Cheating in Cricket

[teamindia]

Why is ICC and cricketing world in general not doing much to clampdown on cheating batsmen? The ones who make an obvious nick and act as if nothing has happened. Australians infact have justified this attitude for long (Even though Mr.Ponting wants batsman to take his word for catches). Symonds during the fateful tour of 2008 went an boasted in front of media that he was out and was lucky. Hiding a wrongdoing in realworld is unlawful. The only catches where batsman may really have a doubt are those bat/pad catches. I am sure this method will be more accurate and show better sportsmanship.

Why does ICC not introduce heavy fines/bans for such behavior?

 

[barmyarmy]

I think it's really about walking and not walking. Most batters take the view that they're going to be given out when they're not out sometimes so why should they walk when the opposite is true.
DRS does of course make this a moot point.

 

[SaiSrini]

Umpires are there for a reason - to give decisions. At times, a batsman might not have felt the nick since the game is happening so fast and yet he would have nicked the ball (a rare case, but nonetheless possible). In such a situation, it would be unfair to punish the batsman for no fault of his.

According to me, its the umpire's call. In fact I would go to the extent and say that, if a batsman thinks he has nicked it but the umpire hasn't given it, HE SHOULD STAY IN HIS CREASE!

 

[Mike23]

Why is ICC and cricketing world in general not doing much to clampdown on cheating batsmen? The ones who make an obvious nick and act as if nothing has happened. Australians infact have justified this attitude for long (Even though Mr.Ponting wants batsman to take his word for catches). Symonds during the fateful tour of 2008 went an boasted in front of media that he was out and was lucky. Hiding a wrongdoing in realworld is unlawful. The only catches where batsman may really have a doubt are those bat/pad catches. I am sure this method will be more accurate and show better sportsmanship.

Why does ICC not introduce heavy fines/bans for such behavior?

SACHIN TENDULKAR 1st Time Not Walking After Nicked The Ball - YouTube .. watch the vid and stfu.

 

[teamindia]

SACHIN TENDULKAR 1st Time Not Walking After Nicked The Ball - YouTube .. watch the vid and stfu.

What does this have to do with what I said? Did I say sachin should not be fined or banned

 

[barmyarmy]

Umpires are there for a reason - to give decisions. At times, a batsman might not have felt the nick since the game is happening so fast and yet he would have nicked the ball (a rare case, but nonetheless possible). In such a situation, it would be unfair to punish the batsman for no fault of his.

According to me, its the umpire's call. In fact I would go to the extent and say that, if a batsman thinks he has nicked it but the umpire hasn't given it, HE SHOULD STAY IN HIS CREASE!

Well he's talking about when a player clearly knows he's nicked it though.

 

[Mike23]

What does this have to do with what I said? Did I say sachin should not be fined or banned

I posted this in the wrong place...should've been here (in the comm bank series thread)

India does not believe in the technology.

Dilshan should be fined/banned for making an obvious nick and standing ground. Cheating should be punished heavily.

Yes it was an obvious nick, but what i'm trying to say is that even Indians do it, so no point bringing forth your opinions (which ftr i agree with).

 

[teamindia]

I posted this in the wrong place...should've been here (in the comm bank series thread)

Still does not make sense. I was commenting on the just concluded match. Anyway Sachin and Dilshan must be punished for cheating.

 

[Mike23]

Still does not make sense. I was commenting on the just concluded match. Anyway Sachin and Dilshan must be punished for cheating.

Why on earth should they be punished? They have every right to stand their ground if they umpire does send them on their way. Yes it is cheating, there is a solution to the its called the DRS.

 

[6ry4nj]

For nicks where the batsman knows they hit it, they still have no effective way of communicating that fact to the umpire before he makes his decision. Anyway, in today's world when losing can be as lucrative as winning, why should the umpire believe them?

The only solution that works consistently is for all such decisions to be arbitrated by Hotspot. Yes I know Hotspot is suspected of missing edges occasionally, but frankly if Hotspot doesn't detect it it's not worth worrying about - it then becomes a case of benefit of the doubt to the batsman (just talking about catches here of course).

Where a dishonestly false statement (or nonverbal communication...) is taken into consideration in an umpiring decision, that is cheating and ought to result in a player ban.

Good on you teamindia for starting the thread btw. His initial examples were all Australian, but he is clearly calling for consistent sanctions to be applied to all.

 

[SaiSrini]

Well he's talking about when a player clearly knows he's nicked it though.

And how do you know that the player clearly knows it? You take his word, right (unless you have a way of getting into the player's mind and finding out that he knows he nicked it or decipher his body language and all)? If you start punishing players based on their words, they will stop saying in public that they nicked it. So basically, I come back to that post I posted above.

 

[barmyarmy]

As I said already I reckon that if you're not concerned about actually getting the decisions right then if players get lucky good for them.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

it's difficult ot really clamp down on deception because part of it is self deception. I guarantee you in 9/10 of rubbish lbw appeals the bowlers will genuinely, genuinely believe it was hitting the stump/pitched inside leg etc.

the problem with walking gets a little muddier when you consider stakes. sure, it's fine to walk in a test, hell, even if the series is on the line and your dismissal will put your team in serious trouble. but say, phil hughes against new zealand, he nicked the ball on 0 after another terrible series (actually I think he gloved it) now, that was his international career on the line. he knew fine well, if he'd walked then and there that was it for him playing for australia (as it turned out he didn't do that great anyway and still does face a daunting task getting back in the side) it's a monumental ask to say someone should voluntarily throw away their career. same standards would apply in a tight finish in a world cup final or something like that.

 

[puddleduck]

Should a wicketkeeper be fined for appealing when he knows there wasn't an edge? A bowler for appealing when he knows it was going down leg? An umpire when he gives a batsmen out when he wasn't?

You either accept that mistakes are made, or you use the DRS (stastically more godamn accurate than humans). All this potential talk of banning players based on nothing more than circumstancial and hypothetical evidence is absurb.

Should spinners be banned for consistently trying to influence the umpire by appealing for absolutely everything?

 

[teamindia]

Should a wicketkeeper be fined for appealing when he knows there wasn't an edge? A bowler for appealing when he knows it was going down leg? An umpire when he gives a batsmen out when he wasn't?

You either accept that mistakes are made, or you use the DRS (stastically more godamn accurate than humans). All this potential talk of banning players based on nothing more than circumstancial and hypothetical evidence is absurb.

Should spinners be banned for consistently trying to influence the umpire by appealing for absolutely everything?

I thought you blocked me

Yes wicket keeper, bowlers,fielders and captains are fined if they appeal excessively for no reason. They can even get banned. Batsmen get away with not walking away through out their career. Which does not look right.