Cricket

[MD Jazz]

But what is “spirit of the game”? It’s a nebulous concept. Bairstow was out according to the laws of the game, a written, structured concept.

It's an individual thing I suppose. Gilly walked, others didn't.

An example of good sportsmanship is Dohni calling Bell back in 2011 even though he was legitimately run out according to the rules. I supose that is spirit of the game.

If Bairstow was trying in some way to gain an advantage I can understand it. But he wasn't.

 

[MD Jazz]

In a stumping situation when a batsman accidentally raises his back foot but not actually going for a run should they be called back?

As for McCullum he has form and I don't think he called back someone once, as someone else said talk is cheap.

Very different again. The keeper is at the stumps and the player knows he needs to stay in the crease.

McCullum is on record as saying he did the wrong thing at the time. People change.

 

[TT33]

It's an individual thing I suppose. Gilly walked, others didn't.

An example of good sportsmanship is Dohni calling Bell back in 2011 even though he was legitimately run out according to the rules. I supose that is spirit of the game.

If Bairstow was trying in some way to gain an advantage I can understand it. But he wasn't.

Bairstow tried to run Labuschagne out the same way the day before. So he has to cop it sweet.

 

[IanG]

Superb from Betoota Advocate:

Stuart Broad Apparently Now A Judge On The Spirit Of Cricket

WENDELL HUSSEY | Cadet | CONTACT In some breaking news from the ‘home of cricket’ this morning, it can be confirmed that English fast bowler Stuart Broad is now the moral arbiter on what is and isn’t within the ‘spirit of cricket.’ The man known for being a cheat, and bragging about being a...

www.betootaadvocate.com

 

[tigersnake]

How long ago were those incidents? He acknowledges they were not the right thing. It's called growth.

If this had happened the other way around I can't imagine the stink on here.

2008-ish I think? Hardly back in the days of 8 ball overs. Growth is easy from the sidelines post-fact. When he was in the moment with the game on the line, not so much. Talk is cheap.

 

[TT33]

Very different again. The keeper is at the stumps and the player knows he needs to stay in the crease.

McCullum is on record as saying he did the wrong thing at the time. People change.

Every wicketkeeper has tried this type of dismissal in just about every game ever played, the trouble is most of them can't hit the stumps when they try.
They Call it "keeping the batsman honest"

 

[MD Jazz]

Bairstow tried to run Labuschagne out the same way the day before. So he has to cop it sweet.

Watch a replay. Marnus was batting out of his crease. Absolutely legitimate in those circumstances, the batsman is trying to gain an advantage by batting out of his crease. And a batsman is almost always expecting or aware of that danger.

Bairstow was not batting out of his crease, he was moving out after each ball. It was dumb but entirely innocent. Not trying to gain any advantage. You can call what Carey did "smart" but also disingenous. He could see what Bairstow was doing, he knew he wasn't trying to steal a run or cheat in any way.

He's out, it obviously creates a lot more feeling for the future tests.

But stop comparing it to instances that are not the same.

And I am a Stuart Broad hater, I love beating the Poms. Just wish we could have done it without such underhand tactics. Not a great example for lovers of sport where results are decided in the contest. This wasn't really part of the contest between batsman and bowler.

 

[Jason King]

Engaland talking about the spirit of the game is rich. That died when they started bodyline. End of story.

 

[MD Jazz]

2008-ish I think? Hardly back in the days of 8 ball overs. Growth is easy from the sidelines post-fact. When he was in the moment with the game on the line, not so much. Talk is cheap.

So one can't change their ideas in 15 years?

Most people would have considered a mankad an awful act 15 years ago, it's now legitimate because the non-striker is considered to be trying to cheat.

 

[theglove3]

Incredibly clever, heads up play by Carey.
A polished keeper.

Bairstow is a hack.
Looks like a village cricketer.
Couldn't catch a cold.
I find it humorous that the old dart keep selecting a keeper that can't keep.

His dismissal was a brain fade.
As for the spirit of the game they are just cut that we exploited their rules. THEIR RULES !!!!

Also very funny watching Stuart Fraud bat.

At the End of the Day.

Kookaburra 2
Dukes 0

 

[tigersnake]

So one can't change their ideas in 15 years?

You can, but thats not the point. Point is talk is cheap, easy to say you may have done something differently which might cast you in a bad light when you can't change it. People can say all sorts of things when they don't actually have to put-up. Woulda, shoulda, coulda.

Do you really reckon Stokes would have acted any differently if the ashes were on the line and Bairstow did the same to Carey? You may, I'm of the strong belief that he would not have.

If the poms, past and present, and baz, were squeaky clean, you'd have a point, and I may buy what Stokes and Baz are selling.

In the context of the moment I thought Broads antics were good, ashes were on the line, he geed-up the crowd and his captain, (I thought he pushed it a bit far which helped us in the end) but seriously rich coming from him, form with questionable spirit of the game. And I like Broad.

 

[TT33]

Watch a replay. Marnus was batting out of his crease. Absolutely legitimate in those circumstances, the batsman is trying to gain an advantage by batting out of his crease. And a batsman is almost always expecting or aware of that danger.

Bairstow was not batting out of his crease, he was moving out after each ball. It was dumb but entirely innocent. Not trying to gain any advantage. You can call what Carey did "smart" but also disingenous. He could see what Bairstow was doing, he knew he wasn't trying to steal a run or cheat in any way.

He's out, it obviously creates a lot more feeling for the future tests.

But stop comparing it to instances that are not the same.

And I am a Stuart Broad hater, I love beating the Poms. Just wish we could have done it without such underhand tactics. Not a great example for lovers of sport where results are decided in the contest. This wasn't really part of the contest between batsman and bowler.

Marnus was batting out of his crease to try to counteract the English bowlers, most top batters do, he's not trying to "gain an advantage" he's trying to play the bowlers the best way he can. If he gets run out doing it, so be it, he'd deserve it for being dumb & not making sure he couldn't be dismissed that way.
Bairstow was dumb in not realising that he was in danger of such a dismissal.


A mate & I used to coach junior cricketers (many, many years ago) & we drummed into them to be vigilant about that exact thing. We told them, always keep some part of your foot or bat behind the crease line until the ball is returned to the bowler or the umpire calls "over"

The guy I was coaching with was a former District Cricketer, a good batsman made a lot of runs in that comp. He said that it was impressed on them to be wary of that particular type of dismissal.

 

[yo_eddy]

...People can say all sorts of things when they don't actually have to put-up. Woulda, shoulda, coulda.

Exactly. Just hot air. Not in the spirit of the game? Well stop Bairstow trying to do the same thing. Insist Duckett was out caught by Starc, as we know it was. Pull that village oaf Robinson into line after abusing Usman. Call out the appalling behaviour of MCC members. But we know that's not going to happen. They're not genuine.

I note that Stokes and McCullum have fanned the flames even more post-game, no doubt in an an attempt to gee themselves up for the rest of the series.

 

[casper68]

Watch a replay. Marnus was batting out of his crease. Absolutely legitimate in those circumstances, the batsman is trying to gain an advantage by batting out of his crease. And a batsman is almost always expecting or aware of that danger.

Bairstow was not batting out of his crease, he was moving out after each ball. It was dumb but entirely innocent. Not trying to gain any advantage. You can call what Carey did "smart" but also disingenous. He could see what Bairstow was doing, he knew he wasn't trying to steal a run or cheat in any way.

He's out, it obviously creates a lot more feeling for the future tests.

But stop comparing it to instances that are not the same.

And I am a Stuart Broad hater, I love beating the Poms. Just wish we could have done it without such underhand tactics. Not a great example for lovers of sport where results are decided in the contest. This wasn't really part of the contest between batsman and bowler.

Should be a rule in cricket then, not out due to being Dumb and Innocent.

 

[mrposhman]

Marnus was batting out of his crease to try to counteract the English bowlers, most top batters do, he's not trying to "gain an advantage" he's trying to play the bowlers the best way he can. If he gets run out doing it, so be it, he'd deserve it for being dumb & not making sure he couldn't be dismissed that way.
Bairstow was dumb in not realising that he was in danger of such a dismissal.

A mate & I used to coach junior cricketers (many, many years ago) & we drummed into them to be vigilant about that exact thing. We told them, always keep some part of your foot or bat behind the crease line until the ball is returned to the bowler or the umpire calls "over"

No entirely true. Marnus (and most batters as you say), are batting out of their crease to take LBW largely out of the equation, it pushes the bowlers length back a little, so it takes extra bounce and increases the likelihood of the ball missing the stumps. Thats exactly what "gaining an advantage" is about. It doesn't mean you are trying to do something unscrupulous, just you are trying to dictate terms and therefore that ensures you gain an advantage. Jazz is right in this instance that Bairstow wasn't trying to gain that advantage, but he was very very dumb in what he did.

 

[caesar]

.

 

[Carter]

It's a stumping, pure and simple.

Batsmen need to be aware of getting stumped whether facing spin or pace.

End of story.

 

[AngryAnt]

Incredibly clever, heads up play by Carey.
A polished keeper.

Bairstow is a hack.
Looks like a village cricketer.
Couldn't catch a cold.
I find it humorous that the old dart keep selecting a keeper that can't keep.

His dismissal was a brain fade.
As for the spirit of the game they are just cut that we exploited their rules. THEIR RULES !!!!

Also very funny watching Stuart Fraud bat.

At the End of the Day.

Kookaburra 2
Dukes 0

username checks out

 

[Tigertool]

Again, very different examples.

But why is Carey’s so much worse than those examples?

 

[spook]

Play a lot more games and have a lot more participants .

And claim non-catches they know are non-catches, and punch each other in the back of the head when the other takes a catch, and claim they touch the ball when they know they didn't, and deliberately break the rules by holding opponents, throwing the ball etc. whenever they think they can get away with it.

Anyway, Stokes is a hell of a cricketer. I think it was Oldie who compared him to Gilchrist last night but the player most resembles is Botham. He's probably a better bat and a lesser bowler than Beefy was, but cut from the same cloth.