Cheating in Cricket

[Papa_Smurf]

He said he conceded to your argument and realized how much of a moron he was.

 

[Mike23]

You're an absolute idiot. The rules state you do what the umpire says, so no one has cheated by not walking

If the rules said walk, then they'd be cheating. It doesn't, they're not. You're wrong, just accept it for once instead of making yourself look stupider.

Well said! It is against the spirit of cricket but it's not against the rules.

 

[Owzat]

You're an absolute idiot. The rules state you do what the umpire says, so no one has cheated by not walking

If the rules said walk, then they'd be cheating. It doesn't, they're not. You're wrong, just accept it for once instead of making yourself look stupider.

Actually I've looked at the laws a few times and I'm pretty sure it says you are out if you edge it and it is caught, the ball hits you in line with the stumps etc, says nothing about the umpire having to give you out.

So if a batsman hits it in any way it and it is caught then he is out, forcing the umpire to adjudicate is cheating. If the batsman doesn't know, which I doubt in 99% of cases would apply, then the umpire would have to adjudicate. Hussain TWICE didn't walk against Sri Lanka in 00/01, patted it off the face of the bat as I recall. You SERIOUSLY claiming that isn't cheating?



As for keepers appealing, they may not actually know what it hit.

 

[puddleduck]

Ok, so everyone can appeal for whatever they like, but a batsmen has to not only accept rough decisions, they have to also give themselves out as well?

Have people actually gone crazy?

I am positive that somewhere in that book, it will state that the umpire is in charge, and he makes the decisions. Probably on the first page...

 

[SLICKR392]

Actually I've looked at the laws a few times and I'm pretty sure it says you are out if you edge it and it is caught, the ball hits you in line with the stumps etc, says nothing about the umpire having to give you out.

So if a batsman hits it in any way it and it is caught then he is out, forcing the umpire to adjudicate is cheating. If the batsman doesn't know, which I doubt in 99% of cases would apply, then the umpire would have to adjudicate. Hussain TWICE didn't walk against Sri Lanka in 00/01, patted it off the face of the bat as I recall. You SERIOUSLY claiming that isn't cheating?



As for keepers appealing, they may not actually know what it hit.

If you walk off at every edges and LBWs, then what are the umpires for ? Mopping the grass ? And there isn't anything in the rule book such as you should start walking once you think you have edged it. It isn't called cheating unless you don't follow the rules of the game.

 

[BKB1991]

AFAIC cheating is when you dont follow the rules. And correct me if I am wrong, the rules state you are out when the umpire says so, if he doesnt you are not.

 

[puddleduck]

I think there's something in the world's water supply, or the sun is melting people's brains.

 

[teamindia]

Here are the rules

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.

Law 32 (Caught) - Laws - Laws of Cricket - Laws & Spirit - Lord's

Does not say an umpire has to lift the hand. So yes it is cheating. Thanks to Owzat for pointing to the rules

 

[SLICKR392]

THAT IS A SPIRIT OF CRICKET FFS GOD DAMNIT! There is a difference between spirit of cricket & cheating. Not calling Ian Bell back isn't called cheating..it's against the spirit of cricket which I think is stupid.

 

[teamindia]

THAT IS A SPIRIT OF CRICKET FFS GOD DAMNIT! There is a difference between spirit of cricket & cheating. Not calling Ian Bell back isn't called cheating..it's against the spirit of cricket which I think is stupid.

Mister go and read the rules . It is Law 32 of cricket. The page title is Laws and Spirit.

Here are the list of all laws
http://www.lords.org/laws-and-spirit/laws-of-cricket/laws/

List of all spirt of the games
http://www.lords.org/laws-and-spirit/spirit/

 

[puddleduck]

Or you could start at the beginning.. you know, like right at the start -

1.Appointment and attendance

Before the match, two umpires shall be appointed, one for each end, to control the game as required by the Laws, with absolute impartiality. The umpires shall be present on the ground and report to the Executive of the ground at least 45 minutes before the scheduled start of each day?s play.

Seriously dude, you're embarrassing yourself now

 

[teamindia]

Or we can go to the preamble

Responsibility of captains

The captains are responsible at all times for ensuring that play is conducted within the Spirit of the Game as well as within the Laws.

3. The umpires are authorised to intervene in cases of:

Time wasting
Damaging the pitch
Dangerous or unfair bowling
Tampering with the ball
Any other action that they consider to be unfair

So yes umpires are giving out since they consider it is as unfair. If the games was played fair within the laws of the game they would be mopping the stadium (as one of the posters recommended)

 

[puddleduck]

Ok, yes let's use the preamble instead of the actual rules. Just stop trolling, you must be doing it deliberately now?

So, again the actual rules...

7. Fair and unfair play
The umpires shall be the sole judges of fair and unfair play.

I really have no idea what you're trying to say anymore, I think you genuinely need some help

 

[angryangy]

Everyone go read law 27 and feel free to disregard most of the claims made this thread. Read the laws and try and figure out what they mean, but don't come up with an opinion and then go trawling through the laws to substantiate your claim.

The thread is now dead because it is too stupid to live.