CRICKET WTC and Ashes Tour of England

I didn't watch the match, but when they were talking about the Bairstow dismissal on the radio a big number of people said that Bairstow attempted to do the exact same thing to Marnus earlier in the match.

Can anyone confirm? Because if he did him, the pommy fans/commentators are just hypocrites
 
Foordy said:
I didn't watch the match, but when they were talking about the Bairstow dismissal on the radio a big number of people said that Bairstow attempted to do the exact same thing to Marnus earlier in the match.

Can anyone confirm? Because if he did him, the pommy fans/commentators are just hypocrites
Click to expand...

He did but the debate was, is it the same context?

Marnus was batting outside his crease and Bairstow was end of the over- scratched his mark and went to talk to his mate.

It's the gaining advantage debate- Marnus is outside his crease on purpose batting trying to not get out leg before and break up the line of the bowler. Bairstow was not gaining any advantage and was going to chat to his partner because the over was over- or so he thought.
 
Don't see how it's any different from the mankad where the batsman is casually walking forward, not looking to gain an advantage but out of his crease none the less.
 
BroncosFever said:
Don't see how it's any different from the mankad where the batsman is casually walking forward, not looking to gain an advantage but out of his crease none the less.
Click to expand...

I don't think the poms are arguing that it wasn't a legal dismissal ... they're claiming that they would never do something that's not in the "spirit" of the game
 
Foordy said:
I don't think the poms are arguing that it wasn't a legal dismissal ... they're claiming that they would never do something that's not in the "spirit" of the game
Click to expand...

It's legal no one can argue it's not, but the context is the spirit. Attempting a run or batting out of your crease fair game but they're saying end of the over and talking to your partner isn't in the spirit.
 
I don’t think he even scratched his crease. He just left the crease immediately, Carey didn’t hold the ball and wait for him to leave the crease, he threw the ball immediately. Was very lazy cricket from Bairstow and he should be the one copping the blame not Carey. Especially as a keeper himself, it’s unforgivable. In an ashes you were in the comeback trail for none the less.
 
1910 said:
No.

But in his defence, the square leg umpire was walking, and the umpire was giving the bowler his hat so I can see how you'd think it's been done.
Click to expand...

If the umpire was moving while the ball was still live , it`s their mistake .
I find it hard to believe the umpire had moved from his position in the time it took for Carey to gather the ball and throw it back .
The ump would need to move the moment the ball hit Carey`s gloves . Because a split second later the ball was on it`s way to the stumps .

The bowler didn`t have time to finish his follow through and collect his hat before the stumps were broken . It was less than 1 second . It takes longer to follow through and turn around and walk back to the umpire .

It`s possible the umpire moved and the bowler turned around and walked back to the umpire . but the ball had already broken the stumps .

Marnus was still standing in position at short leg ...
 
I want anyone to watch a replay of only Carey's actions, and tell me it's poor form. He caught and released in .81 of a second. The ball is absolutely still in play.
 
New Posts

Unread

Watch

YouTube
0 0 789
1:25:04
NRL Round 14, 2003 - Canberra Raiders vs Brisbane Broncos
View full media list »

Active Now

Total: 107 (members: 7, guests: 100)
Robots: 171
Top
  AdBlock Message
Please consider adding BHQ to your Adblock Whitelist. We do our best to make sure it doesn't affect your experience on the website, and the funds help us pay server and software costs.