Not "walking" = cheating (?)

[puddleduck]

I think a lot of people have missed the point.

It was hilarious, and gets funnier every time I see it.

Couldn't have happened to a nicer nation.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

Even the legendary Andrew Symonds not out of 2007/08 vs India was not a big deflection like Broad's. Watch the tape of the Symonds' gaffe and Dhoni even moves slightly leg side to take the ball ie. he was hardly diving in front of 1st slip and then Bucknor giving him not out.

but symonds came out and said he did know he hit it, so how is he not cheating if someone that knows they edge to first slip is purely because they also know they edged it? the distance the ball travels isn't a great way to differentiate between who's cheating and who's not.

of course, symonds could have just been saying that to gain a psychological advantage over india, to annoy them a bit and make them lose focus. He might not really have been sure after all.

which complicates matters even more and makes the whole thing some sort cricketing law Schr?dinger's cat. (god, that is probably the smartest analogy I have ever made.)

 

[Samuels]

Rather than going into the talks of who walked and who didn't walked and who should have walked, I'd like the rule to be simple. If a batsman needs to head back to the pavilion if an umpire adjudges him as out irrespective of the fact whether he was really out or not, then, a batsman should stand if the umpire has not raised his finger. Its an umpire's job to make a decision and the batsman's job to play as long as he can. Simple as that.

 

[Cricketman]

So if you claim a catch that you know you grassed and the umpire doesnt see it, are you cheating?

 

[barmyarmy]

Not if it actually carried you're not.

 

[Cricketman]

What if its a bump ball that the umpire doesn't see? Clearly it is not out and the fielder must know it, but hey it's not his fault if the umpire didn't see it right?

 

[Samuels]

What if its a bump ball that the umpire doesn't see? Clearly it is not out and the fielder must know it, but hey it's not his fault if the umpire didn't see it right?

Fielder should not appeal at first place if he is 100% sure that the ball has bounced before he took the catch but in case the fielder does appeal (its not more a gentleman's game you know), the umpire have the all facility in the world to check the replays and confirm with his fellow umpires before giving his final decision. Still if an umpire is noodle enough to give the batsman out, one can't help.

 

[KrishnamurthiN]

Well the main aim of Cricket is having and showing respect to your fellow players as well your opponents....For what? For establishing Cordial relations between the two nations or counties whatever who are playing cricket. So Even if a team loses a match where one of its In form batsman walks even if the Umpire doesn't raise his finger for it, that moment will be talked about rather than who the victors were and thus the main aim of Cricket will be achieved.
Thus all the countries playing or who are about to play cricket must stress on this point and groom its players and make them realize that statistics are mere numbers and the respect that team has worldwide is the Real Deal....
So If you ask me I would say If a batsman is out but is given a NOT OUT, He SHOULD WALK. Same goes to the fielding side where they must appeal only if they feel the batsman MAY BE OUT and not for the sake of confusing the Umpire.
So According to me If the above said things are not happening then the players may as well rest and do some other work rather than playing cricket, Since in this situation fellas the sole aim or Purpose of playing Cricket is defeated....

 

[SK-ZC]

If Broad Doesn't Got The Edge On the Blade,and Umpire Declares that was a OUT,Can Aussie's Bring Back Broad Again to play ? as "Game Respect" , So why Broad wants to walk if umpire declares as not out?

It was not Cheating , According to me.....

 

[Markkkkk]

Why was it cheating? How many times does a bowler appeal when he thinks it isn't out yet the umpire gives it? There is nothing wrong with standing your ground all thats happening is you are saying"It's the umpires choice wether i knocked it or not"

Nothing wrong with it ive done it before

 

[KrishnamurthiN]

The sole aim of playing cricket is defeated when a player doesn't walk despite knowing he is out....

 

[abhi_jacko]

Why was it cheating? How many times does a bowler appeal when he thinks it isn't out yet the umpire gives it?

Exactly.

Also we have seen so many times that the bowler,keeper,slips tend to appeal really loudly when a leg side WIDE has been bowled - basically trying to fool the umpire into thinking that it hit something on its way and getting away with a dot ball. Almost every single player has been guilty of this.

 

[KrishnamurthiN]

Well the sole aim of playing cricket is defeated If a batsman doesn't walk despite knowing he is out as well as when a bowler appeals despite knowing that it is not out, just for the sake of confusing the umpire...... Cricket actually is not about wins and losses its about fostering cordial relations between the different nations....

 

[sifter132]

Why was it cheating? How many times does a bowler appeal when he thinks it isn't out yet the umpire gives it? There is nothing wrong with standing your ground all thats happening is you are saying"It's the umpires choice wether i knocked it or not"

Nothing wrong with it ive done it before

I've never seen a bowler appeal for something that he was 100% PERCENT SURE wasn't out. I've seen bowlers make some ambitious appeals, but it's usually with the hope that the umpire will agree with their rather optimistic view of things. Yes, even leg side wides, if it's close, bowlers should be appealing. Is that cheating? Hoping the umpire makes a mistake? Really hard to prove that a batsman or bowler is knowingly cheating. Although Dinesh Ramdin picking a ball up off the ground and claiming it comes pretty close

 

[Samuels]

There is so much technology these days, one can't fake a catch that easily with so many cameras on you. Secondly, its an umpire job to decide whether a batsman is out or not and for the purpose, as I mentioned earlier, he can consult his fellow onfield umpire and the third umpire who has the facility to view the slow motion replays from different angles.