series-clinching match being railroaded by such poor umpiring before. We were robbed of what should have been a real spectacle by the umpires, no doubt about it.

I'm not a winger so I won't go into it much, but the 2005 Ashes and the first series Australia played in India for like 30 years were very dodgy, but that's what happens when you are under the pump, you get a bad decision and it breaks the team, that's cricket, get over it mate.

 

[scottydeewah]

Really? I can't remember any other such vital, series-clinching match being railroaded by such poor umpiring before. We were robbed of what should have been a real spectacle by the umpires, no doubt about it.

You wouldnt have won the game. It would have been a drawer.

Oh and Ashes 2005, watch it. Australia had a number of completely wrong decision go against them and that series was a lot closer than this. The reason you cant remember is they didnt complain about it.

Anyone who doesnt think that Harberjan (sp.) is guilty hasnt watched him play. He is a petulant, rude, mouthy little ****. When you watch him play a bit it is VERY hard to believe that he is not only not guilty, but didnt do it on purpose to get a rise.

 

[netmatrix]

OMFG, it's like this is the first test that a cricketer appealed for a wicket that may not have been there....

No, but how many of them are painted as the ultimate pinnacle of sportsmanship that people like to paint Gilchrist as?

FFS the indians are the best at doing that. A few dodgy decisions both ways, it's not like the Aussies have never lost a series due to bad umpiring. As for playing the indians out of the game, go back to the last test match at the SCG between these two teams, it was the most boring and non result minded display from the Indians I've ever seen, atleast the Aussies tried to make a go of it and got reasonably close to the target. India is fast becoming like England.

I dont know what is better, Australia winning or watching the losers go balistic.

I'm not a winger so I won't go into it much, but the 2005 Ashes and the first series Australia played in India for like 30 years were very dodgy, but that's what happens when you are under the pump, you get a bad decision and it breaks the team, that's cricket, get over it mate.

You wouldnt have won the game. It would have been a drawer.

Oh and Ashes 2005, watch it. Australia had a number of completely wrong decision go against them and that series was a lot closer than this. The reason you cant remember is they didnt complain about it.

Anyone who doesnt think that Harberjan (sp.) is guilty hasnt watched him play. He is a petulant, rude, mouthy little ****. When you watch him play a bit it is VERY hard to believe that he is not only not guilty, but didnt do it on purpose to get a rise.

Sorry, this isn't about the result of the match or Harbhajan. I think there's enough posts about those subject elsewhere on this forum.

Please don't derail this thread.

 

[rocker_oz33]

l think the aussie's try to win a match at any cost after been the top side for a while now,at times they try to bulling the umps warne was good at it lets hope the next test is better

 

[kolchak]

No, but how many of them are painted as the ultimate pinnacle of sportsmanship that people like to paint Gilchrist as?









Sorry, this isn't about the result of the match or Harbhajan. I think there's enough posts about those subject elsewhere on this forum.

Please don't derail this thread.

It's got everything to do with it, that is why you are winging about Gilchrist.

 

[Cousin Jed]

No, but how many of them are painted as the ultimate pinnacle of sportsmanship that people like to paint Gilchrist as?

Which people? And how should that affect Gilchrist and when he appeals?

Walking as you know you knicked it, and appealing because the batsmen may have hit it into his shoe are two entirely different things.

 

[netmatrix]

It's got everything to do with it, that is why you are winging about Gilchrist.

Sorry mate. In all seriousness, I'm not. As I said, I've been watching this for a while (well, ever since he walked in 2003 because at the time I thought it was an admirable things to do). However, a few of his antics have just been eating away since then. And yesterday we saw two blatant examples and hence the thread.

 

[netmatrix]

I havent see the incidents but I have watched Gilly for many years and he has never done anything I have question on the cricket pitch. So you should think long and hard about what you are excusing him of doing

Have a look at this replay:
[youtube]z125uLHDlUU[/youtube]
(at Time: 2:50)

Don't have to think too long and hard about that one.

 

[Willow_2000]

He's just living off that one incident in 2003. I reckon nearly everyone has walked once in their career. Even Yuvraj did yesterday.

Gilly has walked more then 1 time.

 

[netmatrix]

Which people? And how should that affect Gilchrist and when he appeals?

There are countless articles on the internet and posts on this forum that laude Gilchrist for his "sportsmanship"

Walking as you know you knicked it, and appealing because the batsmen may have hit it into his shoe are two entirely different things.

as I said, doesn't it all come down to sportsmanship in the end? especially in the case of appealing when there's clear daylight between ball and bat/glove?

 

[netmatrix]

Gilly has walked more then 1 time.

Selective walkers are worse than non-walkers. Pretty easy to walk when your team is dominating. It's when the pressure is on that you see the true colours

 

[Willow_2000]

Selective walkers are worse than non-walkers. Pretty easy to walk when your team is dominating. It's when the pressure is on that you see the true colours

Are you Indian by any chance or support the Indian cricket team? You seem to have a very UNAUSTRALIAN view on our cricket team.

 

[Cousin Jed]

There are countless articles on the internet and posts on this forum that laude Gilchrist for his "sportsmanship"



as I said, doesn't it all come down to sportsmanship in the end? especially in the case of appealing when there's clear daylight between ball and bat/glove?

But there is a noise. Any keeper will appeal if the ball lands in his glove and there is a noise.

Whether he is a walker or not that doesn't make him bad sport.

 

[giantroo]

l think the aussie's try to win a match at any cost after been the top side for a while now,at times they try to bulling the umps warne was good at it lets hope the next test is better

It's the aussie culture. We fight hard for our wins. It's just in our blood.

I dont know what is better, Australia winning or watching the losers go balistic.

Definately the 2nd one.

Really? I can't remember any other such vital, series-clinching match being railroaded by such poor umpiring before. We were robbed of what should have been a real spectacle by the umpires, no doubt about it.

I'm sure you will do a better job, ********!

 

[JKCeagle]

I'm not a winger so I won't go into it much, but the 2005 Ashes and the first series Australia played in India for like 30 years were very dodgy, but that's what happens when you are under the pump, you get a bad decision and it breaks the team, that's cricket, get over it mate.

You wouldnt have won the game. It would have been a drawer.

Oh and Ashes 2005, watch it. Australia had a number of completely wrong decision go against them and that series was a lot closer than this. The reason you cant remember is they didnt complain about it.

Anyone who doesnt think that Harberjan (sp.) is guilty hasnt watched him play. He is a petulant, rude, mouthy little ****. When you watch him play a bit it is VERY hard to believe that he is not only not guilty, but didnt do it on purpose to get a rise.

When I said "we" I meant us, the spectators, were robbed of a greater contest...I didn't mean that India was robbed of the win.

Was that not obvious?

 

[giantroo]

Are you Indian by any chance or support the Indian cricket team? You seem to have a very UNAUSTRALIAN view on our cricket team.

Spot on. Jealous that we beat em.

 

[JuveRule]

As a keeper i can sympathise with Gilchrist. Firstly, it's all too easy to say that Gilchrist would've seen the puff of dirt from the Dhoni incident. Viewers have the pleasure of seeing the ball in slow-mo thousands of times and from various angles. From Gilly's angle, keeping in mind he only saw it once and at full speed, he may have been impaired by any or all of the following things: Dhoni's bat, Dhoni's right leg, the grill on his own helmet. Don't come and tell me he would've seen the puff easily, that's just garbage.

As for the Dravid dismissal, again keeping in mind he only saw it once and at full speed, Dravid's bat (at the time the ball passed it and his pad) was directly behind his pad, before he pulled it further behind his leg. From Gilly's angle, there's a very good chance that it would've appeared as if the ball struck the bat as opposed to the pad.

Personally, i've been in those pressure-cooker situations before (albeit not with a quarter of the repercussions as yesterday) and everyone tends to appeal for anything and everything, regardless of their own nature. That's just the way cricket is at those times and frankly, on such a big stage as yesterday, if you're not playing with that killer instinct then you shouldn't be out there. Any team would've acted the same if they were in Australia's shoes, there's no doubt to that.

 

[crownie]

OK, after watching Gilchrist's appeals behind the stumps over the years, this has been bugging me for a while. But I decided to give Gilchrist the benefit of the doubt and believed that Gilchrist was an all round good sportsman and bloke because everyone said so. Until yesterday.

Everyone loves to talk it up about how Gilchrist is such a great sportsman because he is a "walker". He's just living off that one incident in 2003. I reckon nearly everyone has walked once in their career. Even Yuvraj did yesterday.

Let's face it, Lara started walking much earlier than Gilchrist ever did, but you don't see everyone bring that up every time this debate comes up do you?

And yesterday, two blatant cases where Gilchrist demonstrated that he is no different to the non-walkers.

First the Dravid appeal. Besides Dravid, Gilchrist would have had the second best view in the ground about whether that hit the bat or not. I need not say no more as I'm sure most of you have seen the incident.

Next, the appeal for Dhoni, that was referred to the thrid umpire. Replays showed that it clearly bounced before Gilchrist. There was even a puff of dust from the bounce. And here's what Cricinfo had to say about the incident:


Some of you guys are going to say that walking is not the same as appealing. You're right, but isn't the central principle of walking, sportsmanship?

They say that walkers who walk when it suits them are worse than non-walkers. I agree and I think the same thing can be applied to sportsmanship.

They say that you see the true side of sportsman when the pressure is on. Yesterday Australia was pushing desperately for a victory. I think we saw the true side of Gilchrist yesterday.

you do know Gilchrist doesnt get to see that in slow mo when it happens?

 

[JKCeagle]

I'm sure you will do a better job, ********!

Calm down...all I was saying is that the result would've been more satisfying were it not for all the fallout regarding the obviously substandard umpiring, I wasn't suggesting tha the outcome was wrong because of the umpiring.

Or is it that because we won, any criticism of the match is obviously un-Australian?