Australian Politics Forum - Cheating dismissal of Bairstow has consequences

Laugh till you cry

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13879
In your happy place
Gender: male

Cheating dismissal of Bairstow has consequences
Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 1:13pm

Now there is uncertainty of when the ball is dead.

It was purportedly over and the umpire should have called it as soon as the ball was in Carey's hands. Usually the 'over' call is very quick, however, in this case it did not come at all.

Alex Carey is finished. He and the Australian team will be booed and jeered wherever he plays.

The effect on cricket will be to cause delays in play as batsmen will now have to ask the umpire when the ball is dead.

Aussie has been caught flat-footed outside his crease.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:52pm by Laugh till you cry »

Please don't thank me. Effusive fawning and obeisance of disciples, mendicants, and foot-kissers embarrass me.

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 37688
Gender: male

Re: Cheating dismissal of Bairstow has consequences
Reply #1 - Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:14pm

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 1:13pm:

Now there is uncertainty of when the ball is dead.

It was purportedly over and the umpire should have called it as soon as the ball was in Carey's hands. Usually the 'over' call is very quick, however, in this case it did not come at all.

Alex Carey is finished. He and the Australian team will be booed and jeered wherever he plays.

The effect on cricket will be to cause delays in play as batsmen will now have to ask the umpire when the ball is dead.

Another moronic armchair smacking expert. Read the fu

qking

Rule.

Link.

That ball was certainly not dead as Carey kept it very clearly in play.

The Umpire may only call over when the ball is...within the terms of that linked Rule....dead.

It was not dead.

Sh

its

me when comments like yours are made especially when you so clearly know SFA about the bloody game.

Back to top

IP Logged

Bobby. Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 95629 Melbourne Gender:	Re: Cheating dismissal of Bairstow has consequences Reply #2 - Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:24pm Hi Aussie, your link says: Quote: 20.1.1 The ball becomes dead when 20.1.1.1 it is finally settled in the hands of the wicket-keeper or of the bowler. That was true and it was the end of the over. The ball was dead. It was an unfair decision.
Back to top	IP Logged

Laugh till you cry

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13879
In your happy place
Gender: male

Re: Cheating dismissal of Bairstow has consequences
Reply #3 - Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:24pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:14pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 1:13pm:

Now there is uncertainty of when the ball is dead.

It was purportedly over and the umpire should have called it as soon as the ball was in Carey's hands. Usually the 'over' call is very quick, however, in this case it did not come at all.

Alex Carey is finished. He and the Australian team will be booed and jeered wherever he plays.

The effect on cricket will be to cause delays in play as batsmen will now have to ask the umpire when the ball is dead.

Another moronic armchair smacking expert. Read the fu

qking

Rule.

Link.

That ball was certainly not dead as Carey kept it very clearly in play.

The Umpire may only call over when the ball is...within the terms of that linked Rule....dead.

It was not dead.

Sh

its

me when comments like yours are made especially when you so clearly know SFA about the bloody game.

It was an unfair dismissal. The batsman had good reason to believe that it was over and that the ball was dead.

Fair play has precedence over rules when those rules are misused.

It is not like the Mankad incidents where the batsman was trying to gain an advantage by creeping beyond the crease during a bowler's run-in.

This is Mankading where the batsman has sought a cheating 3 metre advantage.

Back to top

Please don't thank me. Effusive fawning and obeisance of disciples, mendicants, and foot-kissers embarrass me.

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 37688
Gender: male

Re: Cheating dismissal of Bairstow has consequences
Reply #4 - Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:26pm

Bobby. wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:24pm:

Hi Aussie,
your link says:

Quote:

20.1.1 The ball becomes dead when

20.1.1.1 it is finally settled in the hands of the wicket-keeper or of the bowler.

That was true and it was the end of the over.
The ball was dead.
It was an unfair decision.

Read on, Bobby......read on.

Quote:

20.1.2 The ball shall be considered to be dead when it is clear to the bowler’s end umpire that the fielding side and both batters at the wicket have ceased to regard it as in play.

20.2 Ball finally settled

Whether the ball is finally settled or not is a matter for the umpire alone to decide.

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 37688
Gender: male

Re: Cheating dismissal of Bairstow has consequences
Reply #5 - Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:32pm

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:24pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:14pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 1:13pm:

Now there is uncertainty of when the ball is dead.

It was purportedly over and the umpire should have called it as soon as the ball was in Carey's hands. Usually the 'over' call is very quick, however, in this case it did not come at all.

Alex Carey is finished. He and the Australian team will be booed and jeered wherever he plays.

The effect on cricket will be to cause delays in play as batsmen will now have to ask the umpire when the ball is dead.

Another moronic armchair smacking expert. Read the fu

qking

Rule.

Link.

That ball was certainly not dead as Carey kept it very clearly in play.

The Umpire may only call over when the ball is...within the terms of that linked Rule....dead.

It was not dead.

Sh

its

me when comments like yours are made especially when you so clearly know SFA about the bloody game.

It was an unfair dismissal. The batsman had good reason to believe that it was over and that the ball was dead.

Fair play has precedence over rules when those rules are misused.

It is not like the Mankad incidents where the batsman was trying to gain an advantage by creeping beyond the crease during a bowler's run-in.

This is Mankading where the batsman has sought a cheating 3 metre advantage.

https://www.onmanorama.com/content/dam/mm/en/sports/cricket/images/2022/9/25/man...

Nothing unfair about playing within the Rules of the game. If you don't like to play by the Rules, don't play or watch the game. Simple as that.

Know the Rules.

Bairstow had form for being an arrogant disdainful prick wandering off when the ball was not dead and Carey had become aware of it. After noticing that habit, he took him out well within the Rule. Bairstow had tried the same thing only a couple of days earlier on Manus, he took a shot at but he missed the stumps. If he had not missed, bye bye Manus and no point having a sook about it. "You're out, far cough...sheds over there...go have a beer you sucker."

Back to top

IP Logged

Laugh till you cry Gold Member Offline Posts: 13879 In your happy place Gender:	Re: Cheating dismissal of Bairstow has consequences Reply #6 - Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:34pm There you go from Aussie's own rules. "Both batsmen had regarded the ball as not being in play". Therefore the dismissal was wrong.
Back to top	Please don't thank me. Effusive fawning and obeisance of disciples, mendicants, and foot-kissers embarrass me. IP Logged

Aussie Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 37688 Gender:	Re: Cheating dismissal of Bairstow has consequences Reply #7 - Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:34pm ...and for what it's worth...I never had a problem with a Mankad. Play by the Rules. Simple sh it.
Back to top	IP Logged

Laugh till you cry

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13879
In your happy place
Gender: male

Re: Cheating dismissal of Bairstow has consequences
Reply #8 - Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:37pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:34pm:

...and for what it's worth...I never had a problem with a Mankad.

Play by the Rules. Simple sh

it.

Please explain why it was fair.

The batsmen had the right to believe the ball was dead.

Alex Carey's career is ruined. He will never play without being jeered and booed for his cheating.

Back to top

Please don't thank me. Effusive fawning and obeisance of disciples, mendicants, and foot-kissers embarrass me.

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 37688
Gender: male

Re: Cheating dismissal of Bairstow has consequences
Reply #9 - Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:38pm

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:34pm:

There you go from Aussie's own rules. "Both batsmen had regarded the ball as not being in play". Therefore the dismissal was wrong.

FMD....you can't just select a part of the Rule.

Quote:

The ball shall be considered to be dead when it is clear to the bowler’s end umpire that the fielding side and both batters at the wicket have ceased to regard it as in play.

If anyone of the 'fielding side' or anyone of 'both batters' have made it clear the ball has NOT ceased to be in play...the ball is in play.

Think about a regulation stumping. 'Keeper takes the ball, it is settled in his gloves....is the ball dead? Of course not as the 'keeper clearly regards the ball as still in play by his conduct, in then removing the bails.

FMD.

Back to top

IP Logged

Bobby.

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 95629
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Cheating dismissal of Bairstow has consequences
Reply #10 - Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:40pm

Hi Aussie,
I used to play cricket.
As a batsman -
after the over was completed -
I always waited till the wicket keeper had thrown the ball
to the next bowler before leaving my crease.

Still - in this case the over was completed -
as a wicket keeper I would have warned the batsman rather
than stumped him out as cricket is a game for gentlemen
who retire for a cup of tea and lunch and
even have drinks together after the game.

The stumping was not within the spirit of the game
and I hope the POMs stump the Aussies
in the forthcoming matches in the same way as revenge.
The POMs are already asking out loud if the ball is dead - all the time.

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 37688
Gender: male

Re: Cheating dismissal of Bairstow has consequences
Reply #11 - Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:45pm

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:37pm:

[quote author=Aussie link=1688354032/7#7 date=1688358879]...and for what it's worth...I never had a problem with a Mankad.

Play by the Rules. Simple sh

it.

Quote:

Please explain why it was fair.

"Fair" is playing by the Rules and that is exactly what happened.

Quote:

The batsmen had the right to believe the ball was dead.

The only rights the matter has are those he is given by the Rules. What he believes is a nothing.

Quote:

Alex Carey's career is ruined. He will never play without being jeered and booed for his cheating.

I doubt he will give a flying fuq. I wouldn't.

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 37688
Gender: male

Re: Cheating dismissal of Bairstow has consequences
Reply #12 - Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:46pm

Bobby. wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:40pm:

Hi Aussie,
I used to play cricket.
As a batsman -
after the over was completed -
I always waited till the wicket keeper had thrown the ball
to the next bowler before leaving my crease.

Still - in this case the over was completed -
as a wicket keeper I would have warned the batsman rather
than stumped him out as cricket is a game for gentlemen
who retire for a cup of tea and lunch and
even have drinks together after the game.

The stumping was not within the spirit of the game
and I hope the POMs stump the Aussies
in the forthcoming matches in the same way as revenge.
The POMs are already asking out loud if the ball is dead - all the time.

The over is not 'over' until the Laws have been met.

What is so hard for you two to understand. Know the Rules as they are, not as you might think or believe them to be.

Back to top

IP Logged

Laugh till you cry

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13879
In your happy place
Gender: male

Re: Cheating dismissal of Bairstow has consequences
Reply #13 - Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:50pm

The ball was not in play for more than 5 seconds

There is no rule that the umpire needs to signal that the ball is dead and is therefore not dead till the next ball is bowled unless over has been called.

However, it is clearly tradition in cricket that players believe that the ball is dead when it is in the keeper's gloves and the batsmen are not running.

In fact, after an over has been called, the ball is dead because after stopping play by calling over, the umpire has not instructed the players to play by calling 'play'.

Bairstow had good reason to believe the ball was dead, and indeed didn't even know where the ball was.

Back to top

Please don't thank me. Effusive fawning and obeisance of disciples, mendicants, and foot-kissers embarrass me.

IP Logged

Bobby.

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 95629
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Cheating dismissal of Bairstow has consequences
Reply #14 - Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:52pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:46pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2023 at 2:40pm:

Hi Aussie,
I used to play cricket.
As a batsman -
after the over was completed -
I always waited till the wicket keeper had thrown the ball
to the next bowler before leaving my crease.

Still - in this case the over was completed -
as a wicket keeper I would have warned the batsman rather
than stumped him out as cricket is a game for gentlemen
who retire for a cup of tea and lunch and
even have drinks together after the game.

The stumping was not within the spirit of the game
and I hope the POMs stump the Aussies
in the forthcoming matches in the same way as revenge.
The POMs are already asking out loud if the ball is dead - all the time.

The over is not 'over' until the Laws have been met.

What is so hard for you two to understand. Know the Rules as they are, not as you might think or believe them to be.

Then -
cricket is no longer a game for gentlemen -

last night I was hoping Ben Stokes would bat out and
win the game to teach the Aussies a lesson after their ungentlemanly and unsportsmanlike conduct -
but at least he got a magnificent 155 with some of the most exciting cricket I've ever seen.

Back to top

IP Logged

Poll
Question: Was the stumping of Bairstow unsportsmanlike?
* This poll has now closed *
Yes 3 (37.5%) No 5 (62.5%) I don't understand cricket. 0 (0.0%) Total votes: 8 « Created by: Bobby. on: Jul 4^th, 2023 at 6:02pm »