Opinion NMFC Board Cricket ThreadII - Windies, Big Bash, Pakistan.

[kaboom kid]

I get that's not the actual rule but you get that's not how the game is generally played right? Technically it is out but you and I know that is not how the game is normally played.

The overreaction from the English is delicious but hand on heart you can't honestly say you wouldn't be upset if the position was reversed.

I'll take the wicket but any impartial cricket fan would say not out. If the same thing happened Ireland vs Bangladesh what would your heat tell you? Assuming you love cricket

But that's not the case is it? Tons of impartial cricket fans are supporting Carey not Bairstow. Eg. Ashwin and many of his compatriots. Also, the majority of the English cricket commentators.

 

[Samsquanch]

And completely irrelevant in this case as he checks he is behind the crease before walking.

Marking his crease is the irrelevant thing here. It's a red herring as there is no rule than says you can't be out if you make a scratch on the ground. The point is, Bairstow arrogantly left his crease without being aware that Carey had kept the ball in play. Bairstow could have looked back when he was marking his territory and if he did, he'd have seen the ball en-route towards the stumps, not gone walkies and thus would have not been at risk of being dismissed.

He might have even had an opportunity to hang a sledge on Carey in the fine tradition of Ashes test players, maybe to suggest that he F* off and that he's a F*'n P*. That's OK in the spirit of the game so I understand. Carey would have had to suck it up and move on.

 

[Samsquanch]

I get that's not the actual rule but you get that's not how the game is generally played right? Technically it is out but you and I know that is not how the game is normally played.

The overreaction from the English is delicious but hand on heart you can't honestly say you wouldn't be upset if the position was reversed.

I'll take the wicket but any impartial cricket fan would say not out. If the same thing happened Ireland vs Bangladesh what would your heat tell you? Assuming you love cricket

It is exactly how cricket is played.

If an Aussie goes out like that it's 100% on him for being a fool. Same for any batter in any comp.

A social game with kids - one chance maybe. Bairstow is not a kid. He is a whiny sook though.

 

[Sillygit]

I get that's not the actual rule but you get that's not how the game is generally played right? Technically it is out but you and I know that is not how the game is normally played.

The overreaction from the English is delicious but hand on heart you can't honestly say you wouldn't be upset if the position was reversed.

I'll take the wicket but any impartial cricket fan would say not out. If the same thing happened Ireland vs Bangladesh what would your heat tell you? Assuming you love cricket

you can have a look and find many many many impartial people saying it's out too, not really hard to find either, it's kinda in the news at the moment.

Also not hard to find because there are just two options. Out or not out. Everything else you put on it is just personality.

Hand on heart i would be ****ing livid with any batsman that played at internation level for australia that didn't know to stay in their crease.

 

[kaboom kid]

All this whining about the spirit of the game is just a convenient sideshow for the English Team and just diverts tabloid attention from their own underperformance and the recent report on the inequality that permeates the English game. However that will be temporary IMO. It won't be long before the blowtorch is applied with earnest. They eat their own like few other media.

 

[Harvey Manfrenjensenden]

Exactly. There's no law that states if you scratch the ground with your foot that means the ball is dead or it's over. The umpire calls over when they are satisfied the ball is dead.

Plenty of players have walked before the umpire officially calling it dead as it is assumed. The third umpire should have been easily satisfied the ball was dead after watching the replay.

But that's not the case is it? Tons of impartial cricket fans are supporting Carey not Bairstow. Eg. Ashwin and many of his compatriots. Also, the majority of the English cricket commentators.

Can't say I've listened much of the media but let me make it clear I don't support Bairstow and Carey and the Aussies were well within their rights to make that play and stand by the umpire's decision. Unfortunately the umpire was wrong in this case

 

[Harvey Manfrenjensenden]

Hand on heart i would be ******* livid with any batsman that played at internation level for australia that didn't know to stay in their crease.

 

[kaboom kid]

Plenty of players have walked before the umpire officially calling it dead as it is assumed. The third umpire should have been easily satisfied the ball was dead after watching the replay.

Can't say I've listened much of the media but let me make it clear I don't support Bairstow and Carey and the Aussies were well within their rights to make that play and stand by the umpire's decision. Unfortunately the umpire was wrong in this case

The umpire clearly doesn't agree with you regarding the ball being dead as they gave Bairstow out. Respecting the umpires decision is an important part of the 'Spirit of the Game'

 

[krakouers]

you can have a look and find many many many impartial people saying it's out too, not really hard to find either, it's kinda in the news at the moment.

Also not hard to find because there are just two options. Out or not out. Everything else you put on it is just personality.

Hand on heart i would be ******* livid with any batsman that played at internation level for australia that didn't know to stay in their crease.

I must confess, more than a few times I’ve muttered under my breath “stop f-ing moving forward Smith”

 

[DarwinRoo]

The ginger campaigner is still out ya soap dodging sook.

 

[big_e]

And completely irrelevant in this case as he checks he is behind the crease before walking.

Should have checked where the ball was instead.

 

[Samsquanch]

there are just two options. Out or WRONG.

FIFY

Hand on heart i would be ******* livid with any batsman that played at internation level for australia that didn't know to stay in their crease.

Totally. There is no excuse for an error like that. It's easy to see what happened but it is still an error by the batter and it can't be ignored at test match level (or 1st class, grade, club or any other competition level).

In my opinion, test players, especially those with a back-story like Bairstow's would be treated like royalty in local competition and I suspect that they'd be so revered that they do get a few concessions - I could even imagine that some might expect special treatment such as being immune from dismissal if they scratch a foot on the ground before wandering off to talk about the lunch menu or whatever they discuss between overs.

That scratch on the ground is especially telling. You can see that to Bairstow it meant than he could not be dismissed when he walked out of the crease. He believed that he had made himself immune. I suspect that would have been honoured in any lower level game than he played. But he was unaware than the ball was already in motion towards his demise and in any case, it was his team who were playing the role of jerk in this series. They were the one's playing the unsociable game. I can see how Carey would have just bided his time and then, SNAP. You're gone mate!

 

[Horace]

Get ya hand off it mate

It’s happened quite a few times but when we do it , it’s a hangable offence.
They’re playing to win - not some social game

My hand's not on anything except the keyboard. Don't judge others by what you might get up to in your quiet private moments.

I'm simply making an observation about what might be a consequence of this. Nothing more or less.

 

[Emma12]

Plenty of players have walked before the umpire officially calling it dead as it is assumed. The third umpire should have been easily satisfied the ball was dead after watching the replay.

Can't say I've listened much of the media but let me make it clear I don't support Bairstow and Carey and the Aussies were well within their rights to make that play and stand by the umpire's decision. Unfortunately the umpire was wrong in this case

So you know more than the umpire
I’m sure they will now be sacked due to lack of knowing the rules

 

[krakouers]

All this whining about the spirit of the game is just a convenient sideshow for the English Team and just diverts tabloid attention from their own underperformance and the recent report on the inequality that permeates the English game. However that will be temporary IMO. It won't be long before the blowtorch is applied with earnest. They eat their own like few other media.

It’s easy to blame that decision, a lot harder to blame the other 40 moments that cost them the game

I wonder if sometime in the future, Carey's act will be judged in a not dissimilar manner to how the Mankad incident was judged? I think it has the potential to be because we are just one of several countries who play cricket and may not have too many friends in a situation like this.

mankad - Google Search

www.google.com

Controversial ‘Mankad’ law revised in response to Adam Zampa Big Bash incident

Controversial ‘Mankad’ law revised in response to Zampa Big Bash incident

www.foxsports.com.au

“Marylebone Cricket Club, which still has global responsibility for cricket’s laws, issued a statement soon afterwards confirming TV umpire Shawn Craig had ruled correctly.

But the MCC said Thursday the previous wording of Law 38.3.2 had led some to think such a run out could happen even after the bowler had gone through the bowling action”

I fancy a little wager on the timing something like this happens

 

[Sillygit]

well, belief is important to you jesus so i won't hold it against ya

 

[Harvey Manfrenjensenden]

The umpire clearly doesn't agree with you regarding the ball being dead as they gave Bairstow out. Respecting the umpires decision is an important part of the 'Spirit of the Game'

Well I did say he was wrong so I'd have thought that was obvious. Maybe read my post again and then reply?

Should have checked where the ball was instead.

Do you think he walked without knowing where the ball was?

 

[Hearts to hearts]

Well I did say he was wrong so I'd have thought that was obvious. Maybe read my post again and then reply?


Do you think he walked without knowing where the ball was?

He guessed and assumed. You can see on the footage he doesn’t look.

 

[Harvey Manfrenjensenden]

So you know more than the umpire
I’m sure they will now be sacked due to lack of knowing the rules

Where did I say that? Umpires make incorrect decisions every game and stll know more than 99% of people watching the game (in relation to the rules).

Sackings require more than a straw man to pass the court of public opinion, let alone stand the test of good governance. It's also the foundation of formulating any well reasoned rebuttal.

Try harder

 

[Harvey Manfrenjensenden]

He guessed and assumed. You can see on the footage he doesn’t look.

Where he thought the ball was is only relevant to this discussion is if you're saying he thought the ball was in play.

For arguments sake, he guessed and or assumed. Where did you think he guessed or assumed it was?

Surely not anywhere but in the keepers gloves or he would have taken a run?

 

[kaboom kid]

Well I did say he was wrong so I'd have thought that was obvious. Maybe read my post again and then reply?


Do you think he walked without knowing where the ball was?

So the umpire should just ignore the laws of the game and make a decision on 'the vibe of it'? Is that what you're saying?

 

[Harvey Manfrenjensenden]

well, belief is important to you jesus so i won't hold it against ya

I believe nothing

 

[Samsquanch]

Ponting and Taylor laboured the point during the 2nd test about how far out of his crease Davey Warner was setting up. They explained the reasoning, but also made the point a couple of times that by standing out of his crease there was a risk that a throw at the stumps could bring him down. That didn't happen to Warner, but as has been said a million times, Bairstow did try the tactic against Labuschagne. That in itself proved Bairstow's awareness of the rule that allows a stumping by a keeper standing back to a "fast" bowler.

Some claim that England would not have appealed had Bairstow hit the stumps when Marnus was out of his ground. A straw-man that simply doesn't stand the test of common sense. England have a track record of claiming wickets in far more dubious circumstances, and in reality, if they got Marnus in that manner then he would be undeniably out. He was more astute than dozy Bairstow however and the point is completely moot.

Can anybody possibly imagine Warner being given a life by England if he was out in the way Bairstow was? Heck no. At least, it would not be likely.

The English press are dog whistling here - something that they have perfected - and there is an obedient crowd who are baying to the calls, some genuinely outraged and some playing along in the same way that an Aussie crowd can when an opponent like Harvinder Singh or Chris Broad commits some outrageous dog act as they are prone to do.

 

[Samsquanch]

Do you think he walked without knowing where the ball was?

Yes. That is exactly what he did. He scratched the ground and left his crease. He had no awareness whatsoever of the ball, and he assumed that by scratching the ground that he'd made himself safe. But that is not how the rules of the game are written.

 

[Samsquanch]

well, belief is important to you jesus so i won't hold it against ya

It's all he's bloody got.