The Cricket Thread

[McFlash]

I think this really sums it all up big fella.
Roll on Headingley.
I have a gut feeling you guys will bounce back big time.

Looking forward to Headingley, it's going to be an interesting game, especially being so close to the last one and 'the incident'.
I think the likes of Stokes, Bairstow and of course Broad will be well up for it and they're all players who are better when they're angry.

Hopefully there's a bit more to the pitch and it's not another short-ball-athon but if there's a bit of needle out there, it should make for a good game.

 

[McFlash]

It’s ironic that you bring this up.

Can you remember the last time England got upset over the spirit of the game not being respected?

I can't help but hate the whole idea of a mankad.
Just seems like such a dick thing to do.
In that clip you posted, the batter was still grounded as the bowler was in the middle of her action, it's not like she was halfway down the track already.

I know it's technically within the rules but it really shouldn't be.

 

[Timbo Tottenham]

Looking forward to Headingley, it's going to be an interesting game, especially being so close to the last one and 'the incident'.
I think the likes of Stokes, Bairstow and of course Broad will be well up for it and they're all players who are better when they're angry.

Hopefully there's a bit more to the pitch and it's not another short-ball-athon but if there's a bit of needle out there, it should make for a good game.

Bairstow’s home ground too, so I imagine that him and crowd will be well up for it. If the Aussies think the copped it at Lords…

 

[LeSoupeKitchen]

good question, how it's going on down here is generally, in short "whinging poms" and really not much more than that other than the click bait sites

in short, we are entitled to appeal, it's up to the umpires to make a decision that we have no control over

I mean seriously, Trescothic and his cough lollies, McCallum and his running out of Murali when he stopped running because Sangakara got his ton, so after the single Mig Mac (who was the keeper) ran Murali out who was standing mid pitch to congratulate Snaga

we could go on

let he who is without sin cast the first stone

I've had a good sleep and am reinvigorated.

I just don't understand why something McCullum did for NZ nearly 20 years ago is relevant. Does that mean England can now actually fully cheat in the Ashes for the next 20 years and if Australia complain we can just bring up the sandpaper?

When you saw footage of the Long Room, were you just appalled? Or do you think maybe the Aussies have possibly done something a bit naughty when the most famous prawn sandwich brigade in the world completely lose their minds? Just the day before they gave Lyon a thunderous applause after he looked to have won the test for you guys. Eoin Morgan has played there since he was 16 and has never seen anything like it.

I think you're right about it probably not affecting the result. It will hopefully be a good thing for the series and make our cricketers want to win a bit more.

 

[McFlash]

Bairstow’s home ground too, so I imagine that him and crowd will be well up for it. If the Aussies think the copped it at Lords…

Yeah, it's going to be a very lively crowd, most likely the best atmosphere (and most aggressive) so far.
Going to be a really interesting game.

 

[McFlash]

I've had a good sleep and am reinvigorated.

I just don't understand why something McCullum did for NZ nearly 20 years ago is relevant. Does that mean England can now actually fully cheat in the Ashes for the next 20 years and if Australia complain we can just bring up the sandpaper?

When you saw footage of the Long Room, were you just appalled? Or do you think maybe the Aussies have possibly done something a bit naughty when the most famous prawn sandwich brigade in the world completely lose their minds? Just the day before they gave Lyon a thunderous applause after he looked to have won the test for you guys. Eoin Morgan has played there since he was 16 and has never seen anything like it.

I think you're right about it probably not affecting the result. It will hopefully be a good thing for the series and make our cricketers want to win a bit more.

Yeah, it was incredible to see the blazer brigade acting like that.
Was maybe expecting a bit of a boo here and there but they were properly angry.

 

[Timbo Tottenham]

Yeah, it certainly would have been better if it didn't happen. Both teams have had opportunities to win the game and lost wickets to some very poor shots.

Cricket Australia isn't really buying into it, the Australian media are doing the usual clickbait rubbish, whinging poms, and all that which I find quite boring. I don't think poms whinge anymore than we do.

I do have an issue with big Mac and his "spirit of cricket" where he has a history.

Anyway, 3 more to go, and good luck from here.

The McCallum thing is interesting as I’ve not seen them, but they sound completely against the spirit of cricket, as you say. He did apologise directly to them in his speech at the Spirit of Cricket awards, but to harp on about it for England does seem a bit rich.

Whats annoyed me is the whataboutism, rather than just owning it. It’s as if no one who shares these examples reads the response to them as to why they are different, which makes me think that they don’t actually understand why everyone is so ‘outraged’ (isn’t everyone at everything these days, but I think the word can genuinely be used here) at the stumping.

 

[Barmy_in_Palmy]

The McCallum thing is interesting as I’ve not seen them, but they sound completely against the spirit of cricket, as you say. He did apologise directly to them in his speech at the Spirit of Cricket awards, but to harp on about it for England does seem a bit rich.

Whats annoyed me is the whataboutism, rather than just owning it. It’s as if no one who shares these examples reads the response to them as to why they are different, which makes me think that they don’t actually understand why everyone is so ‘outraged’ (isn’t everyone at everything these days, but I think the word can genuinely be used here) at the stumping.

I think a lot of it comes down to unconscious bias. The ‘whataboutism’ is simply a reaction to the self righteousness that occurs in cricket when something ‘against the spirit of the game’ occurs against you.

People get pissed off when something against the spirit happens against them, they don’t really get pissed off if something against the spirit of the game happens to someone else and if something against the spirit of the game is committed by their team well then technically we’re just following the rules it’s the umpires fault or actually it’s not against the spirit of the game your player was at fault get over it.

So on one hand you have Australia commit something that England view to be against the spirit of the game.

At the end of the day the England coach says two things.

1: that was wrong and if we were in that position we would never do that (the implication being we are better people than you).

2: I don’t think they’ll sleep well tonight. (As if the guilt will give them nightmares.)

The problem with that is that when the English coach was the New Zealand captain he did do shit like this on more than one occasion and he doesn’t seem to have lost any sleep over it.

So his self righteousness is bullshit, he’s just a hypocrite.

The argument in its simplest form is England feeling the we’re wronged want Australia to admit they were wrong. Australia feel like we didn’t break any rules so how can we be wrong?

But once you add is the self righteousness, the over the top indignation and the implication that you a better than someone else then you really put peoples backs up. And so they argue back.

which creates the ‘whataboutism’.

England only seem to bring up the spirit of the game when it goes against them.

example 1
so what about when grandhomme got run out by England when he was standing outside of his crease waiting for a response to the umpire over an LBW appeal? England run him out, he wasn’t trying to get any advantage but he was out of his crease.

so the English fans response is “that’s completely different why are you bringing this up”

as a New Zealander I say well actually they’re pretty similar both kinda shitty things to do.

the English response (at least on here is) if you think they’re similar you don’t know fucking anything about cricket so fuck off with this example.

my New Zealander response is “fuck you too”

Example 2

I found this looking for the grandhomme run out.



It’s probably the closest thing I can find that’s similar to what just happened. Now I’d like to think that we didn’t act self righteous after that game and say we were better than England but then Brendon Mccullum was in that New Zealand team so maybe we did.

but as long as one side claims to “follow the spirit of the game” then you’ll always have people pointing out the times where they didn’t.

which I think is the biggest issue with the whole “spirit of the game” debate, no team follows it 100%, every team takes advantage of it, every team wants to win. Nothings black and white and no team can claim to be perfect because no team ever is

And normally while I’d like kick Australia while they’re there for the kicking I’d rather end this spiel with this video.



Hopefully this post had a point.

 

[Archibald&Crooks]

When it comes to the spirit of cricket, some cricketers are so low that they can crawl under a snake whilst wearing a top hat. It just happens the majority of them are Australian

 

[LeSoupeKitchen]

I think a lot of it comes down to unconscious bias. The ‘whataboutism’ is simply a reaction to the self righteousness that occurs in cricket when something ‘against the spirit of the game’ occurs against you.

People get pissed off when something against the spirit happens against them, they don’t really get pissed off if something against the spirit of the game happens to someone else and if something against the spirit of the game is committed by their team well then technically we’re just following the rules it’s the umpires fault or actually it’s not against the spirit of the game your player was at fault get over it.

So on one hand you have Australia commit something that England view to be against the spirit of the game.

At the end of the day the England coach says two things.

1: that was wrong and if we were in that position we would never do that (the implication being we are better people than you).

2: I don’t think they’ll sleep well tonight. (As if the guilt will give them nightmares.)

The problem with that is that when the English coach was the New Zealand captain he did do shit like this on more than one occasion and he doesn’t seem to have lost any sleep over it.

So his self righteousness is bullshit, he’s just a hypocrite.

The argument in its simplest form is England feeling the we’re wronged want Australia to admit they were wrong. Australia feel like we didn’t break any rules so how can we be wrong?

But once you add is the self righteousness, the over the top indignation and the implication that you a better than someone else then you really put peoples backs up. And so they argue back.

which creates the ‘whataboutism’.

England only seem to bring up the spirit of the game when it goes against them.

example 1
so what about when grandhomme got run out by England when he was standing outside of his crease waiting for a response to the umpire over an LBW appeal? England run him out, he wasn’t trying to get any advantage but he was out of his crease.

so the English fans response is “that’s completely different why are you bringing this up”

as a New Zealander I say well actually they’re pretty similar both kinda shitty things to do.

the English response (at least on here is) if you think they’re similar you don’t know fucking anything about cricket so fuck off with this example.

my New Zealander response is “fuck you too”

Example 2

I found this looking for the grandhomme run out.



It’s probably the closest thing I can find that’s similar to what just happened. Now I’d like to think that we didn’t act self righteous after that game and say we were better than England but then Brendon Mccullum was in that New Zealand team so maybe we did.

but as long as one side claims to “follow the spirit of the game” then you’ll always have people pointing out the times where they didn’t.

which I think is the biggest issue with the whole “spirit of the game” debate, no team follows it 100%, every team takes advantage of it, every team wants to win. Nothings black and white and no team can claim to be perfect because no team ever is

And normally while I’d like kick Australia while they’re there for the kicking I’d rather end this spiel with this video.



Hopefully this post had a point.

I can understand where it comes from. It's human nature. I personally hate the race to the lowest common denominator. The tit for tat is just a downwards spiral.

I believe the de Grandhomme incident is different for a number of reasons, the biggest being he was never in his crease. That is such a gigantic difference to Bairstow being in his crease and then even scratching at it to demonstrate he's in.

As for the NZ runout - that was a disgrace and Collingwood will be remembered for that for eternity. When NZ had the opportunity to reciprocate a few years later they chose to do the right thing which was universally adored.

When you say McCullum hasn't lost any sleep - here are some quotes:

“If I could turn back time, I would. We were within the laws of the game but not the spirit and there is a very important difference which is glaringly obvious to me years later, and it’s that aspect that I want to focus on a little more this evening.

“Because nearly ten years after running out Murali, I view things very differently and I would hope that I am am a very different person. Kumar Sangakkara is here tonight. Sanga, I admire you enormously. I regard you as a friend. And I take this opportunity to apologise to you and Murali for my actions on that day.”

 

[ThroughTheEther]

Is this against the spirit of the game or opportunistic genius from Bairstow?

 

[dimiSpur]

example 1
so what about when grandhomme got run out by England when he was standing outside of his crease waiting for a response to the umpire over an LBW appeal? England run him out, he wasn’t trying to get any advantage but he was out of his crease.

so the English fans response is “that’s completely different why are you bringing this up”

as a New Zealander I say well actually they’re pretty similar both kinda shitty things to do.

the English response (at least on here is) if you think they’re similar you don’t know fucking anything about cricket so fuck off with this example.

my New Zealander response is “fuck you too”

You can choose to ignore explanations, but I'll keep posting them and with evidence too.

I am saying it's different, not because I'm saying you know nothing about cricket, but with an actual explanation, which is pretty self evident from the video which you've admittedly not located and therefore not seen. Here it is to refresh your memory.



Colin de BrickShitHouse (for those of you who listen to the Tailenders), edges the ball and RUNS down the pitch, apparently looking to set off on a run. Even if he wasn't doing that in his mind, it looked like that. I can tell you for sure what it wasn't and what it definitely didn't look like. It didn't look like Colin considered the ball dead and wandered down the pitch to have a chat with the non-striker. If nothing else, he fell out of his crease, as batsmen do when defeated by a ball which makes them lose balance.

If you're response to the above is "fuck you", then there really is little point to continuing this debate.

As for the other presumably Aussie poster who has mental health concerns because there's a debate on an internet fucking forum, if his moral code is such that someone telling him he knows little about cricket hurt his feelings, you'd expect him to be the first in line to consider the morality and spirit of the action we're discussing. Alas, not.

 

[dimiSpur]

Is this against the spirit of the game or opportunistic genius from Bairstow?

This one is a lot closer to the Carey stumping and a good find. I still don't think it's exactly the same, as the batter is in the process of bringing his bat down having left the ball and is perhaps off balance. But I agree this one can be argued, as opposed to anything else I've seen so far.

Still irrelevant though. If both are wrong, both are wrong. I'm sure Carey didn't have a First Class match stumping in mind when he threw the ball, thinking "right, this is payback for that".

 

[funkycoldmedina]

Is this against the spirit of the game or opportunistic genius from Bairstow?

I'm in my 50's and have played at a good standard and all the way down and this has always been what a keeper does. What never happens is what Carey did

 

[Archibald&Crooks]

This one is a lot closer to the Carey stumping

I don't think it's anywhere near and I'm honestly surprised at your take on that.

 

[Archibald&Crooks]

I'm in my 50's and have played at a good standard and all the way down and this has always been what a keeper does. What never happens is what Carey did

Exactly this, I think.

 

[dimiSpur]

I don't think it's anywhere near and I'm honestly surprised at your take on that.

I base the slight proximity on the fact that a few seconds pass between taking the ball and the lifting of the back foot. I can't really say the batter is really off balance, he's been a bit dozey.

The main point of difference of course is that the batsman didn't think the ball was dead and wandered off for a chat, which is why I don't think it's the same. Just slightly closer to what Carey did than the de Grandhomme nonsense I keep seeing.

 

[funkycoldmedina]

I've had a good think about this and I think my ire is 2 fold. The first isn't about being an England fan it's being a cricket one. I love that this shithousery doesn't go on much, it's a race to the bottom. Other sports like golf, snooker have these unwritten codes which make them better sports to watch. Let's face it football is a cesspool and the mantra of win at all costs, whether it's shithousing on the pitch or manoeuvring around FFP, human rights etc makes a bit less palatable every year.
The other is the Aussies. No one in the media has dug up McCullum's quotes about his regret at doing his spirit of the game fuck up. The Aussie 'line' is something they use to suit themselves. No one can convince me that Starc, Cummins, Hazelwood didn't know that ball was being tampered with but it's not questioned. Poor old Bancroft got thrown under the bus and normal service is resumed.
Bit by bit it all chips away at the game. There was the most outrageous mankad in the u19 world cup. Those kids learn that from the senior game. This shithousery will be repeated now

 

[dvdhopeful]

Some of the videos being posted as some sort of proof that what happened is fine are mind boggling.

 

[Barmy_in_Palmy]

I can understand where it comes from. It's human nature. I personally hate the race to the lowest common denominator. The tit for tat is just a downwards spiral.

I believe the de Grandhomme incident is different for a number of reasons, the biggest being he was never in his crease. That is such a gigantic difference to Bairstow being in his crease and then even scratching at it to demonstrate he's in.

As for the NZ runout - that was a disgrace and Collingwood will be remembered for that for eternity. When NZ had the opportunity to reciprocate a few years later they chose to do the right thing which was universally adored.

When you say McCullum hasn't lost any sleep - here are some quotes:

“If I could turn back time, I would. We were within the laws of the game but not the spirit and there is a very important difference which is glaringly obvious to me years later, and it’s that aspect that I want to focus on a little more this evening.

“Because nearly ten years after running out Murali, I view things very differently and I would hope that I am am a very different person. Kumar Sangakkara is here tonight. Sanga, I admire you enormously. I regard you as a friend. And I take this opportunity to apologise to you and Murali for my actions on that day.”

I use the grandhomme incident as an example of the tit for tat. I couldn’t really give a shit about it, a bit dumb a bit odd really, certainly nothing to cry about (which is why I didn’t bother posting it) but when people want argue but don’t want to listen then something that really isn’t like the grondhomme run out becomes more than it is.

If I want to prove that England are bad then Grondhomme was wronged because I can say that technically he was just waiting for the umpires decision and he just happened to be out of his crease (which really is scraping the truth) but technically he also happened to start running down the pitch before he see the umpire, sees the umpire and realises there’s no run but doesn’t get back in time and is run out.

It’s really nothing like the other incident but when people have there backs up and are arguing it doesn’t need to be and personally I don’t know why it was brought up as an example by the media when the the Paul collingwood incident seems ridiculously similar.

but again I think I comes back to down to Mccullum and Stokes saying that they’d never do that. It took Mccullum 6-7 years to admit he was wrong and wouldn’t do that again but in that time he did it more than once. It’s had been better to say it’s agains the spirit of the game and from own personal experiences you’ll end up regreting them, but the “we’ll never do that” posturing just comes offs badly and so people will use anything to have a go at them using such things as the Grondhomme incident, whether it’s relevant or not.

instead of saying we won’t have beers at the end of the series how about at the end of the series over beers I’ll explain what I did in my career and what I’d have changed.