BS: Bury the Ashes?

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: Pete Jennings
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 09:56 AM

Deciding if a batsman is in or out is the umpire's job, with or without the aid of the square leg/DRS umpires. End of story.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: MikeL2
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 09:54 AM

Hi Raggy

Sometimes dreams do come true !!!

I have watched many Tests at Old Trafford and at one time both my son and I were members there.

The first England V Australia Test I saw there was in 1948.

I remember having to get up very early in the morning and go and queue for three hours to get in.

It was the only time that I saw Don Bradman ( surely still acknowledged as the best ever batsman in the World ?)

He disappointed this time though, scoring only a handful of runs - bowled by Dick Pollard - very popular as Dick was a Lancashire player.

Cyril Washbrook - another Lancashire Player scored a double century and then 80 odd not out in front of his own crowd.

I saw Lindwall and Miller who were to become a fantastic opening attack in future years.

If I remember correctly the infamous Manchester rain came to the rescue of the Aussies.

""Those were the days my Friend""

Cheers

Mike

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: GUEST,Ed
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 07:27 AM

How many times does it have to be said? This was NOT "win at any cost" (with the inference that cheating is to be condoned).

There was no foul play, no law broken, no intentional deception (how often have players from ALL nationalities rubbed their forearms having been hit on the glove?).

I take your point, Gutcher but I think calling the players' 'moral compass' into question is a little extreme.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 07:19 AM

Your moral upbringing in this particular was clearly exemplary, Gutcher, and much to be respected. But it does seem to have left you a bit doctrinaire as to its universal applicability, a bit intolerant of deviance from it ~~ and prone to reject any hint of precedents to this outrage [as you view it] which you refer to as if it was unique in the history of sport, and no such thing had ever been heard of before: so what if the Grace stories may be a bit apocryphal and folkloric as I said?; the Bradman 1946 one wasn't.

I wonder whether such intolerance and lack of empathy were the effect that those who imbued you {'programmed' as you call it} from childhood onwards with such excellent principles, would have been aiming for, or would have approved.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: Gutcher
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 07:02 AM

We are all programmed from childhood in different ways. What I personally deem to be the right code to live by is obviously not that followed by these profesional sportsmen and their supporters whose attitude seems to be win at any cost no matter how many millions of people are aware of the route followed to achieve that end.
As regards individual sports such as golf I have a hazy recollection of some controversy surrounding the actions of Colin Montgomery in an important match, the details of which escape me at this time.
Many late night snooker matches were enlivened by a player drawing the referees attention to an unseen foul commited by him, that was true sportsmanship in my book.
If cricketers are afraid of the adverse opinions of their fellow teammates this is a sad reflection on the moral compass of the whole team and of the supporters who encourage such actions.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: GUEST,Ed
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 05:35 AM

OK, 'absurd' was possibly too strong a word. I do however think that the importance of the incident is being much overplayed.

One point that hasn't been given much prominence are the particular pressures of 'gentlemanly' responses to such situations within a team environment.

Gutcher mentions snooker and I've heard various discussions regarding the scrupulous honesty of golfers. I'd suggest that it's a hell of a lot easier when you only have yourself to consider.

Phil Tufnell made an astute point: "If you walked off with one run to win the Ashes, your team-mates wouldn't talk to you." This is before even thinking about your influence on other people's prize money (or 'filthy lucre' if you must, I suppose).

Additionally, and we'll never know, what if Broad had been instructed not to walk? Ian Botham is reported as saying, when captain, that "anyone who walks will have me to answer to."

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 05:25 AM

Why did he need an 'excuse/? "Should" by what compulsion, Gutcher? I can see the reason for your opinion. But it is surely at least equally arguable that to promote a gentlemanly convention into an invariable rule offers an alarming precedent for all sorts of unreasonable expectations to become engrained. I do not see how sanctions can be applied to anyone who has broken no laws, be these the laws of a nation or those of a sport. The worst that should happen to him would be that he might be booed by some in the crowd and ostracised by some in the Pavilion. What do you think should have happened to him?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: Gutcher
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 05:08 AM

In the historical examples given there may or may not have been room for reasonable doubt, I ignore the apocryphal stories of W. Grace, in the current debate Broad had no excuse, he should have walked without even awaiting the umpires decision.
As a neutral supporter of test match cricket I do not see the view I take on this matter as absurd. I am sure many of those debating the same will be of my opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 04:39 AM

Graves are very expensive. Maybe they should just flush me down the toilet. I've done that to turtles and goldfish, so it would serve me right. I buried the cat, though...

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 04:14 AM

I think there always will be a bit of controversy when someone is as clearly out as Broad was and opts not to walk. Personally, I'd prefer to see players walk but recognize that as the batsman's choice and am not sure I can complain too much as a player not walking is acting within the laws of the game.

From the other side, I was interested to read that Adam Gilchrist had been accused of showing disrespect to the umpires for his decisions to walk so perhaps you can't win either way.

As for tainting the series. I don't know how the rest of it will go by I think this particular match will be remembered for its twists and turns, Agar's remarkable innings at no 11 and an exiting finish. OK, there were a couple of controversial points (Trott given out was another) but I think very few would see the game itself as anything other than an excellent test match.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 04:12 AM

A lot of it is folklore, for that matter. I was brought up on a slightly different version of the W G Grace story told in that Mail article linked by Ed: that Grace was clearly stumped, but the square leg umpire said emphatically, "Not out"; then, turning to the wicket-keeper, added, "And you look here, young man; all these people have come here to see Dr Grace bat, not to watch your monkey-tricks!"

Same story in two different folkloric variants? Or two different occasions? Or never really happened, but se non è vero, è ben trovato ?

Who can tell?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 04:11 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: GUEST,Ed
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:46 AM

MtheGM is, of course, right.

Loathed though I am to link to the Daily Mail, this article from 2002 reinforces the point.

To suggest that this series will always be tainted is franky absurd.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:06 AM

But this is all nothing new, despite the tone of some posts. A letter in today's Times reminds us of an incident when Bradman failed to walk when obviously out, and Hammond's appeal was turned down. That was in 1946.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: Gutcher
Date: 16 Jul 13 - 07:00 PM

I never ever thought I would have had the opportunity of praising the sportsmanship and superior behavior of snooker players over that of cricket players.                                                                                     Having been brought up on a diet of cricket as a game played by gentlemen whose whole ethos was to set an example to us lesser mortals, but, as in many fields, when the lure of filthy lucre enters the equation morals in this modern world are very easily dispensed with.
This series will always be tainted by the unsporting behavior of one man who, had he been a gentleman, would not have taken advantage of an umpires error. It certainly ruined for me what, up to that point, had been an excellent match.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 16 Jul 13 - 09:54 AM

If Haddin had made a WORSE effort, Ralphie, and missed the thing completely, you would have had a bit more "test" cricket.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: GUEST,Ralphie
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 08:04 PM

Oh WAV....Not that bloody Alf Ramsey story again (for the 100th time). Give it a rest. And what has football got to with cricket anyway? You obviously enjoy Limited overs cricket. Matches your limited attention span methinks. Nobody is going to take up your crackpot ideas any decade soon. Particularly after the amazing game we witnessed last week. If you don't like Test cricket. Don't watch it.....Simples

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 07:18 PM

Did you see the final Becker lost to his compatriot Michael Stich - I didn't see any "tears" (M) but there were plenty of "hysterics" from Boris - it wasn't cricket.

Raggytash - I was actually born in St. Mary's hospital, Manchester, the day Alf Ramsey's English team won the World Cup (not cricket, either), before being brought up in Australia...http://walkaboutsverse.blogspot.co.uk/.

Back to cricket - a sarcastic "well left" from the slips or wicket- keeper following an air-swing only really applies to test-cricket, because, as I keep saying, in limited-over cricket the bowler gets rewarded with a dot-ball for being too good for the batsman.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: GUEST,roderick warner
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 07:12 PM

I like baseball and cricket - different games. Less boring than most 'folk' music, imo...

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 04:58 PM

Actually, without wanting to be too po-faced or humourless or puritanical about it ~~ but "war" is actually a very unfortunate word in the context IMO. Remember Boris Becker when he was once eliminated rather early from Wimbledon, and some silly reporter asked him in tones of deepest woe to comment, obviously hoping for tears and hysterics. "I lost a game of tennis," he said. "That's all. There wasn't a war. Nobody died."

Wise words...

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 04:22 PM

MikeL2 ....................... I am envious, tickets for a test at Old Trafford, against the "old enemy".

My idea of bliss, sunny day, bottle of wine, England 560 for one declared at tea on the second day, Australia bowled out for 200 on the third.

In my dreams !!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: GUEST,MikeL2
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 02:38 PM

Hi

I agree with Raggytash and others who thought that this was a brilliant Test Match.

It was exciting stuff to watch as the match continually swung to and fro. Of course there were some "iffy" moments and some controversial
ones too.

I like Raggy's comparison of Cricket to Baseball as one of Chess with draughts ( checkers). Not only do the fielding side have to know every batsman's weaknesses and strengths and to set the fielders to attempt to stop the batsman scoring, but also the batsmen have to try to memorise and visualise the field placings and try to pierce the defences.

"war" was a good word to describe Test Cricket; especially England v Australia. I await the forthcoming games with expectancy and some anxiety. This Aussie team have shown that they are not going to lie down and let England roll over them.

Michael....I understand your comment about the way the last wicket fell and agree that a catch like Cook's for the wicket before this one would have been a wonderful finish to a thoroughly exciting game.....but.....I'll take to ending as it came because a win is a win !!

I have tickets for the match at Old Trafford....wouldn't it be just great if Jimmy Anderson could produce another match-winning performance on his own ground.

Kind Regards

MikeL2

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: IanC
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 10:54 AM

The difference between Test Cricket and most other sport/games is that the others are a battle, whereas cricket is a war.

In a war, tactics and technique just aren't enough. You need to marshall your resources for the longer term destruction of the enemy.

:-)

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 10:21 AM

Or tiddlywinks ~~ no joke!; very skilful game. The most brilliant girl in my wife's year at Newnham, Classical Scholar, double ** First, married that year's captain of the University tiddlywinks team. We stayed in touch for many years. They appeared ideally happy.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 09:06 AM

WAV from which nation do you hail, do you have cricket there as a spectator sport. If so risk boring yourself one afternoon and go and watch a game. It can be fascinating. Adversely are you being deliberately naïve?

This last test match has been fantastic, not much done in our house over the five days, far too enthralled with the cricket.

To try and make a simile, cricket is like chess with men and ball, moving the players around to your best advantage.

I suppose you could make a comparison with Baseball ........... and draughts.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 08:22 AM

"Plus, as one of the many consequences, bowlers would intentionally bowl as wide as legally possible. Not very interesting to watch..."

Yup, just like Baseball. Boring crap.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 08:01 AM

You're right.

OK, so in your new 'improved' test cricket, every miss is given out?

It's not going to be a particularly long game is it?

Plus, as one of the many consequences, bowlers would intentionally bowl as wide as legally possible. Not very interesting to watch...

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 07:50 AM

Guest - I seem to recall that in baseball it's THREE strikes and you are out.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 07:38 AM

I can only imagine such a rule killing the game.

In test cricket, it is enough that that particular delivery was a moral victory to the bowler.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 07:37 AM

If the rule is changed such that an air-swing is out

...then you'd be playing baseball.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 07:29 AM

If the rule is changed such that an air-swing is out, then umpires would merely have to decide if the batsman aimed to hit the ball or not..?

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 06:15 AM

Missing the ball completely IS a worse effort than managing (as Haddin, e.g., just did) to get an edge

I'll try but will probably get pulled up on a few things...

OK, a batsman may be lucky in playing and missing completely but the last thing a batsman wants to do is get an edge - it could go anywhere - often to slips or the wicket keeper. He may get away with it, even score runs from it but he's not in control.

The batsman wants to either play a controlled shot (including just defending his stumps) or leave the ball when a) it's safe to do so and b) he doesn't believe he is going to gain anything by hitting it and he would be taking an unnecessary risk in trying to do so (in the limited overs forms, a batsman is more likely to try to score runs from every ball. In test cricket one can get very annoyed when a batsman takes a wild slash at a ball he had no need to play and gets himself out - it's giving his wicket away).

A bowler doesn't just try to hit the stumps. He tries to "trick" the batsman into making the wrong decisions or play poorly judged shots.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 02:13 AM

"Which is beaten by an even better effort from the bowler?

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 02:12 AM

And, presumably, in the strange place that is WAV-World, the efforts and skills of the bowler have no influence on the outcome? Does it not strike you that the batsman may make a good attempt at a shot, which is beaten by an even better ball from the bowler?

Cricket is a very complex, multi-faceted endeavour, and to try to express it as a simple 'hit = good, miss = bad' kind of game is to do it the greatest of disservices, and reduce it to the banality and gracelessness of, e.g. Baseball.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 05:53 PM

Missing the ball completely IS a worse effort than managing (as Haddin, e.g., just did) to get an edge, Blackwoodsman. (I played junior cricket, in a low grade, for just 2 seasons - managing to carry my bat on one occasion, and spin both ways.)

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 03:46 PM

Do you understand anything at all about the art and game of cricket? Based on the above post, I'd say the answer to that question would be "Fuck all".

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 01:51 PM

Just saw it on the news and, as I said atop, if Haddin had made a WORSE effort and missed it completely, the match would not have been over; all sports have their strengths and weaknesses but test-cricket has this huge weakness.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 10:54 AM

Yes; but what a disappointing end, dependent on that rather inexpressive technology, while we all had to wait to see whether the third umpire had seen or heard anything. Would have been far more interesting if the batsman had been dismissed by a brilliant diving catch; or, alternatively, if the 14 runs needed had been gained by 2 4s and a 6 in a single over.

Much to be said for all this goal-line, Hawkeye, DRS hot-spot caper. But has robbed rather a lot of the human element.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 10:33 AM

What a fantastic match, it could have so easily gone to Australia but fortunately for England the final wicket was taken with them just 14 runs short. It has been one of the great test matches. Credit to both sides for a brilliant sporting spectacle.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 13 Jul 13 - 06:29 PM

Having been persuaded by my nephew to visit last year, some pics of Bowral, where Don Bradman learnt to bat - https://plus.google.com/photos/106493534240943918991/albums/5890139692999290609

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 13 Jul 13 - 06:09 PM

...as I say, I'm not a fan of test-cricket and I'd rather listen to the chants, drums and flauting of Amerindians/First Nations/Native Americans, but I'm enough of a realist to agree that (rather than dying a death from limited over cricket) it has become "the new rock 'n' roll". Via the news, I see that it's not just the Ashes that pack the grounds these days.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 13 Jul 13 - 03:16 PM

I think the last four days of cricket has been spellbinding, the match hovering between the two sides frequently. England appear to have the upper hand at the close of play today, but I thought that on Thursday lunchtime before Ashton Agar came to the crease. What a debut, even I was willing him to get his 50, before the bugger went on to get 98. Brilliant cricket.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: GUEST,Ed
Date: 13 Jul 13 - 03:14 PM

But Maradona WAS cheating. Broad wasn't. Rather a big difference, I think.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Jul 13 - 03:05 PM

It's the claim to be above that kind of that thing. As with the stuff about Maradona and the Hand of God.

Slip of the tongue there about Mchael Clarke. Though I can quite imagine he'd likely be up for it too...

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 13 Jul 13 - 11:49 AM

I suspect Kevin knows this, of course, but was allowing himself to indulge in a little Oirish mischief in singling out England. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 13 Jul 13 - 11:46 AM

Which is pretty much what I was saying.
I don't like it, but unless and until the Laws are amended, it will continue to happen, and ALL sides will do it.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: GUEST,Ed
Date: 13 Jul 13 - 11:29 AM

McGrath,

Broad did NOT cheat. He acted entirely within the the laws of cricket. Nearly all of the recent players, both English and Australian, that I have heard comment on the event agree that he did the right thing.

The outrage is pretty much a media invention. Now whether he acted within the 'spirit' of the game is a different question.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: Pete Jennings
Date: 13 Jul 13 - 10:40 AM

Michael Clarke? I thought it was Stuart Broad...unless there were two of them who didn't walk?

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Jul 13 - 10:38 AM

Cheated gets copied, and in time becomes universal. There was a time when defending a penalty in football was seen as pretty dodgy. Football commentators will regularly talk about someone winning a free kick when a foul by the opponent is seen as having being cleverly provoked.

But I think the line should always be drawn against intentionally dangerous acts, and against actions like Clarke's. Failing to penalise it retrospctively is a way of ensuring that others do it.

Subject: RE: BS: Bury the Ashes?
From: GUEST,Musket being patriotic
Date: 13 Jul 13 - 09:25 AM

Australia tried their own version of the body line back in the early 80s. Beefy swatted them to the boundary and Boycott asked for more as they were easy to deflect.

It used to be that a batsman walked but that was before 3rd umpire and cameras. Playing to the officials is what is expected in any sport. Technically, you are in till the umpires agree you are out. Ages since I dusted off an old Wisden......