08 Feb 09
Originally posted by boarmanWhat? How can you be sure the South Africans knew?
Maybe we should look at Mathew Haydens dismissal in one of the recent tests.He was given out caught , but the ball plainly came off his pads and the South Africans knew that too but still appealed, should we call this cheating also.
I think not, its heat of the moment stuff and with the 3rd umpire, hawkeye, heatspot , numerous replays you will always see ...[text shortened]... be left in the hands of the umpires, thats the beauty of cricket, some you win others you lose.
Amla was given out LBW in one of the games, but replays showed it was never out. Why did the Aussies appeal? They are cheaters!
See? Going down this road just gets you to Nowheretown...
08 Feb 09
1 edit
I've been vocal in these and other forums about the need for rule changes for the third umpire to get involved more.
The recent games between India and Sri Lanka (I believe?) there were team appeals, where the fielding side or batsmen could appeal umpire decisions.
It seemed to work fine - we just need the process to go more quickly.
Spirit of the game, tradition, blah blah blah
Let's get the correct decision, that would be in the spirit of the game in my opinion.
This is a professional sport with lucrative contracts and people's jobs at stake, so possibly putting that in the balance because an umpire blinked (or blind like Buchnor) is not the way to go.
08 Feb 09
Originally posted by CrowleyYou will see i mentioned in my post that i said it wasn't an act of cheating, whereas you say the Aussies are cheaters,
What? How can you be sure the South Africans knew?
Amla was given out LBW in one of the games, but replays showed it was never out. Why did the Aussies appeal? They are cheaters!
See? Going down this road just gets you to Nowheretown...
Gee Crowley your one eye is working wonders.
But i did just hear on the grapevine that you recently became mayor of Nowheretown
🙂
08 Feb 09
Originally posted by boarmanOh my god, here we go again, eh boreman?
You will see i mentioned in my post that i said it wasn't an act of cheating, whereas you say the Aussies are cheaters,
Gee Crowley your one eye is working wonders.
But i did just hear on the grapevine that you recently became mayor of Nowheretown
🙂
I never called Haddin a cheater either.
Cheating, I believe, would be if he had intent. I don't think he did.
I think what he did was unethical and not very sporting, because he must have known he clipped the bails. He should've manned up and told the umpire it wasn't out.
Who's got this mythical one eye, my quick-on-trigger friend?
08 Feb 09
Originally posted by CrowleyIs there a blinker over that one eye?
Oh my god, here we go again, eh boreman?
I never called Haddin a cheater either.
Cheating, I believe, would be if he had intent. I don't think he did.
I think what he did was unethical and not very sporting, because he must have known he clipped the bails. He should've manned up and told the umpire it wasn't out.
Who's got this mythical one eye, my quick-on-trigger friend?
Read your post where you say the aussies are cheaters.
I know you didnt call Haddin a cheater , but you said the Aussies were , when clearly both SA and Aus are guilty of the same thing.
LBW's or catching appeals do have a tinge of bluff involved when not clear cut.
08 Feb 09
Originally posted by boarmanCan nobody on this site detect a little playful sarcasm? My god, I despair for humanity...
Is there a blinker over that one eye?
Read your post where you say the aussies are cheaters.
I know you didnt call Haddin a cheater , but you said the Aussies were , when clearly both SA and Aus are guilty of the same thing.
LBW's or catching appeals do have a tinge of bluff involved when not clear cut.
08 Feb 09
Originally posted by boarmanYou need to stay on thread.
Is there a blinker over that one eye?
Read your post where you say the aussies are cheaters.
I know you didnt call Haddin a cheater , but you said the Aussies were , when clearly both SA and Aus are guilty of the same thing.
LBW's or catching appeals do have a tinge of bluff involved when not clear cut.
Bluff type appeals and sledging aren't cheating even though limits are often absurd and are designed to put undue pressure on the umps.. The ICC could of course do us a favour and tell the umps to get tough and cite players for ungentlemanly behaviour - particularly captains.
Cheating involves a deliberate act of breaking the rules and Haddin very clearly did this.
08 Feb 09
Originally posted by Tirau DanI don't think so. Are you seriously telling us that Haddin saw the ball was going to miss the top of off-stump and then decided to take matters into his own hands (as it were)?
Cheating involves a deliberate act of breaking the rules and Haddin very clearly did this.
Not a chance.
It was accidental, but he should have apologised and reset the stumps. Instead he decided to celebrate a hollow victory, which was disgusting and very unsportsman-like...
09 Feb 09
Originally posted by CrowleyHis hands were clearly in front of the wickets.. you can't do that accidently and tipping the bails off with his glove (whether or not accidental) should have required an immediate admission to the umpire.
I don't think so. Are you seriously telling us that Haddin saw the ball was going to miss the top of off-stump and then decided to take matters into his own hands (as it were)?
Not a chance.
It was accidental, but he should have apologised and reset the stumps. Instead he decided to celebrate a hollow victory, which was disgusting and very unsportsman-like...
09 Feb 09
Originally posted by Tirau DanBut thats where the ethics come down to a man to man level. Haddin is in a losing side, having a cruddy summer, his own position under the pump. He got " white line fever" and snatched at the ball. What he should of done was to "man up" and say i wasnt sure, but he is no Gilchrist.
His hands were clearly in front of the wickets.. you can't do that accidently and tipping the bails off with his glove (whether or not accidental) should have required an immediate admission to the umpire.
Crowley says it right:
Originally posted by Crowley
Cheating, I believe, would be if he had intent. I don't think he did.
I think what he did was unethical and not very sporting, because he must have known he clipped the bails. He should've manned up and told the umpire it wasn't out..
09 Feb 09
Originally posted by lordhighgusImagine this:
But thats where the ethics come down to a man to man level. Haddin is in a losing side, having a cruddy summer, his own position under the pump. He got " white line fever" and snatched at the ball. What he should of done was to "man up" and say i wasnt sure, but he is no Gilchrist.
Crowley says it right:
Originally posted by Crowley
[b]Cheat ...[text shortened]... nown he clipped the bails. He should've manned up and told the umpire it wasn't out..[/b]
Stand behind the wickets up close, put your hands in front of the top of the wicket. Hold that position for a moment in your mind ..look at your hands and the wicket.
How and why are your hands in front of the wicket?
It's not an accident because your nose is right there between your eyes and the stumps. Your hands are there on purpose.
He's a senior wicketkeeper with loads of experience so knows his hands can't be there legally.
So why?
Why if he could see the ball was going to kit the wicket he would have let it. It was a slow ball. Slow enough that he didn't have to grab at the ball. He consciously took the ball in front and tipped the bales off.
There is no other explanation. The ball went into his hands, he knocked off the bales and appealed. The umpire didn't have a chance.
This couldn't have happened accidentally because you don;t put hands in front of the wicket accidently.
Worse the guy refused to admit any wrong at all at the after match and made a fool of himself and his national team. Umpires around the world will have watched that clip and will be very watchful in future.
It's certainly how the press see it here .. anyway 2 nil down in this Chappell Hadlee series and back against the wall. What next?
09 Feb 09
Originally posted by Tirau DanPlease, I have done a lot of keeping in my days and there is no way he did this on purpose.
Imagine this:
Stand behind the wickets up close, put your hands in front of the top of the wicket. Hold that position for a moment in your mind ..look at your hands and the wicket.
How and why are your hands in front of the wicket?
It's not an accident because your nose is right there between your eyes and the stumps. Your hands are there on purp ...[text shortened]... .. anyway 2 nil down in this Chappell Hadlee series and back against the wall. What next?
I'm not saying it's impossible, just saying that looking at the evidence, he did not cheat.
The keeper's gloves are always close to the stumps. He pushed his hands forward because he probably thought the ball would hit the stumps and pushing the arms straight is an instinctive reaction.
I know from experience.
09 Feb 09
Originally posted by Tirau DanNever put down in conspiracy what can be put down to incompetence. I think he messed up putting his hands in front. It should have been a no ball - end of story - but I honestly don't think you can fairly conclude he did the whole thing deliberately.
He deliberately held his gloves in front of the wickets which is cheating in itself the ball went into the gloves so he knew the batsman wasn't bowled as it was a no ball.
If he had, and it was all pre-meditated, there wouldn't have been the hesitation when he appealed.
09 Feb 09
1 edit
Originally posted by mtthwExactly.
Never put down in conspiracy what can be put down to incompetence. I think he messed up putting his hands in front. It should have been a no ball - end of story - but I honestly don't think you can fairly conclude he did the whole thing deliberately.
Check the video again, Dan - the ball is close to the bat edge and would've been very close to hitting the bail.
Haddin straightens his arms as he rears up, which is not good keeper play, and this off-balance movement pushes his hands over the bail.
Also, let's not kid ourselves - his gloves were only barely over the top of the stumps.
No intent = Not cheating.
09 Feb 09
Originally posted by CrowleyIn school and social cricket did you honestly never do this to a batsman?
Please, I have done a lot of keeping in my days and there is no way he did this on purpose.
I'm not saying it's impossible, just saying that looking at the evidence, he did not cheat.
The keeper's gloves are always close to the stumps. He pushed his hands forward because he probably thought the ball would hit the stumps and pushing the arms straight is an instinctive reaction.
I know from experience.
Our keepers used to do it (in fun) regularly just to keep you on your toes.
I had missed the hesitation in his appeal but even so their is no exuse for this rotten behaviour in cricket.