This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
There have been three incidents of sportsmanship recently that I thought were quite interesting.
Senanayake running out Buttler in the one dayer appeared to be within the rules and was supported by most of the pundits, but has had bad fall out.
Andy Murray conceded a point to Monfils last night when the rules were on his side and did something similar in the previous match with Verdasco both of which the commentator (Jim Courier) said he thought he was wrong to concede.
The Sri Lankan's have lost friends and support and most cricketers have said that it is a bad development since everyone knew this was possible over the years, they just never did it. Murray, on the other hand, has been praised highly and probably gained a lot of support from the crowd which he may put into good effect in the semi on Friday.
I think I am more with the Murray course of action than the Senanayke/Matthews one, but the circumstances were different as well. Murray was easily winning the sets when he conceded the points, the Sri Lankans were dismissing the guy who had smacked them around the ground two days earlier at a key point in the match.
Alan
Senanayake running out Buttler in the one dayer appeared to be within the rules and was supported by most of the pundits, but has had bad fall out.
Andy Murray conceded a point to Monfils last night when the rules were on his side and did something similar in the previous match with Verdasco both of which the commentator (Jim Courier) said he thought he was wrong to concede.
The Sri Lankan's have lost friends and support and most cricketers have said that it is a bad development since everyone knew this was possible over the years, they just never did it. Murray, on the other hand, has been praised highly and probably gained a lot of support from the crowd which he may put into good effect in the semi on Friday.
I think I am more with the Murray course of action than the Senanayke/Matthews one, but the circumstances were different as well. Murray was easily winning the sets when he conceded the points, the Sri Lankans were dismissing the guy who had smacked them around the ground two days earlier at a key point in the match.
Alan
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
I think Senanayke/Matthews are being pretty harshly treated hear. Running out an over zealous 'backer upper' was always part of school cricket when I played.
Its not as though Butler hadn't been warned twice already. Maybe they should have done it after one warning, but removed the appeal on the understanding that next time it would stand ? either way if no action is taken more and more batsmen will tale the piss - especially in the melting pot of a T20.
I think Senanayke/Matthews are being pretty harshly treated hear. Running out an over zealous 'backer upper' was always part of school cricket when I played.
Its not as though Butler hadn't been warned twice already. Maybe they should have done it after one warning, but removed the appeal on the understanding that next time it would stand ? either way if no action is taken more and more batsmen will tale the piss - especially in the melting pot of a T20.
In reply to GrahamD:
The reports I have heard though suggest that you can run the non-striker out around 90% of the time in one-day run chases, and because of this, it isn't done at the top level.
They have struggled to find many examples of people doing it.
One here of Chris Gayle not doing it - youtube.com/watch?v=b4bt13S_Mfo&
Alan
The reports I have heard though suggest that you can run the non-striker out around 90% of the time in one-day run chases, and because of this, it isn't done at the top level.
They have struggled to find many examples of people doing it.
One here of Chris Gayle not doing it - youtube.com/watch?v=b4bt13S_Mfo&
Alan
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
And it may be further complicated by the fact that Murray and Monfils have good friends for a long time.
The Buttler thing is a bit weird. The Sri Lankans played to the law. Buttler was warned in the previous over about his backing-up, so he's certainly dozy, as one commentator put it, if not really stupid, and he was a long way beyond the 'few inches' some commentators were suggesting. Keeping your bat in your ground until the bowler release the ball really isn't that difficult.
Boycott was chuntering on last night about how you do need to have some kind of sanction against extreme backing up in the later stages of an innings when sides are chasing runs, but that would seem really hard to enforce.
And it may be further complicated by the fact that Murray and Monfils have good friends for a long time.
The Buttler thing is a bit weird. The Sri Lankans played to the law. Buttler was warned in the previous over about his backing-up, so he's certainly dozy, as one commentator put it, if not really stupid, and he was a long way beyond the 'few inches' some commentators were suggesting. Keeping your bat in your ground until the bowler release the ball really isn't that difficult.
Boycott was chuntering on last night about how you do need to have some kind of sanction against extreme backing up in the later stages of an innings when sides are chasing runs, but that would seem really hard to enforce.
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
Being run out as the non-striker is entirely avoidable, and is entirely within the control of the batsman. If you don't want to run the risk of being run out, keep your bat in your ground.
> The reports I have heard though suggest that you can run the non-striker out around 90% of the time in one-day run chases, and because of this, it isn't done at the top level.
Being run out as the non-striker is entirely avoidable, and is entirely within the control of the batsman. If you don't want to run the risk of being run out, keep your bat in your ground.
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
Shame to see it but the Sri's warned him and he did it again. Also Jos is quick and could have started backing once the bowler hit his action.
Sometimes the 'spirit of cricket' can depend on the game and the oppo, played in some games where not walking, sledging and running across the batsman were par for the course. In other games the complete opposite.
Think the Murray action had more to do with momentum, why sit there listening to the oppo bitch for five mins when you can just finish him off. (for the Verdo match, missed the Monfils early parts)
Shame to see it but the Sri's warned him and he did it again. Also Jos is quick and could have started backing once the bowler hit his action.
Sometimes the 'spirit of cricket' can depend on the game and the oppo, played in some games where not walking, sledging and running across the batsman were par for the course. In other games the complete opposite.
Think the Murray action had more to do with momentum, why sit there listening to the oppo bitch for five mins when you can just finish him off. (for the Verdo match, missed the Monfils early parts)
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
We should stop complaining and take Dilshan's wicket in similar fashion at Lords. They won't like it up 'em!
In all seriousness, they should have recalled him. Bad form.
We should stop complaining and take Dilshan's wicket in similar fashion at Lords. They won't like it up 'em!
In all seriousness, they should have recalled him. Bad form.
In reply to Pepper:
which seems very sporting. Buttler has only himself to blame here:
youtube.com/watch?v=aDhRuslE37U&
> Shame to see it but the Sri's warned him and he did it again.
which seems very sporting. Buttler has only himself to blame here:
youtube.com/watch?v=aDhRuslE37U&
In reply to Morgan Woods:
Almost certainly planned by Sri Lanka. If I had the time I could show you plenty of evidence of their lot doing precisely the same. Mathews should have recalled him, lesson learnt.
http://www.thatscricket.com/news/2012/02/21/when-sachin-upheld-the-spirit-o...
Almost certainly planned by Sri Lanka. If I had the time I could show you plenty of evidence of their lot doing precisely the same. Mathews should have recalled him, lesson learnt.
http://www.thatscricket.com/news/2012/02/21/when-sachin-upheld-the-spirit-o...
Post edited at 10:24
In reply to Morgan Woods:
Hmmmm, first time seen it. nothing wrong with what Jos is doing there really, see that in every game, not sprinting off or half way down the track.
That said, he was warned twice so his own daft fault.
After stick they gave Jordan I expect it to be a bouncy summer...
Hmmmm, first time seen it. nothing wrong with what Jos is doing there really, see that in every game, not sprinting off or half way down the track.
That said, he was warned twice so his own daft fault.
After stick they gave Jordan I expect it to be a bouncy summer...
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
I gather Murray conceded the point after a ball fell out of his pocket - his own fault (and it happened to him a few times last year - so much for Scots having deep pockets). Now technically he should get a warning the first time, and lose the point thereafter - bit daft if you ask me, and I guess Murray knew he'd lost the point by that point.
Against Verdasco a good serve had been called out, then overruled, but Murray accepted the call hadn't affected him. Good sportsmanship and honest.
Hadn't Senanayke already warned Butler ? If so he was well within his rights - Butler was the one breaking the rules/spirit of the game.
I gather Murray conceded the point after a ball fell out of his pocket - his own fault (and it happened to him a few times last year - so much for Scots having deep pockets). Now technically he should get a warning the first time, and lose the point thereafter - bit daft if you ask me, and I guess Murray knew he'd lost the point by that point.
Against Verdasco a good serve had been called out, then overruled, but Murray accepted the call hadn't affected him. Good sportsmanship and honest.
Hadn't Senanayke already warned Butler ? If so he was well within his rights - Butler was the one breaking the rules/spirit of the game.
In reply to Chris the Tall:
In which case virtually every batsman in a run chase is breaking the rules/spirit of the game. This was a case of the Sri Lankan's being exceptionally keen to keep Buttler off the strike and using the rules of the game to do it, but they now have to deal with the repercussions.
A bit like Broad had to live with his not walking at a key point in the Ashes series a few years ago because it happened at a crucial point, despite the fact that no-one had 'walked' for the entire series, on both sides.
Rules and spirit - it is a complex thing in cricket and usually you will find it rules are applied where it is important, and the spirit is applied where it doesn't matter so much.
Alan
> Hadn't Senanayke already warned Butler ? If so he was well within his rights - Butler was the one breaking the rules/spirit of the game.
In which case virtually every batsman in a run chase is breaking the rules/spirit of the game. This was a case of the Sri Lankan's being exceptionally keen to keep Buttler off the strike and using the rules of the game to do it, but they now have to deal with the repercussions.
A bit like Broad had to live with his not walking at a key point in the Ashes series a few years ago because it happened at a crucial point, despite the fact that no-one had 'walked' for the entire series, on both sides.
Rules and spirit - it is a complex thing in cricket and usually you will find it rules are applied where it is important, and the spirit is applied where it doesn't matter so much.
Alan
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
Things are going to have to change, though, because aggressive backing up will become more and more normal if the laws aren't enforced. to my mind trying to steal a meter of ground on the run is at least as far against the spirit of the game as legitimately running someone out.
Things are going to have to change, though, because aggressive backing up will become more and more normal if the laws aren't enforced. to my mind trying to steal a meter of ground on the run is at least as far against the spirit of the game as legitimately running someone out.
In reply to GrahamD:
Knocking the bails off has been done plenty of times before and hasn't made the slightest bit of difference to the wider ODI game. It's just a cheap wicket.
Sri Lanka were offered a big reprieve by India at the Gabba last year for doing the same.
If we'd done it i'd be pretty embarrassed. Just a crappy thing to do, IMO.
Knocking the bails off has been done plenty of times before and hasn't made the slightest bit of difference to the wider ODI game. It's just a cheap wicket.
Sri Lanka were offered a big reprieve by India at the Gabba last year for doing the same.
If we'd done it i'd be pretty embarrassed. Just a crappy thing to do, IMO.
In reply to JMGLondon:
More or less crappy than trying to steal a meter on every run ? if the law never gets enforced, 1 meter will become 2 meters and so on.
Maybe the law needs to change such that it isn't a run out but the umpire can call "one short". But that isn't the law right now.
More or less crappy than trying to steal a meter on every run ? if the law never gets enforced, 1 meter will become 2 meters and so on.
Maybe the law needs to change such that it isn't a run out but the umpire can call "one short". But that isn't the law right now.
In reply to GrahamD:
Thin end of the wedge ?
Alan
> More or less crappy than trying to steal a meter on every run ? if the law never gets enforced, 1 meter will become 2 meters and so on.
Thin end of the wedge ?
Alan
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
Good for the Sri Lankans. Buttler is an idiot IMO and was trying to steal an unfair advantage.
Didn't Collingwood do something to them in a one dayer a few years ago ? Can't remember what it was.......
Andy Murray's gesture does him great credit.
Good for the Sri Lankans. Buttler is an idiot IMO and was trying to steal an unfair advantage.
Didn't Collingwood do something to them in a one dayer a few years ago ? Can't remember what it was.......
Andy Murray's gesture does him great credit.
In reply to I like climbing:
Colly was vs the Kewis when he ran one of them out after a mid pitch collision. They were really pissed about it and he regretted it almost straight away.
Stealing a meter hardly a crime, rather bat with someone on their toes than sat on their bat.
Colly was vs the Kewis when he ran one of them out after a mid pitch collision. They were really pissed about it and he regretted it almost straight away.
Stealing a meter hardly a crime, rather bat with someone on their toes than sat on their bat.
In reply to Pepper:
...but it is cheating. If 1 meter is acceptable, is 2 meters ? 3 meters ?
> Stealing a meter hardly a crime, rather bat with someone on their toes than sat on their bat.
...but it is cheating. If 1 meter is acceptable, is 2 meters ? 3 meters ?
In reply to GrahamD:
1 meter rarely becomes 2, and more often than not the batsman is not trying to steal what limited advantage 1 meter makes over 22 yards. Hardly an offence worthy of a dismissal, but who am I to disagree with law 42.15
Sri Lanka's moral position and rigid enforcement of 42.15 is commendable and I look forward to their continued adherence to it...
1 meter rarely becomes 2, and more often than not the batsman is not trying to steal what limited advantage 1 meter makes over 22 yards. Hardly an offence worthy of a dismissal, but who am I to disagree with law 42.15
Sri Lanka's moral position and rigid enforcement of 42.15 is commendable and I look forward to their continued adherence to it...
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
Wouldn't it be convenient for batting sides if there were no LBW appeals either?
The rules are clear - he was out, fair and square.
Wouldn't it be convenient for batting sides if there were no LBW appeals either?
The rules are clear - he was out, fair and square.
In reply to Pepper:
Thanks, I remember that now.
My comment re Buttler was based on him being warned before they ran him out - he should have taken notice.
Thanks, I remember that now.
My comment re Buttler was based on him being warned before they ran him out - he should have taken notice.
In reply to I like climbing:
True, for that he is a muppet. Still like him, not ready for test yet, needs more time in county. (totally not related to him being the only batsman Lancs have this year apart from Woody)
People have been backing up since the birth of the modern game, has it ever got to three meters?
Rules are rules but personally I've never got on with rules and less so with those that quote them. Remember some tosser stood in the car park waiting to quote the rule book on us being five late and him taking the toss without us.
Glad we stuffed them, and yeah we backed up, sledged, bounced, fielded too close. Nothing WG himself wouldn't do.
True, for that he is a muppet. Still like him, not ready for test yet, needs more time in county. (totally not related to him being the only batsman Lancs have this year apart from Woody)
People have been backing up since the birth of the modern game, has it ever got to three meters?
Rules are rules but personally I've never got on with rules and less so with those that quote them. Remember some tosser stood in the car park waiting to quote the rule book on us being five late and him taking the toss without us.
Glad we stuffed them, and yeah we backed up, sledged, bounced, fielded too close. Nothing WG himself wouldn't do.
In reply to Pepper:
I'd rather bat with someone who can hold their end up rather than get out because of a silly error having already been warned twice.
> Stealing a meter hardly a crime, rather bat with someone on their toes than sat on their bat.
I'd rather bat with someone who can hold their end up rather than get out because of a silly error having already been warned twice.
In reply to Martin W:
True there, was talking in general terms. Still say he is a prat because he was warned, but would want him to do it until he was.
Like in rugby, you want your flankers to live offside until the ref spots and warns them. Then they should behave. For a bit.
True there, was talking in general terms. Still say he is a prat because he was warned, but would want him to do it until he was.
Like in rugby, you want your flankers to live offside until the ref spots and warns them. Then they should behave. For a bit.
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
Off on a tennis tangent, I've seen Michael Chang cheered for outwitting an opponent with a cheeky underarm serve (I forget the situation, though it probably wasn't a Grand Slam singles final), yet I've also seen Martina Hingis almost booed off the court for doing the same (1999 French Open Ladies' Singles final). Her opponent and victor, Steffi Graf, seemed to be the only person in Paris that day to actually praise Hingis for it.
(seen other players either concede controversial points or simply give the next point away if an umpire refused to let them concede it)
edit - looks like I was wrong about Chang's underarm and possibly his sportsmanship, although here it says nothing about crowd response. Sounds a bloody epic match!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Chang#1989_French_Open_match_vs_Ivan_L...
Off on a tennis tangent, I've seen Michael Chang cheered for outwitting an opponent with a cheeky underarm serve (I forget the situation, though it probably wasn't a Grand Slam singles final), yet I've also seen Martina Hingis almost booed off the court for doing the same (1999 French Open Ladies' Singles final). Her opponent and victor, Steffi Graf, seemed to be the only person in Paris that day to actually praise Hingis for it.
(seen other players either concede controversial points or simply give the next point away if an umpire refused to let them concede it)
edit - looks like I was wrong about Chang's underarm and possibly his sportsmanship, although here it says nothing about crowd response. Sounds a bloody epic match!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Chang#1989_French_Open_match_vs_Ivan_L...
Post edited at 17:36
In reply to I like climbing:
Was, especially as I'd never played this other team before, thought it bloody rude. Found out later in the season they had been that way with a lot of sides whereas most the teams just got on with each other.
You dont need a bloody league rule book when folk are playing in trackies, games are stopped to chase scallies nicking the boundary markers and sides fielding with 8 and dog because people need to leave for work!
Later in the season a player from that side threatened to punch the umpire, who then told him he was an ice hockey player and he shut up quickly!
Was, especially as I'd never played this other team before, thought it bloody rude. Found out later in the season they had been that way with a lot of sides whereas most the teams just got on with each other.
You dont need a bloody league rule book when folk are playing in trackies, games are stopped to chase scallies nicking the boundary markers and sides fielding with 8 and dog because people need to leave for work!
Later in the season a player from that side threatened to punch the umpire, who then told him he was an ice hockey player and he shut up quickly!
In reply to JMGLondon:
As I said, the umpire should be allowed to call "one short" which penalises the batting side by preventing them getting a run if there is over zealous backing up but there is no dismissal.
> 1 meter rarely becomes 2, and more often than not the batsman is not trying to steal what limited advantage 1 meter makes over 22 yards. Hardly an offence worthy of a dismissal, but who am I to disagree with law 42.15
As I said, the umpire should be allowed to call "one short" which penalises the batting side by preventing them getting a run if there is over zealous backing up but there is no dismissal.
In reply to GrahamD:
I'd have to disagree. I think the umpires have quite enough to be keeping an eye on without having to police backing-up as well. The umpire at the bowler's end has to watch the bowler's feet for no-balls, then switch his attention down the track to be ready to judge LBWs, thin catches behind etc. The square leg umpire has to look out for positional infringements by the fielding side as the ball is delivered, and be ready to judge stumpings.
If the fielding side think the batsman is backing-up too eagerly then they have the means at their disposal to do something about it. For some reason this seems to have upset some people.
I don't think aggressive backing-up is "cheating" as some have suggested, any more than the if the batsman on strike takes his stance outside the popping crease - which is not at all uncommon. If the non-striker is foolish enough to be out of his ground when the bowler starts his run-up then he's even more at risk of being run out. Most of the time the non-striker does at least start with his bat in ground, even if he moves down the pitch as the ball is being delivered, so his first run is not even technically "short" - even though the striker's might be!
I'd have to disagree. I think the umpires have quite enough to be keeping an eye on without having to police backing-up as well. The umpire at the bowler's end has to watch the bowler's feet for no-balls, then switch his attention down the track to be ready to judge LBWs, thin catches behind etc. The square leg umpire has to look out for positional infringements by the fielding side as the ball is delivered, and be ready to judge stumpings.
If the fielding side think the batsman is backing-up too eagerly then they have the means at their disposal to do something about it. For some reason this seems to have upset some people.
> As I said, the umpire should be allowed to call "one short" which penalises the batting side by preventing them getting a run if there is over zealous backing up but there is no dismissal.
I don't think aggressive backing-up is "cheating" as some have suggested, any more than the if the batsman on strike takes his stance outside the popping crease - which is not at all uncommon. If the non-striker is foolish enough to be out of his ground when the bowler starts his run-up then he's even more at risk of being run out. Most of the time the non-striker does at least start with his bat in ground, even if he moves down the pitch as the ball is being delivered, so his first run is not even technically "short" - even though the striker's might be!
Post edited at 11:59
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
I totally agree with the way the Sri Lankans handled it, he was warned for over zealous backing up yet did it again, the dismissal was fair and the Sri Lankans were sportsmen about it. Buttler was attempting to unfairly gain yards before the bowler had released the ball and was penalised for it. We have all backed up beyond the crease when we are chasing a score but to continue to do it after a warning (and knowing that the bowler and the umpire will be watching for it) is just brainless.
I totally agree with the way the Sri Lankans handled it, he was warned for over zealous backing up yet did it again, the dismissal was fair and the Sri Lankans were sportsmen about it. Buttler was attempting to unfairly gain yards before the bowler had released the ball and was penalised for it. We have all backed up beyond the crease when we are chasing a score but to continue to do it after a warning (and knowing that the bowler and the umpire will be watching for it) is just brainless.
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
I missed the match, but I read that the French Open Ladies' Singles final yesterday saw huge amounts of timewasting by Sharapova, including a 20 minute "time out" where she disappeared into her locker room. Apparently she plays this sort of tactic quite a lot. Also turns her back on opponents preparing to serve, so they have to delay their serve.
I remember when she won Wimbledon in 2004, she was a delight (she had not developed her "power scream on EVERY SINGLE HIT" back then) but I've not followed her much since then. Sounds like it's for the best!
Keeping it tennis....I recently revisited (via Wikipedia!) a former hero of mine, Michael Chang. This description of his French Open win 25 years ago kind of put me off him. Fair play for skying the ball to slow the game down, and I might forgive the underarm serve, but that final break to win the championship sounds a bit off...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Chang#1989_French_Open_match_vs_Ivan_L...
I missed the match, but I read that the French Open Ladies' Singles final yesterday saw huge amounts of timewasting by Sharapova, including a 20 minute "time out" where she disappeared into her locker room. Apparently she plays this sort of tactic quite a lot. Also turns her back on opponents preparing to serve, so they have to delay their serve.
I remember when she won Wimbledon in 2004, she was a delight (she had not developed her "power scream on EVERY SINGLE HIT" back then) but I've not followed her much since then. Sounds like it's for the best!
Keeping it tennis....I recently revisited (via Wikipedia!) a former hero of mine, Michael Chang. This description of his French Open win 25 years ago kind of put me off him. Fair play for skying the ball to slow the game down, and I might forgive the underarm serve, but that final break to win the championship sounds a bit off...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Chang#1989_French_Open_match_vs_Ivan_L...
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
I think sportsmanship is one of the best things about cricket, but it works two ways. As a wicket keeper, I've pointed out to batsmen that they should walk, when he and I both know that he's hit it, but the umpire is unsure. Similarly, I've sometimes asked a keeper when I've been batting if he caught it cleanly, when I know I've touched it, and if he has, I'll walk. I'm happy to be fair and sporting towards the opposition, but I expect the other side to do the same.
With the run out in question, I think it's probably fair. The batsman has been warned, and if he continues to do it, then it's his own fault. Important for me is that the bowler doesn't try to do it on the sly, or try to "trick" the batsman. However, if he's been warned, it's hard to see how it could be underhand.
I think sportsmanship is one of the best things about cricket, but it works two ways. As a wicket keeper, I've pointed out to batsmen that they should walk, when he and I both know that he's hit it, but the umpire is unsure. Similarly, I've sometimes asked a keeper when I've been batting if he caught it cleanly, when I know I've touched it, and if he has, I'll walk. I'm happy to be fair and sporting towards the opposition, but I expect the other side to do the same.
With the run out in question, I think it's probably fair. The batsman has been warned, and if he continues to do it, then it's his own fault. Important for me is that the bowler doesn't try to do it on the sly, or try to "trick" the batsman. However, if he's been warned, it's hard to see how it could be underhand.
In reply to Martin W:
Exactly, I'm not sure why people are saying that the rules need to be enforced on backing up. The fact that you can be run out is surely enough of a deterent? If anything the fielding sides just need to start running out backer uppers and it would stop or at least become a calculated risk rather than a kind of 'permitted cheating'.
> If the fielding side think the batsman is backing-up too eagerly then they have the means at their disposal to do something about it.
Exactly, I'm not sure why people are saying that the rules need to be enforced on backing up. The fact that you can be run out is surely enough of a deterent? If anything the fielding sides just need to start running out backer uppers and it would stop or at least become a calculated risk rather than a kind of 'permitted cheating'.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Loading Notifications...