1st Test: England v Australia at Nottingham Jul 10-14, 2013

[Ricco_M]

The "To walk or not to walk" argument rumbles on again - as always I guess it is just down to the individual involved

It was refreshing and nice to see Bairstow walk earlier but it seems to be each to their own

The one thing Michael Clarke should learn from today is to be a lot more tactful in using his reviews - cooke has been very astute in the use of his reviews whereas the Aussies have gambled more on theirs - they should a least keep the last review for absolute certs like what happened today.

 

[aussie1st]

I don't blame Broad, that was down to Aleem "I need glasses" Dar and Michael "I need to stop wasting reviews" Clarke.

 

[Auwais]

Aleem Dar is Pakistani and we know their history with brown envelopes.

Just saying.

Oh and this is humourous in hindsight:

 

[Left_Hander]

I don't blame Broad, that was down to Aleem "I need glasses" Dar and Michael "I need to stop wasting reviews" Clarke.

This. While it obviously should have been out, Clarke is so trigger happy with his reviews.

 

[ferg512]

It saddened me a little bit but I guess its up to personal choice, I'm a walker myself. The fact that it was Broad of all people made me more angry about the whole thing.

----------

The comparisons between Broad and Ramdin are ridiculous. The main difference is that Ramdin actively tried to deceive the umpire, like a dive in football. On the other hand, what Broad did was fail to correct the umpire, that's like asking the goalkeeper to correct the referee if the a goal is incorrectly disallowed. These are fundamental differences. Also, with regards to the Ian Bell example, it would actually be wrong for him to be given out as he had tapped into his crease and was not attempting a run. This is inscribed in the laws somewhere, meaning that he could not be given out.

Sorry but I don't understand, how did Broad not deceive the umpire by acting as though he didn't hit it, which I'm sure played a factor in Dars decision.

 

[midgetwars]

You think that Australia's bowling attack is better than England's?

If Australia chose the proper bowlers then possibly on par. But now, it's slightly behind.

Though, stats wise. Australia is better at bowling.

----------

The problem here is that Broad didn't walk on one of the most clearest edges. Normally, on those minor edges, even on replays it's not clear but this one is.

BUT, fair enough on Broad for following the umpire's crap decision. This wasn't even a 50/50 decision, this was clear. EVERYONE thought it was out, Australia were celebrating, the scorecards were even updated.

Also, what makes it worse is that Broad didn't walk and crap decision against Agar on a clear decision, revenge would of been sweet for Agar.

 

[Owzat]

It saddened me a little bit but I guess its up to personal choice, I'm a walker myself. The fact that it was Broad of all people made me more angry about the whole thing.

----------



Sorry but I don't understand, how did Broad not deceive the umpire by acting as though he didn't hit it, which I'm sure played a factor in Dars decision.

Not "walking" is cheating, the laws don't stipulate the umpire has to give you out

1. Out Caught

The striker is out Caught if a ball delivered by the bowler, not being a No ball, touches his bat without having previously been in contact with any fielder, and is subsequently held by a fielder as a fair catch before it touches the ground.

https://www.lords.org/mcc/laws-of-cricket/laws/law-32-caught-1/

As you say he was trying to deceive the umpire, and at the very least it is against the spirit of the game/bad sportsmanship.

All those who think it's ok to stand your ground should hang your heads in shame, if you were playing a friendly game in the park you'd be furious if someone was out and didn't walk. If Broad knew, and I'm certain he did, he should have walked. There is no justification for not walking other than doubt, and he can't prey on slight doubt or hoping to get away with it.

aussies can't complain really, they are the ar*eholes who made it so common that people now accept it as part of the game, and that's the real shame, that so many people accept it and even defend it.

So enough with this "I guess it is down to the individual", even if you believe the umpire should have to give someone out for them to have hit the ball and the fielder caught it - and I'm not talking about clean catches - then you must surely not be so misled that you think it is in the spirit of the game to refuse to give yourself out?!?!?!?!?

Cheats Charter - you can choose not to walk

----------

Oh and it also backs up what I've been saying all along about the Dopey Review System, that making it effectively tactical was always going to throw something like this up.

That said, Broad cheated and should have walked thus negating the issue of remaining reviews. And when the review still gets it wrong the injustice stands, but that's about silly blinking s*y and their priorities being up their own a*se

 

[aussie1st]

If Australia chose the proper bowlers then possibly on par. But now, it's slightly behind.

I don't know about par but we wouldn't be that far behind as a unit if Pattinson, Harris, Bird + spinner was the attack. Starc isn't quite there yet and this wouldn't be the pitch to have him in front of Bird or Harris. Siddle on his day is brilliant as we saw in the first innings but can leak runs at times and goes through spells like today.

 

[zeustrojanstark]

People talk asif Stuart Broad is the first and only cricketer not to have walked after getting an edge.I am an Aussie fan,i love England too but i hate Broad but i dont really like the way people talk about Broad.Aleem Dar has always given us shocking decisions time and again,if people here blame only Aleem Dar,then blame DRS,Hotspot etc..I have always disliked DRS and now with Trott's dismissal i feel ICC should seriously consider to remove DRS forever.Shockers or brilliant ones,i would like people to respect the onfield umpires.Umpiring is one tough job and we have seen legends like Dickie Bird,David Shepard,Simon Taufel etc.not the way we treat umpires and umpiring.

 

[barmyarmy]

Interesting point about the umpires in the papers this morning. 8 of the 12 Elite Panel umpires are from Australia and England leaving only 4 to stand in the 10 Ashes tests.
Two of those are Dar and Erasmus...

 

[MattW]

Interesting point about the umpires in the papers this morning. 8 of the 12 Elite Panel umpires are from Australia and England leaving only 4 to stand in the 10 Ashes tests.

Which I think is crazy that we can't just have the best umpires, we have so much technology now that there's enough scrutiny on the umpires that we don't need to assume they will fail at basic professionalism and favour their own side.

 

[barmyarmy]

I think you can have a "non-neutral" umpire in ODIs. I totally agree that it's insulting to the elite panel to assume they are unprofessional.

There did used to be issues in India with home umpires though.

 

[aditya123]

I agree with the suggestion that we can now do away with this idea of neutral umpires. Firstly, it would mean you have a larger pool of umpires, get the travel load off these guys who are travelling pretty much the length and breadth of the planet due to this rule. I think one of the main reasons for umpires like Taufel retiring so early is the fact that he would be away 10 months a year owing to not being able to umpire in Australia tests.

 

[MattW]

Wow, what a delivery.

 

[Left_Hander]

How many do you guys think Australia can chase? Personally, I'd be worried with anything over 100 haha. I don't think we're out of it just yet, but I wouldn't want to chase many more than 300.