Cricket Thread

[Vieux Talonneur]

Since when wasn't 5-13 or 6-17 good enough to win MoM? Mental game, the ebbs and flows of test matches are what makes them so compelling.

Bring on the Ashes!

Alpha, cricket's good. Support England and give it a try

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Meg Lanning has just walloped an unbeaten 133 off 63 for Aus against Eng in the women's T20. Outstanding, if helped by some rank bowling.

 

[Reiser99]

Has your mind changed in the last hour and a half?

Ridiculous match.

Definitely, Ireland just capitulated. It's a shame as they had a fantastic.

 

[Rich Taff]

Definitely, Ireland just capitulated. It's a shame as they had a fantastic.

They had a fantastic what?
You can't just leave it like that! What was fantastic? Was it a theme tune? Was it a motorcycle display team?
Darn it, I must know!

 

[Reiser99]

They had a fantastic what?
You can't just leave it like that! What was fantastic? Was it a theme tune? Was it a motorcycle display team?
Darn it, I must know!

Hmm guess I need to find something better than 'chance' now.

Had a fantastic prospect of inflicting a humiliating drubbing of their former oppressors.

Happy?

 

[Rich Taff]

Hmm guess I need to find something better than 'chance' now.

Had a fantastic prospect of inflicting a humiliating drubbing of their former oppressors.

Happy?

Much better. You have to finish sentences off! (I must admit I'm slightly disappointed as I was hoping for an amazing motorcycle display team link)

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Stonking start to the Ashes. Loving the sandpaper waving.

 

[smartcooky]

Booing a test century, and then booing the batsman as he leaves the field as last man out scoring 144.

What a disgraceful bunch of morons you have among that Barmy Army crowd. Whatever else Smith has done as regards sandpaper gate, he absolutely did not deserve that.

****-off back to soccer where you belong with your boorish behaviour.

 

[ncurd]

Sorry but no Steve Smith and David Warner were senior players who conducted a plan to deliberately cheat in a game of Cricket. This wasn't a slight bend of the laws like previous ball tampering scandals this was outright wrong.

Smith was also captain a 12 month ban was way too lenient and was all about allowing them to play in the world cup and subsequent Ashes. They deserve all the flak they get. As far as I'm concerned their actions are no worse than the Pakistan spot fixing affair. Infact they are possibly worse as their actions was obtain advantage to win a game of cricket.

Plus look back when Broad didn't walk and the flak he got down under, and Broad didn't break a single law he simply wasn't given out.

 

[smartcooky]

Sorry but no Steve Smith and David Warner were senior players who conducted a plan to deliberately cheat in a game of Cricket. This wasn't a slight bend of the laws like previous ball tampering scandals this was outright wrong.

Smith was also captain a 12 month ban was way too lenient and was all about allowing them to play in the world cup and subsequent Ashes. They deserve all the flak they get. As far as I'm concerned their actions are no worse than the Pakistan spot fixing affair. Infact they are possibly worse as their actions was obtain advantage to win a game of cricket.

Plus look back when Broad didn't walk and the flak he got down under, and Broad didn't break a single law he simply wasn't given out.

I accept all that, but I do not accept that they get a life sentence for it. They served their suspension, and while it was probably not long enough, that isn't their fault - it wasn't a decision they had any input into.

I have always been a fan of the Barmy Army because they are fun, and their banter is always light-hearted. I am now reviewing that position.

 

[TRF_heineken]

I accept all that, but I do not accept that they get a life sentence for it. They served their suspension, and while it was probably not long enough, that isn't their fault - it wasn't a decision they had any input into.

I have always been a fan of the Barmy Army because they are fun, and their banter is always light-hearted. I am now reviewing that position.

I dunno Cooky. I have mixed feelings about this issue.

Yes it's very tasteless to boo a centurion as he walks off the field. But that innings doesn't take away the mud off his face for his previous test's indiscretions.

IMHO Smith and Warner should play test cricket ever again, and their suspension wasn't at all long or good enough.

I guess I will always measure cheating in any shape or form in cricket by using Hansie Cronje as the example to compare with. His cheating meant the end of his cricketing career, and anyone else after him getting a lesser sentence just makes me so mad. Hansie was and still is, one of the most loved sportsmen in South African history, and we as supporters will voice our opinion of cheaters when they are still on the field, by way of booing.

I think if Smith and Warner ever return to SA for a test, the welcoming wagon will be a lot more hostile...

 

[Rich Taff]

Deserve all they get. The only thing they regret is being caught cheating.

The sight of a guy in the world cup, dressed as a cricket ball being chased around the stadium by a guy dressed as sand paper was one of the highlights.

And the booing is nothing compared to the 'behaviour' of the crowds down under.

 

[Which Tyler]

I accept all that, but I do not accept that they get a life sentence for it. They served their suspension, and while it was probably not long enough, that isn't their fault - it wasn't a decision they had any input into.

I have always been a fan of the Barmy Army because they are fun, and their banter is always light-hearted. I am now reviewing that position.

Which is your subjective opinion.
Others are allowed theirs.

Bring it back to rugby, and even though he's "served his time" I will happily boo Callum Clarke for the rest of his career, even if he ends up playing for Bath.
Others will say that he's served his time and deserves a second chance. Neither side is "right" or "wrong" and neither deserves to be told to "****-off back to soccer where you belong with your boorish behaviour."

 

[Every Time Ref]

Which is your subjective opinion.
Others are allowed theirs.

Bring it back to rugby, and even though he's "served his time" I will happily boo Callum Clarke for the rest of his career, even if he ends up playing for Bath.
Others will say that he's served his time and deserves a second chance. Neither side is "right" or "wrong" and neither deserves to be told to "****-off back to soccer where you belong with your boorish behaviour."

I do think there's an important distinction between deliberately maiming someone and cheating at a sport though. I'll happily boo Callum Clarke to the end if time because he won't have served his time until he goes to prison for it, frankly.

To be honest, re sandpapergate, I'm in the fairly unpopular camp that it was a bit of an overreaction, I don't for a moment think they're unique in doing it, I think there have been constant scandals over the years and it's the tip of the iceberg in terms of what's going on. I refuse to judge Atherton, Tendulkar, whoever else in any lasting way, and I'm not going to judge these guys either. Well, I will judge David Warner for generally being a piece of **** but that's a separate thing. I've got a lot of respect for Steve Smith as a player and sandpaper isn't going to change that for me.

Altering the condition of the ball is way less of a big deal than is made of it in the cricketing world in my opinion. It's based on a totally subjective judgement that making the ball shinier = good, making the ball rougher = bad and I think it's ridiculous how much hand wringing is attached to it.

I accept I'm in a minority. Full disclosure, I am (or was) a fast bowler, and have a bit of a bee in my bonnet about the constant trend over the last couple of decades towards favouring the batsmen more and more (I switched on a T20 last night and the boundaries were ******* ludicrous!). Frankly if I had it my way, ball tampering would be legal ...

 

[ncurd]

It isn't a subjective opinion though, making one side rougher and the other side shiny is entirely how you get the ball to reverse swing. Movement through the air being an absolutely key part of a fast bowlers arsenal. Reverse swing being exceptionally potent because the movement occurs far later.

 

[ncurd]

I would ban white balls though.

 

[Every Time Ref]

It isn't a subjective opinion though, making one side rougher and the other side shiny is entirely how you get the ball to reverse swing. Movement through the air being an absolutely key part of a fast bowlers arsenal. Reverse swing being exceptionally potent because the movement occurs far later.

This doesn't contradict what I said though? My point is exactly what you said - but that although both have an effect on the ball, for some reason one is encouraged and the other is a full blown scandal if you're caught.

I was being pithy, and I do accept that sandpaper is a step up, I'm not saying it didn't deserve punishment. I just think the hand-wringing was waaaaay out of proportion.

I would ban white balls though.

What about 2 balls per innings? Let's make absolutely damn sure that there will never be any reverse swing ever again, God forbid...

 

[ncurd]

Whilst utter Horlicks 2 balls was supposed to encourage conventional swing for longer. Oh yeah other wish is red Kookaburra ball all to be put the white ball pure as well.

 

[smartcooky]

Altering the condition of the ball is way less of a big deal than is made of it in the cricketing world in my opinion. It's based on a totally subjective judgement that making the ball shinier = good, making the ball rougher = bad and I think it's ridiculous how much hand wringing is attached to it.

I accept I'm in a minority. Full disclosure, I am (or was) a fast bowler, and have a bit of a bee in my bonnet about the constant trend over the last couple of decades towards favouring the batsmen more and more (I switched on a T20 last night and the boundaries were ******* ludicrous!). Frankly if I had it my way, ball tampering would be legal ...

This

EVERY international team, without exception, has indulged in ball tampering; sand in the pocket, bottle cap, saliva and sweet lolly, the tube of chapstick, the zinc cream on the face, the rasp-faced button on the back pocket, using the trouser zip, lifting the seam with a thumbnail....

Lets name a few names of ball tamperers shall we

1990 - Chris Pringle, New Zealand (Warning)
1994 - Michael Atherton, England (£2,000 fine)
2000 - Waqar Younis, Pakistan (suspended for 1 match, fined 50% of match fee)
2004 - Rahul Dravid, India (fined 50% of match fee)
2005 - Marcus Trescothic, England (never charged but admitted to it three years later)
2006 - Inzamam Ul Haq, Pakistan (match terminated and result awarded to England by default)
2010 - Shahid Afridi, Pakistan (suspended for one match)
2013 - Faf Du Plessis, South Africa (fined 50% of match fee)
2014 - Vernon Philander, South Africa (fined 75% of match fee)
2016 - Faf Du Plessis, South Africa (again) (fined 100% of match fee)
2018 - Steve Smith, Australia (suspended immediately and sent home, banned from all cricket for 12 months)
2018 - Mark Warner, Australia (suspended immediately and sent home, banned from all cricket for 12 months)
2018 - Cameron Bancroft, Australia (suspended immediately and sent home, banned from all cricket for 9 months)
2018 - Dinesh Chandimal , Sri lanka (suspended for one match)

Smith's and Warner's crimes were allowing Bancroft to be clumsy enough in the way he went about it to get caught.

It is worth noting that these three were dealt with far more harshly, by a couple of orders of magnitude, than anyone before since!

 

[TRF_heineken]

This

EVERY international team, without exception, has indulged in ball tampering; sand in the pocket, bottle cap, saliva and sweet lolly, the tube of chapstick, the zinc cream on the face, the rasp-faced button on the back pocket, using the trouser zip, lifting the seam with a thumbnail....

Lets name a few names of ball tamperers shall we

1990 - Chris Pringle, New Zealand (Warning)
1994 - Michael Atherton, England (£2,000 fine)
2000 - Waqar Younis, Pakistan (suspended for 1 match, fined 50% of match fee)
2004 - Rahul Dravid, India (fined 50% of match fee)
2005 - Marcus Trescothic, England (never charged but admitted to it three years later)
2006 - Inzamam Ul Haq, Pakistan (match terminated and result awarded to England by default)
2010 - Shahid Afridi, Pakistan (suspended for one match)
2013 - Faf Du Plessis, South Africa (fined 50% of match fee)
2014 - Vernon Philander, South Africa (fined 75% of match fee)
2016 - Faf Du Plessis, South Africa (again) (fined 100% of match fee)
2018 - Steve Smith, Australia (suspended immediately and sent home, banned from all cricket for 12 months)
2018 - Mark Warner, Australia (suspended immediately and sent home, banned from all cricket for 12 months)
2018 - Cameron Bancroft, Australia (suspended immediately and sent home, banned from all cricket for 9 months)
2018 - Dinesh Chandimal , Sri lanka (suspended for one match)

Smith's and Warner's crimes were allowing Bancroft to be clumsy enough in the way he went about it to get caught.

It is worth noting that these three were dealt with far more harshly, by a couple of orders of magnitude, than anyone before since!

Using saliva is permitted though. Most of the players used saliva, but was busy chewing gum or something else and that was the cause for the fines. Every team has a designated person that shines the ball for them to try and get as much as possible out of the ball for them within the rules of the game. Sure these guys overstepped in using other things such as gum or something else, whether it was on purpose or not, but you can't put them in the same bracket as the sandpaper trio.

Reason being:

1. There was a deliberate scheme by the Captain, vice-captain and the culprit (Bancroft) to conspire and do what they did with them knowing that it's beyond the scope and boundaries of the ICC Rules and Regulations.

2. They did it in such a manner that they wanted to hide what they are doing, and had they not been caught on camera, they would have gotten away with it.

3. Their team-mates, well most of them, didn't know what they were up to, neither did their administrators and selectors.

4. The fact the CA went to such a length after the incident, made it clear that it was a much bigger issue than the other incidents.

To make the ball rough on one side is a tough thing to do, and their plan was to get it to reverse, something their opposition wasn't able to do in that test either, they failed with the bat and tried to save face with the ball. It was a very tough series, and they got their asses handed to them.

They were so consumed with winning at all cost, that they felt that cheating would be okay, even if they get caught.

Now cooky, in the criminal justice system, we would call that Premeditation. And that usually warrants the most extreme penalties.