[Cricket] 2nd ODI England v Australia

[Mackenzie]

Watching the video it looked clear that he wasnt taking evasive action as was not going to hit him but the stumps but when it happened would he have known that, I dont think so. Perhaps should have been given the benefit of the doubt and not out.

Behave.

 

[Sheebo]

Let the Aussies cheat - they still can't take the fact they were massive favourites & lost the Big one

 

[Jello]

The throw was heading for his stumps and stopped it! If it was self defence his hands would be trying to protect his head not his wicket.

 

[Blues Rock DJ]

The throw was heading for his stumps and stopped it! If it was self defence his hands would be trying to protect his head not his wicket.

is the correct answer !

 

[albion534]

Slo motion looks worse, real time, no chance

Some massive guy hurls a ball at you from close range, you'd dive out the way

 

[Jello]

Slow mo makes it worse, you can see his hand searching for the ball. If you're playing Australia your first instinct should be to protect your wicket! He did but got caught out 99/100 he'd of got away with it.

 

[LamieRobertson]

Slo motion looks worse, real time, no chance

Some massive guy hurls a ball at you from close range, you'd dive out the way

I wonder what you would really do 'real time' and not with the benefit of thinking about it

 

[LamieRobertson]

Slow mo makes it worse, you can see his hand searching for the ball. If you're playing Australia your first instinct should be to protect your wicket! He did but got caught out 99/100 he'd of got away with it.

Ball wasn't thrown in slow mo though was it

 

[LamieRobertson]

Watching the video it looked clear that he wasnt taking evasive action as was not going to hit him but the stumps but when it happened would he have known that, I dont think so. Perhaps should have been given the benefit of the doubt and not out.

I'd agree BG....but it's typical Oz...maybe Smith thinks they've been too nice...still what goes around comes around ..he'll get his turn

 

[Bold Seagull]

The throw was heading for his stumps and stopped it! If it was self defence his hands would be trying to protect his head not his wicket.

Absolute crap. In real time there is no way he could have reacted other than to just fling himself to the ground. It's like a fielder at silly point or forward short leg, you take evasive action but you end up catching it, not because you intended to, but it just hits you.
No way anyone has the reflexes to do that intentionally. The Aussies knew that, the only people not is the 3rd umpire and you, sucked in by slow mo.

 

[happypig]

The throw was heading for his stumps and stopped it! If it was self defence his hands would be trying to protect his head not his wicket.

The stop was pure chance, luck some might say, but the laws state that interference has to be "wilful". He's thrown himself out of the way, arm flailing, and the ball has hit him. He's not looking at it and there has to be a serious element of doubt as to his wilfulness to interfere. Therefore Australia should have given him the benfit of the doubt, withdrawn the appeal and called him back but, as they often do, they want to "win at all costs"

 

[Hampster Gull]

Just got back from the match. Lots and lots of "feedback" from the crowd to Starc and the Umpires. What a joke. At real time speed most would have also put their arm and tried to get out the way. The Aussies have lowered the bar again

 

[dazzer6666]

Just got back from the match. Lots and lots of "feedback" from the crowd to Starc and the Umpires. What a joke. At real time speed most would have also put their arm and tried to get out the way. The Aussies have lowered the bar again

This.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Well, at least we know the type of captain Smith is going to be.

 

[BensGrandad]

Well, at least we know the type of captain Smith is going to be.

Sore at losing The Ashes series and has to go back to Oz with some consolation credence.

 

[Triggaaar]

Why is it the fault of the Aussies for appealing, rather than the umpires for making the wrong decision?

 

[Bold Seagull]

Why is it the fault of the Aussies for appealing, rather than the umpires for making the wrong decision?

Spirit of the game. Some decisions are based on judgement and therefore an 'appeal'. Most captains would withdrawal the appeal and not put the umpire in the position of making the decision. Only 6th time someone has been out this way in 3800 odd matches!
similar things happen if a running batsmen collides with the bowler or fielder, generally the captain will withdrawal an appeal if a run out occurs in that instance.

Most forms of cricket from that distance with the ball hurled full force at the batsmen, you won't get an appeal because you know as a cricketer there is no way you are doing anything other than protect yourself. You'll note it's barely an appeal from the Aussies, at first it's more like an apology, even the umpires can't believe that've actually been asked and I think they ask Smith to confirm they're appealing. They then bottle the decision and some goon with slow mo thinks it proves willful obstruction. Terrible decision, not on the sense of say a poor LBW, but because it is so against that spirit the game should be played in.

 

[Hampster Gull]

Remember this is the country that bowled the last ball in a match vs NZ UNDER ARM when the kiwis needed a six to win the match. The Aussie moral compass is super low in competitve sports. Nice at least to see that their once impressive sporting prowess is in decline

 

[coagulantwolf]

Watching the video it looked clear that he wasnt taking evasive action as was not going to hit him but the stumps but when it happened would he have known that, I dont think so. Perhaps should have been given the benefit of the doubt and not out.

Do you literally just post comments just for attention and to be the guy with the 'different' opinion?

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Spirit of the game. Some decisions are based on judgement and therefore an 'appeal'. Most captains would withdrawal the appeal and not put the umpire in the position of making the decision. Only 6th time someone has been out this way in 3800 odd matches!
similar things happen if a running batsmen collides with the bowler or fielder, generally the captain will withdrawal an appeal if a run out occurs in that instance.

Most forms of cricket from that distance with the ball hurled full force at the batsmen, you won't get an appeal because you know as a cricketer there is no way you are doing anything other than protect yourself. You'll note it's barely an appeal from the Aussies, at first it's more like an apology, even the umpires can't believe that've actually been asked and I think they ask Smith to confirm they're appealing. They then bottle the decision and some goon with slow mo thinks it proves willful obstruction. Terrible decision, not on the sense of say a poor LBW, but because it is so against that spirit the game should be played in.

You, by the letter of the laws of the game, can only be out if an appeal is made, even when your middle stump has been smashed out the ground from a legal ball. Therefore it is totally as your post remains the fielding sides captain to decide if he wishes the appeal to stand.

If the bowlers ever needed a better incentive to play hard ball this is it. As another beamer whistles past sorry you tosser hand slipped.