Australia were never going to withdraw their appeal over the stumping, because it was something they actively performed. They’d spotted that Bairstow tended to end his over before it had been officially called and they took advantage of the fact. It’s unsportsmanlike — if they had a problem with his behaviour, they should just have requested that he stopped It. It’s really not the spirit of the game that you find some loophole to get somebody out despite no actual skill being involved.
The Ashes 2023
- Thread starter WhyLikeThis
- Start date
WhyLikeThis
Something, something, something
Shocking week for English cricket…
The Ashes 2023: MCC suspends three members over Australia Long Room confrontations
The Marylebone Cricket Club suspends three members over altercations with Australia players at Lord's on day five of the second Test.www.bbc.co.uk
David Warner fronting up to a pensioner. Well ‘ard.
Posh privileged bigoted twats embarrassing themselves.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
But enough about the players, what about the MCC?
Well exactly - cricket really needs to sort itself out fast but doubt it will. A Lords crowd really is the worst.
WhyLikeThis
Something, something, something
I could happily watch a battle royale between Australia and a long room packed with elderly public schooled tories.
In fact, I’d pay good money to see that.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
It was compared to Mankading on the radio, but I don't think it's the same. A player backing up too early is trying to gain an advantage, like a baseball batter trying to steal a base. I think that should just be fully incorporated into the game as a legitimate thing to do. Whereas here, Bairstow was not trying to gain an advantage. So it clearly breaks the spirit of the game.
Problem is that the spirit of the game is kind of bollocks. A batter not walking when they know they've hit it is not in the spirit of the game. A bowler appealing for lbw when they know there was an inside edge is not in the spirit of the game. Lots of everyday incidents occur that aren't within the spirit of the game. fwiw I don't like any of them. I wouldn't appeal if I knew it wasn't out and would walk if I knew it was out, but mine is an attitude probably more shaped by martial arts than by sports. Realistically, that isn't how the game is played, ever has been played (WG Grace famously didn't walk), or ever will be played.
Only seen a brief replay of that 'stumping' but Carey was completely within in his rights. I did that myself back in the day as a keeper
Leaving that aside, and whatever your position on Bazball, can anyone remember a more exciting period of test cricket than Stokes et al have been serving up. It's fucking brilliant. And congrats to the Aussies too, for dealing with it. It's utterly bonkers but they're responding to it. England to win 3-2
Leaving that aside, and whatever your position on Bazball, can anyone remember a more exciting period of test cricket than Stokes et al have been serving up. It's fucking brilliant. And congrats to the Aussies too, for dealing with it. It's utterly bonkers but they're responding to it. England to win 3-2
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
I bet Cummins regrets it now. It takes a bit of the shine off the win and they probably would have won anyway.
The bit I don't like about it is that the umpire clearly already thought it was dead ball by the time the ball hit the stumps as he was already handing a cap back. But the throw took so long to hit the stumps that he wasn't doing that at the time the ball was thrown.
On reflection, if the ump thinks it's now dead ball, it's dead ball, so it should have been given not out. The handing back of the cap is the crucial point there. Hmmmm. Regardless of the appeal, I now think that was a wrong decision by the umpires. Ump may have been wrong to already be declaring dead ball - and I think he was, should have waited - but nothing can happen once dead ball is declared, and if dead ball hadn't been declared, why was the ump reaching for the cap?
The bit I don't like about it is that the umpire clearly already thought it was dead ball by the time the ball hit the stumps as he was already handing a cap back. But the throw took so long to hit the stumps that he wasn't doing that at the time the ball was thrown.
On reflection, if the ump thinks it's now dead ball, it's dead ball, so it should have been given not out. The handing back of the cap is the crucial point there. Hmmmm. Regardless of the appeal, I now think that was a wrong decision by the umpires. Ump may have been wrong to already be declaring dead ball - and I think he was, should have waited - but nothing can happen once dead ball is declared, and if dead ball hadn't been declared, why was the ump reaching for the cap?
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
It was amazing. With 75 to win and four wickets left, I was just starting to believe. But we all knew it was done if Stokes got out. So very nearly. Would have been a sweet win, with the Smith drop, the 'stumping', and everything.Only seen a brief replay of that 'stumping' but Carey was completely within in his rights. I did that myself back in the day as a keeper
Leaving that aside, and whatever your position on Bazball, can anyone remember a more exciting period of test cricket than Stokes et al have been serving up. It's fucking brilliant. And congrats to the Aussies too, for dealing with it. It's utterly bonkers but they're responding to it. England to win 3-2
planetgeli
There's no future in England's dreaming
There certainly was skill involved (hitting the stumps) and quickness of thinking. Bairstow, through arrogance or whatever, moved too early.
The umpire made a mistake with the cap. I don't think that's crucial, and it's deflection. There's no way Bairstow KNEW the ball was under control by the keeper - he assumed. If Carey had fumbled it and knocked the ball away, Bairstow would have taken the bye.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
I agree that Bairstow is at fault and Carey caught and threw the ball in one motion. But who decides when it's dead ball? I'm lawyering the rules here a bit, but the laws of cricket are clear - once the ump decides dead ball, nothing can happen, and here the ump had (mistakenly as it happens) decided dead ball, not having seen the ball slowly approaching the stumps.
I don't feel strongly about it. Mostly I think Bairstow was dozy. But I think there's an argument to be had there that the ump had declared dead ball, so not out. After all, Bairstow could see what the ump was doing.
I don't feel strongly about it. Mostly I think Bairstow was dozy. But I think there's an argument to be had there that the ump had declared dead ball, so not out. After all, Bairstow could see what the ump was doing.
I seem to recall Stokes apologised and wanted the decision to be reversed when he inadvertently won the WC against NZ by that freak sliding the bat in and the ball hitting it to the boundary. I wonder if Cummins has made a comment? I mean, he seems a gentleman himself.
Both were 50/50 decisions really. Carey was not at fault. From what I hear though, the gammons in the long room were.
Both were 50/50 decisions really. Carey was not at fault. From what I hear though, the gammons in the long room were.
tommers
It was... Rebekah Vardy's account
What did you hear? I can't see any details.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
It's like my dear old nan always used to say. If you don't want people to call you a cunt, don't be a cunt.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
I do believe that Stokes would have withdrawn the appeal. But I also think most captains wouldn't. I'd like more cricketers to be like Stokes. he does genuinely believe in more than just winning while having an intense will to win. Shows that these things are possible.
I don't know who was a cunt here? Carey acted on the spur of the moment, split second. Totally within his rights.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Kinda. It was an absent-minded toss of the ball at the stumps at a point where Bairstow was in his ground. I don't blame Carey for his actions. However I also don't think he even was trying to effect a stumping, sneaky or otherwise.
I didn't see it. Did Cummins have the option of withdrawing the appeal?
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
Just as the entire Lord's crowd is within their rights to call him a cunt for it.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Yes. A captain always has that option, tbf.
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
Yep, exactly that. The fact they did it while he was in his ground meant they were anticipating normal end of over behaviour. It wasn't an opportunistic stumping, it was planned.
Not all of them were within their rights. MCC really is cricket at its worst - like a jumped up golf club.
The Ashes 2023: MCC suspends three members over Australia Long Room confrontations
The Marylebone Cricket Club suspends three members over altercations with Australia players at Lord's on day five of the second Test.
www.bbc.co.uk
planetgeli
There's no future in England's dreaming
I don't agree LBJ. Not absent-minded by Carey, it was being fully alert.
As I said before, my opinion is coloured by thinking "you can't do that" about Bairstow way before the ball hit the stumps. And you can't do that.
I also like to think Stokes may have withdrawn an appeal, because he's Stokes and he's different, but I can't say with any confidence I believe he would have done in the heat of the moment.
It was clever cricket.
As I said before, my opinion is coloured by thinking "you can't do that" about Bairstow way before the ball hit the stumps. And you can't do that.
I also like to think Stokes may have withdrawn an appeal, because he's Stokes and he's different, but I can't say with any confidence I believe he would have done in the heat of the moment.
It was clever cricket.
Cummins has said that it was planned by Carey
Well it's nobody's fault but Bairstow's then, sorry. I'm with Ashwin on the mankad. Bowlers aren't allowed to step over the line so why should batsmen be allowed to sneak a few feet? Totally Bairstow's fault by the sounds of it. Read the rules johnny.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Maybe. It didn't look calculated, but maybe it was. If it was, I don't like it, but it's still mostly Bairstow's own fault so I'm not going to cry about it. I still think the ump reaching for the cap is relevant, though. Umpires have been weak all series if I'm honest. Host of bad decisions and doing absolutely nothing about the over rates.
Stokes would have totally withdrawn it. Without a doubt.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Ok. In that case, I think it's worse. Don't like that. But it's still Bairstow's fault.
