Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Cricket] 2nd ODI England v Australia



Mackenzie

Old Brightonian
Nov 7, 2003
33,536
East Wales
Watching the video it looked clear that he wasnt taking evasive action as was not going to hit him but the stumps but when it happened would he have known that, I dont think so. Perhaps should have been given the benefit of the doubt and not out.
Behave.
 




Sheebo

Well-known member
Jul 13, 2003
29,287
Let the Aussies cheat - they still can't take the fact they were massive favourites & lost the Big one :)
 


Jello

He's Not A Jelly Belly
NSC Patron
Jul 8, 2003
1,583
The throw was heading for his stumps and stopped it! If it was self defence his hands would be trying to protect his head not his wicket.
 








Jello

He's Not A Jelly Belly
NSC Patron
Jul 8, 2003
1,583
Slow mo makes it worse, you can see his hand searching for the ball. If you're playing Australia your first instinct should be to protect your wicket! He did but got caught out 99/100 he'd of got away with it.
 








LamieRobertson

Not awoke
Feb 3, 2008
46,675
SHOREHAM BY SEA
Watching the video it looked clear that he wasnt taking evasive action as was not going to hit him but the stumps but when it happened would he have known that, I dont think so. Perhaps should have been given the benefit of the doubt and not out.

I'd agree BG....but it's typical Oz...maybe Smith thinks they've been too nice...still what goes around comes around ..he'll get his turn
 


Bold Seagull

strong and stable with me, or...
Mar 18, 2010
29,789
Hove
The throw was heading for his stumps and stopped it! If it was self defence his hands would be trying to protect his head not his wicket.

Absolute crap. In real time there is no way he could have reacted other than to just fling himself to the ground. It's like a fielder at silly point or forward short leg, you take evasive action but you end up catching it, not because you intended to, but it just hits you.
No way anyone has the reflexes to do that intentionally. The Aussies knew that, the only people not is the 3rd umpire and you, sucked in by slow mo.
 


happypig

Staring at the rude boys
May 23, 2009
7,960
Eastbourne
The throw was heading for his stumps and stopped it! If it was self defence his hands would be trying to protect his head not his wicket.

The stop was pure chance, luck some might say, but the laws state that interference has to be "wilful". He's thrown himself out of the way, arm flailing, and the ball has hit him. He's not looking at it and there has to be a serious element of doubt as to his wilfulness to interfere. Therefore Australia should have given him the benfit of the doubt, withdrawn the appeal and called him back but, as they often do, they want to "win at all costs"
 




Hampster Gull

New member
Dec 22, 2010
13,462
Just got back from the match. Lots and lots of "feedback" from the crowd to Starc and the Umpires. What a joke. At real time speed most would have also put their arm and tried to get out the way. The Aussies have lowered the bar again
 










Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
50,171
Goldstone
Why is it the fault of the Aussies for appealing, rather than the umpires for making the wrong decision?
 


Bold Seagull

strong and stable with me, or...
Mar 18, 2010
29,789
Hove
Why is it the fault of the Aussies for appealing, rather than the umpires for making the wrong decision?

Spirit of the game. Some decisions are based on judgement and therefore an 'appeal'. Most captains would withdrawal the appeal and not put the umpire in the position of making the decision. Only 6th time someone has been out this way in 3800 odd matches!
similar things happen if a running batsmen collides with the bowler or fielder, generally the captain will withdrawal an appeal if a run out occurs in that instance.

Most forms of cricket from that distance with the ball hurled full force at the batsmen, you won't get an appeal because you know as a cricketer there is no way you are doing anything other than protect yourself. You'll note it's barely an appeal from the Aussies, at first it's more like an apology, even the umpires can't believe that've actually been asked and I think they ask Smith to confirm they're appealing. They then bottle the decision and some goon with slow mo thinks it proves willful obstruction. Terrible decision, not on the sense of say a poor LBW, but because it is so against that spirit the game should be played in.
 


Hampster Gull

New member
Dec 22, 2010
13,462
Remember this is the country that bowled the last ball in a match vs NZ UNDER ARM when the kiwis needed a six to win the match. The Aussie moral compass is super low in competitve sports. Nice at least to see that their once impressive sporting prowess is in decline
 




coagulantwolf

New member
Jun 21, 2012
716
Watching the video it looked clear that he wasnt taking evasive action as was not going to hit him but the stumps but when it happened would he have known that, I dont think so. Perhaps should have been given the benefit of the doubt and not out.

Do you literally just post comments just for attention and to be the guy with the 'different' opinion?
 


PILTDOWN MAN

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 15, 2004
18,704
Hurst Green
Spirit of the game. Some decisions are based on judgement and therefore an 'appeal'. Most captains would withdrawal the appeal and not put the umpire in the position of making the decision. Only 6th time someone has been out this way in 3800 odd matches!
similar things happen if a running batsmen collides with the bowler or fielder, generally the captain will withdrawal an appeal if a run out occurs in that instance.

Most forms of cricket from that distance with the ball hurled full force at the batsmen, you won't get an appeal because you know as a cricketer there is no way you are doing anything other than protect yourself. You'll note it's barely an appeal from the Aussies, at first it's more like an apology, even the umpires can't believe that've actually been asked and I think they ask Smith to confirm they're appealing. They then bottle the decision and some goon with slow mo thinks it proves willful obstruction. Terrible decision, not on the sense of say a poor LBW, but because it is so against that spirit the game should be played in.

You, by the letter of the laws of the game, can only be out if an appeal is made, even when your middle stump has been smashed out the ground from a legal ball. Therefore it is totally as your post remains the fielding sides captain to decide if he wishes the appeal to stand.

If the bowlers ever needed a better incentive to play hard ball this is it. As another beamer whistles past sorry you tosser hand slipped.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here