Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

England Cricket 2021 (excluding Ashes)

13567…183

Comments

  • lolwray
    lolwray Posts: 4,899
    Thinking of the stupid ridiculous exaggerated leave as introduced by Steve Smith..maybe theres some way it can be controlled in the laws of the game 

    It's not a good example and if it hasn't infiltrated club cricket yet it will do sometime soon...
  • Chizz
    Chizz Posts: 28,331
    Steve Smith is a phenomenally gifted batsman and will deserve his elevated place in the record books when his career ends.  But the stench of cheating - and its attendant detrimental consequence on a generation of Australian cricketers - has no trouble following him around.  

    He breaks the laws of the game.  He ignores his responsibility to uphold the spirit of the game.  He's shameless and selfish and his actions - note the plural - foment the diminution of the great sport.  He is, in the best sense of the phrase, not cricket.  

    Law 41.12.1 is clear.  It is unambiguous.  But it is not optional.  
    It is unfair to cause deliberate or avoidable damage to the pitch. A fielder will be deemed to be causing avoidable damage if either umpire considers that his/her presence on the pitch is without reasonable cause.
    What 'reasonable cause' is there for a fielder to damage the pitch, especially during the fourth innings when neither he or his teammates were scheduled to use the batting crease again during the match?   

    I wonder if he ever thinks of the words of a cricketer who, some years ago, was caught cheating and promised the cricketing public, in front of the world's press that:

    'I hope in time I can earn back respect and forgiveness'. 

    Who was that cricketer, pleading for his future and promising to demonstrate redemption and exemplary behaviour? Steven Peter Devereux Smith. 
  • mendonca
    mendonca Posts: 9,405
    Excellent summary!
  • kentaddick
    kentaddick Posts: 18,729


    can't wait for the sequel
  • kentaddick
    kentaddick Posts: 18,729
    lolwray said:
    Thinking of the stupid ridiculous exaggerated leave as introduced by Steve Smith..maybe theres some way it can be controlled in the laws of the game 

    It's not a good example and if it hasn't infiltrated club cricket yet it will do sometime soon...
    courtney walsh was the OG of the exaggerated leave.
  • killerandflash
    killerandflash Posts: 69,840
    Very poor by Smith, as no way can that be classed as accidental or even instinctive as he shouldn't have been on the crease full stop.
  • blackpool72
    blackpool72 Posts: 23,667
    Smith has the most punchable face I have ever seen.
    I'd be surprised that when he was born the midwife never considered punching his face rather than slap his arse. 
  • thai malaysia addick
    thai malaysia addick Posts: 18,332
    I find it all rather pathetic. I can't imagine what was going through his mind. He doesn't get the difference between being highly competitive and cheating.
  • North Lower Neil
    North Lower Neil Posts: 22,945
    Weird thing is, what did it achieve really?

    Takes about 10 seconds to take guard again.
  • Chizz
    Chizz Posts: 28,331
    thai malaysia addick said:
    I find it all rather pathetic. I can't imagine what was going through his mind. He doesn't get the difference between being highly competitive and cheating.
    I can
  • Sponsored links:



  • Chizz
    Chizz Posts: 28,331
    North Lower Neil said:
    Weird thing is, what did it achieve really?

    Takes about 10 seconds to take guard again.
    If you notice it, yes.  Smith did two things.  One was to destroy the guard that was there.  If he'd stopped there, the batsman would have just re-marked it.  But the second thing he did was to mark a new one.  It's possible that a batsman wouldn't notice it had been re-marked and placed against another guard.  
  • thai malaysia addick
    thai malaysia addick Posts: 18,332
    Chizz said:
    thai malaysia addick said:
    I find it all rather pathetic. I can't imagine what was going through his mind. He doesn't get the difference between being highly competitive and cheating.
    I can
    I get your point, @chizz. I was wondering how he was thinking he would get away with it.
  • Chizz
    Chizz Posts: 28,331

  • MrOneLung
    MrOneLung Posts: 26,835
    Rubbing out the guard is bad, but to then put another one in !!!

    mind you, I am not sure why batsmen have to ask umpires for a guard anyway.
  • North Lower Neil
    North Lower Neil Posts: 22,945
    Chizz said:
    North Lower Neil said:
    Weird thing is, what did it achieve really?

    Takes about 10 seconds to take guard again.
    If you notice it, yes.  Smith did two things.  One was to destroy the guard that was there.  If he'd stopped there, the batsman would have just re-marked it.  But the second thing he did was to mark a new one.  It's possible that a batsman wouldn't notice it had been re-marked and placed against another guard.  
    Ah hadn't noticed he'd added another one.
  • mendonca
    mendonca Posts: 9,405
    edited January 2021
    Looking back at the video, it's not clear that he is marking the new guard with his studded swipes that he performed 5 times! That was either the act of wiping it or marking a pretend one. I cannot be sure.
  • kentaddick
    kentaddick Posts: 18,729
    MrOneLung said:
    Rubbing out the guard is bad, but to then put another one in !!!

    mind you, I am not sure why batsmen have to ask umpires for a guard anyway.
    erm, so they know where their stumps are? So they can play a certain side of the wicket to a specific bowler?
  • MrOneLung
    MrOneLung Posts: 26,835
    kentaddick said:
    MrOneLung said:
    Rubbing out the guard is bad, but to then put another one in !!!

    mind you, I am not sure why batsmen have to ask umpires for a guard anyway.
    erm, so they know where their stumps are? So they can play a certain side of the wicket to a specific bowler?
    I know why they are asking the Umpire (to get their bat in front of the stumps in position they want) I was more pondering as to why they should ask the umpire to tell them rather than make their own decision.


  • golfaddick
    golfaddick Posts: 33,620
    I call that cheating. Anything that is not necessary or disrupts the player /surface is cheating. No ons else apart from the batsman and bowler should be on the wicket. 
  • mendonca
    mendonca Posts: 9,405
    MrOneLung said:
    kentaddick said:
    MrOneLung said:
    Rubbing out the guard is bad, but to then put another one in !!!

    mind you, I am not sure why batsmen have to ask umpires for a guard anyway.
    erm, so they know where their stumps are? So they can play a certain side of the wicket to a specific bowler?
    I know why they are asking the Umpire (to get their bat in front of the stumps in position they want) I was more pondering as to why they should ask the umpire to tell them rather than make their own decision.


    A batsman cannot view the line of his stump from 22 yards away. The Umpire can. 

    It has no more relevance that the placement of a football for a corner. A ref spraying the floor to keep a wall at a 10 yard distance. It's just part of that sport.
  • Sponsored links:



  • kentaddick
    kentaddick Posts: 18,729
    MrOneLung said:
    kentaddick said:
    MrOneLung said:
    Rubbing out the guard is bad, but to then put another one in !!!

    mind you, I am not sure why batsmen have to ask umpires for a guard anyway.
    erm, so they know where their stumps are? So they can play a certain side of the wicket to a specific bowler?
    I know why they are asking the Umpire (to get their bat in front of the stumps in position they want) I was more pondering as to why they should ask the umpire to tell them rather than make their own decision.


    ... because the umpire has the best view and its the gentlemanly thing to do?
  • North Lower Neil
    North Lower Neil Posts: 22,945
    https://www.skysports.com/cricket/news/12175/12185570/steve-smith-tim-paine-defends-former-australia-captain-over-pitch-scuffing-incident-in-india-test

    What a load of bollocks.

    So he was shadow batting a couple of shots "as a left hander" to visualise how he was going to bat.

    Despite being a right hander and it being the 4th innings.

    Pathetic. 
  • MrOneLung
    MrOneLung Posts: 26,835
    Sri Lanka won the toss and elected to bat. 

    65-3 Lunch. 


    Stuart Broad: 2-14 from five overs

    Sam Curran: 0-8 from four overs

    Mark Wood: 0-10 from three overs

    Dom Bess: 1-17 from six overs

    Jack Leach: 0-15 from six overs

  • oohaahmortimer
    oohaahmortimer Posts: 34,145
    78-3

    some shocking shot selection for the wickets 
  • oohaahmortimer
    oohaahmortimer Posts: 34,145
    81-5 

    3 for Broad 
  • Todds_right_hook
    Todds_right_hook Posts: 10,877
    I’m not up to date on cricket at the moment and didn’t even realise the game was on. 

    Very surprised to see bairstow back. What has happened to burns, pope and stokes 
  • oohaahmortimer
    oohaahmortimer Posts: 34,145
    105-6 another shocking wicket 

  • oohaahmortimer
    oohaahmortimer Posts: 34,145
    Todds_right_hook said:
    I’m not up to date on cricket at the moment and didn’t even realise the game was on. 

    Very surprised to see bairstow back. What has happened to burns, pope and stokes 

    Stokes rested 
    pope injured I believe and not sure on Burns possibly injured as well 
  • MarcusH26
    MarcusH26 Posts: 8,029
    oohaahmortimer said:
    Todds_right_hook said:
    I’m not up to date on cricket at the moment and didn’t even realise the game was on. 

    Very surprised to see bairstow back. What has happened to burns, pope and stokes 

    Stokes rested 
    pope injured I believe and not sure on Burns possibly injured as well 
    Burns wife had their first child this week so he's missing the whole tour. 
  • Todds_right_hook
    Todds_right_hook Posts: 10,877
    Just shows how weak our batting cover is if bairstow is back in

Categories

“Marketplace”