[Cricket] The Ashes- England v Australia- 2nd Test, Lords, June 28 - July 02, 2023

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Ashes- 2nd Test- The result ?


  • Total voters
    74
  • Poll closed .


BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
18,197
Seems like this is because it happened during an appeal for LBW (not something that comes across on the video very well). I guess if we are talking spirit of the game this could be seen as similar to the end of an over thing.

As you so wisely say though Badfish this is why we have rules.
Thanks Badfish.

 




Eeyore

Colonel Hee-Haw of Queen's Park
NSC Patron
Apr 5, 2014
25,909
Yet many people seem to be saying it was not in the 'spirit of the game' in the same way as Baistow.

Surely this is why we have rules instead of relying on the 'spirit of the game'?
Well, yes.

But I suppose the delineation is the intent of the batsman. CDG was in the process of actively trying to gain an advantage (looking for a run) JB wasn't. So one is not up for question, the other is when we consider how the game should be played fairly.

If anyone has 35 minutes to spare, get yourself a coffee and pull up a chair. Mike Brearley on the Spirit of Cricket (6:30 to 42:15 ) Cowdrey Lecture 2019.

 


BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
18,197
Anyway, you will all be absolutely stunned to hear that the Australian press seem to be leading with the behaviour of the MCC members instead for the spirit of cricket thing.

A massive difference between here and there is the press he back their sporting teams to the hilt rather than trying to bring them down like the red top rags in the UK.
 


Scappa

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2017
1,584
Yet many people seem to be saying it was not in the 'spirit of the game' in the same way as Baistow.

Surely this is why we have rules instead of relying on the 'spirit of the game'?
Was Bairstow still in the act of playing the ball, or seeking to gain an advantage - standing outside his crease to negate swing/take a quick run/advancing down the track?

This is the same Australian setup who, post Sandpaper Incident, themselves vowed to place greater emphasis on spirit of the game
 


Sid and the Sharknados

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 4, 2022
5,695
Darlington
Seems like this is because it happened during an appeal for LBW (not something that comes across on the video very well). I guess if we are talking spirit of the game this could be seen as similar to the end of an over thing.

As you so wisely say though Badfish this is why we have rules.
You normally consider the ball to be dead once it's gone through to the keeper, unless you've run down the pitch to hit a spinner or something.
Strictly speaking, this is only true once both sides agree to it, but 99.9% of the time that doesn't really matter.
In de Grandhomme's case, the ball came off him and he lost track of where the ball had gone. Now I'm not sure if he was deliberately walking around to put the LBW appeal off, or thought there might be a run on, but there was never any question of whether the ball was in play.
That the Australians are dredging this sort of thing up is sort of making my point about their needing to be seen to always be in the right for me.
 




BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
18,197
Was Bairstow still in the act of playing the ball, or seeking to gain an advantage - standing outside his crease to negate swing/take a quick run/advancing down the track?

This is the same Australian setup who, post Sandpaper Incident, themselves vowed to place greater emphasis on spirit of the game

The 'spirit of the game' over here means winning it. They may have said stuff after sandpapergate but this shit is deep in the culture of Australian cricket.

While the ire of England is pointed at Australia rather than Bairstow there is a problem. One of these things is changeable, the other isn't. Why focus on that you can't change instead of drilling into the players to be careful out there?

Is it possibly that england would be better at sport if we sorried less about the 'spirit of the game' and played to the rules. We have a noble and long history of being 'cheated' in football and we claim the moral high ground because of it.

Australia's take on this is that we can have the moral high ground and the will take the win.

I guess its about priorities.
 


Akker

New member
Sep 9, 2020
12
The architect of Englands revival.

Eagerly looking forward to this hypocrites next instalment tomorrow. No doubt he will be running with England 2-0 up or something.



 


BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
18,197
You normally consider the ball to be dead once it's gone through to the keeper, unless you've run down the pitch to hit a spinner or something.
Strictly speaking, this is only true once both sides agree to it, but 99.9% of the time that doesn't really matter.
In de Grandhomme's case, the ball came off him and he lost track of where the ball had gone. Now I'm not sure if he was deliberately walking around to put the LBW appeal off, or thought there might be a run on, but there was never any question of whether the ball was in play.
That the Australians are dredging this sort of thing up is sort of making my point about their needing to be seen to always be in the right for me.
I agree, their fans know they are on dodgy ground but I am convinced they neither they nor the team will care about this if/when they win the ashes.

What frustrates me is that our sporting teams never seem to learn about this stuff. I hope to god that someone has given Bairstow a rocket for his sloppiness, enough of a rocket that we don't make this mistake again. You can be damn sure that the Aussie team would be doing this if the tables were turned.
 




Rdodge30

Well-known member
Dec 30, 2022
624
I hope Broad gets a chance to “Mankad” Carey and then gets right in his face as he walks to the Pavilion 👊👊
 


Sid and the Sharknados

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 4, 2022
5,695
Darlington
I agree, their fans know they are on dodgy ground but I am convinced they neither they nor the team will care about this if/when they win the ashes.

What frustrates me is that our sporting teams never seem to learn about this stuff. I hope to god that someone has given Bairstow a rocket for his sloppiness, enough of a rocket that we don't make this mistake again. You can be damn sure that the Aussie team would be doing this if the tables were turned.
I mean, I don't much care what they think, I just find it funny.
But beyond Bairstow's dismissal, there's been far too much sloppiness with regards the basics of the game from England in the first two matches, we could and should have won both these games if we'd maintained a basic level of discipline re. no balls and shot selection.
The latter I can understand there's a tension between the situation and clarity/commitment to an individual's way of playing, but at the end of the day all of these players have been around a while now and should do better than they did in this match.
 


Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
62,404
Location Location
Bairstow was casual and naive, particularly given the knife-edge fine balance of the match (the SERIES) at that time. There are many factors in play, but given that we lost by just 43 runs, its not hard to imagine a Stokes-Bairstow partnership might well have been enough to help get us over the line. Yet another opportunity tossed into the Ashes firepit by England this series.

Carey is still a f*king WEASEL though. What a grubby way to take a wicket. Broad was dead right - he'll be remembered for that.
 




Scappa

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2017
1,584
Bairstow was casual and naive, particularly given the knife-edge fine balance of the match (the SERIES) at that time. There are many factors in play, but given that we lost by just 43 runs, its not hard to imagine a Stokes-Bairstow partnership might well have been enough to help get us over the line. Yet another opportunity tossed into the Ashes firepit by England this series.

Carey is still a f*king WEASEL though. What a grubby way to take a wicket. Broad was dead right - he'll be remembered for that.
If that's the only way they think they can get him out, that's a) pathetic and b) they haven't been paying attention
 


Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
62,404
Location Location
If that's the only way they think they can get him out, that's a) pathetic and b) they haven't been paying attention
Well...Bairstow has a rich and varied way of getting out, as we have all witnessed. I'm not saying his snidey wicket is why we lost the test. But it did ultimately exposed the tail, essentially leaving us with 1 more life, so it was a crucial dismissal.

Aussies just do what they do. Pointless us whining about it.
 


Kalimantan Gull

Well-known member
Aug 13, 2003
13,437
Central Borneo / the Lizard
Agree totally. Only Root would get in their side. Maybe a fit Stokes over Green (but he’s not fit). The bowling attacks in particular are light years apart. Bazball has been incredible at making the side more than the sum of its parts. That said, I was there on Thursday and the final session batting wasn’t Bazball it was brainless.
Reckon I'd choose Stokes over Green regardless, but you do you 😀
 




Kalimantan Gull

Well-known member
Aug 13, 2003
13,437
Central Borneo / the Lizard
Bairstow was casual and naive, particularly given the knife-edge fine balance of the match (the SERIES) at that time. There are many factors in play, but given that we lost by just 43 runs, its not hard to imagine a Stokes-Bairstow partnership might well have been enough to help get us over the line. Yet another opportunity tossed into the Ashes firepit by England this series.

Carey is still a f*king WEASEL though. What a grubby way to take a wicket. Broad was dead right - he'll be remembered for that.
The thing about leaving the crease to tap the pitch and have a chat is that both teams were doing it throughout the game, repeatedly and even when the spinner was bowling and the keeper had it. I remember thinking a couple of days back that you'd never get away that in a club game, but that it must be an understanding at this level that its OK. So I can't fault Bairstow on his own, he was doing something that everyone had been doing, and then Carey decided suddenly he was going to be a c*nt.

Plus the umpire, he's getting the bowlers cap out of his belt ffs. You don't do that if you haven't called over. If the umpires not looking, the ball should be dead. Weakness all round.

Glad it happened though :D Really spiced everything up. Can't wait for Headingley now!
 


Deportivo Seagull

I should coco
Jul 22, 2003
5,467
Mid Sussex
Whatever the Aussies say in public regards rules etc their body language and facial expressions when they came back out said the opposite. They know they went a step too far and that it’s tainted their victory. For all their talk, they haven’t got rid of the stench of ball tampering saga. I fully expect Carey to be peppered with bouncers for the rest of the series.

as for the three members being suspended at Lords, not sure what the Aussies thought the response would be. Needy bunch of pricks are our antipodean brethren.
 


pasty

A different kind of pasty
Jul 5, 2003
31,024
West, West, West Sussex
I hope Broad gets a chance to “Mankad” Carey and then gets right in his face as he walks to the Pavilion 👊👊

I think we can pretty much guarantee Broad will do something along the lines of a mankad , even if it’s just a warning to a batter.

Although I hope he doesn’t actually do it and appeal. That would drag us down to their level.
 






METALMICKY

Well-known member
Jan 30, 2004
6,823
Anyway, you will all be absolutely stunned to hear that the Australian press seem to be leading with the behaviour of the MCC members instead for the spirit of cricket thing.

A massive difference between here and there is the press he back their sporting teams to the hilt rather than trying to bring them down like the red top rags in the UK.
If the MCC members actually used foul and abusive language or wrongfully called cheat then it should rightfully be condoned. However, if a few posh duffers in silly ties mumbled something along the lines of " shame on you " surely the big burly Aussies like Warner need to grow thicker skins. The professional response would have been to walk straight on or if they felt the need to respond a very curt simple " Whatever " or " look in the score book mate" would have sufficed.
 




Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top