Jump to content
The Race Place

Bairstow stumping incident


Maximus

Recommended Posts

Max is most interested in everyone's views of the Bairstow Stumping fiasco.

IMO:

  • Bairstow has no-one to blame but his-self for walking out of his crease before checking where the ball was.
  • In the 'spirit of the game' Cummins as captain could have withdrawn the appeal but didn't. Huge opportunity lost there to show that true sportsmanship aka 'spirit of cricket' is alive and well. Clearly it isn't, at least not when The Ashes are at stake.
  • McCullum's media statement arguing that the stumping was 'not in the spirit of cricket' is hugely hypocritical. He did it himself - more than once, when 'keeping for NZ. Ironically one occasion the batsman was Paul Collingwood (now on his England management team).; and it was Daniel Vettori, I believe, as captain who withdrew the appeal and Collingwood was restored to the crease.
  • Here's the Collingwood incident (2008/9) - officially a stumping, not a run out. Same thing as Carey did to Bairstow and what countless keepers do and have done every week playing the game. 
  • Big ups to Vettori - now assistant coach to the Australian team v the Bazballian English ...LOL..oh the irony of it all.
     
  •  

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only play grade cricket but one rule everyone knows is you stay in your crease or there's a chance you'll be run out. striker or non-strikers end even. 

At the very Top level of cricket , which is an Ashes Test series, they are trying to get you out any way possible.

e.g Seems in this series they are just bowling short all the time as a tactic. 

Anyway if Bairstowe 'wanders off down the pitch' Without the traditional OVER being called by Umpire. Stupidity is on Him. 

Surely no-one expects the opponent to say " Oh , you poor bugger, you forgot the OVER call rule, please come back and bat again . We should change the rule just for your sake " That will make it a Gentlemans game again .. hahaha (Truly glad that didn't happen. that WOULD make a mockery of the game.) 

A Great Test result in the end ! . Poms got just desserts. maybe the 3 expelled MCC members should be offered councilling on fair play lol. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It they appeal to the umpire and the umpire still considered the ball to be live and not settled, then giving the batsman out is perfectly within the laws of the game.    We saw the same thing happen when the bowler during his action knocked off the bails at his end, in a game in India, when the non facing batsman had decided to walk forward out of his crease as the bowler was running in.   If the bowler has commenced his action then the ball is also deemed live.     To move out of your crease when the ball is still in the hands of the wicket keeper and he hasn't thrown it to a fielder to return to the bowler, or thrown it back to the bowler (which is when it would be usually considered settled), is a pretty basic no no that you learn early on with the cricket academies.   If everyone started picking and choosing which rules they wanted to abide by then I would consider that less "gentlemanly" .   Surely abiding by the rules as they are is what ensures that everyone plays the game in the right spirit, it's just that some know them better than others it seems, or some players are more alert to what is happening around them than others - if that is the case then they have themselves to blame and I would put money on them never doing it again.

    

   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lightning Blue said:

I only play grade cricket but one rule everyone knows is you stay in your crease or there's a chance you'll be run out. striker or non-strikers end even. 

At the very Top level of cricket , which is an Ashes Test series, they are trying to get you out any way possible.

e.g Seems in this series they are just bowling short all the time as a tactic. 

Anyway if Bairstowe 'wanders off down the pitch' Without the traditional OVER being called by Umpire. Stupidity is on Him. 

Surely no-one expects the opponent to say " Oh , you poor bugger, you forgot the OVER call rule, please come back and bat again . We should change the rule just for your sake " That will make it a Gentlemans game again .. hahaha (Truly glad that didn't happen. that WOULD make a mockery of the game.) 

A Great Test result in the end ! . Poms got just desserts. maybe the 3 expelled MCC members should be offered councilling on fair play lol. 

Totally agree LB. Whinging Poms. As one great scribe said" this isn't tiddlywinks". When first moving to Aussie as a 19 yr old, one of the first things I learnt, was that you knew when a plane load of Poms had landed at the airport because when they turned the engines off the whining kept going..

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great comments ..Poms crybabies. BUT captain Cummins had the chance to 'even the ledger' to a great degree if he'd withdrawn the appeal - as Vettori did  Collingwood. THAT would've proven Oz have learned something about the 'spirit of the game' since the miseries of Sandpapergate (and the earlier underarm incident of [1981). In every other respect I rate Cummins as a captain; he does not act churlishly in front of the media even when they try to upset him. He's very likeable, a fabulous fast bowler and good scrapper with the bat. 

MM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hesi said:

A shame Smith allowed himself to become involved in sandpaper gate, as according to commentary he is the ultimate professional.

The story about him being blindfolded and able to pick out each of his 24 bats

are ya telling me he really didnt know he'd got a nick off the bat when given out today? Bat was miles from his pad, and the man with such fine sense of touch (as you describe) shakes his head in disbelief when given out and after the review confirms the nick ... i guess that's professionalism in the modern era.

MM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Maximus said:

are ya telling me he really didnt know he'd got a nick off the bat when given out today? Bat was miles from his pad, and the man with such fine sense of touch (as you describe) shakes his head in disbelief when given out and after the review confirms the nick ... i guess that's professionalism in the modern era.

MM

Fair point

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About to start Day 2 ..

Eion Morgan says the Poms could get to parity and then have a bowl...or words to that effect.

Readin' between the lines. that means there's not much chance they can bat all day ..which they should be lookin' to do...

oh hang on, Stokes is captain so he'll probable declare with Bairstow and Root on 99 apiece just to show the Ozzies the 'spirit of cricket' LOL

MM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Hesi said:

are ya telling me he really didnt know he'd got a nick off the bat when given out today?

Oh well he possibly wants to believe he didn't, Steve is so focused on staying in , probably doesn't want to acknowledge he's out. Just as a Rugby League player who scores a try isn't gunna say to the ref "I took that as a forward pass so it shouldn't count" even if he knows it was forward. 

You leave these decisions for the officials. always. even in races jocks and harness drivers make lots of contact with other runners , but you just let the officials do the deciding of what's what. their job to decide. they're paid a lot of money to do it. Best they earn it ? 😆

38 minutes ago, Maximus said:

show the Ozzies the 'spirit of cricket'

Poms are a bit rusty so far today , so they're not getting a lot of spirit going. Actually the criticism is a lot of Folly I reckon, as it's the Umpires that make the decisions . ( As they did with that catch that touched the grass by Starc ... incomplete apparently)  The Aussies can grizzle all they like but it's the officials that make the calls on what they see and review.  If they say no catch , it's no catch . Everyone should/could/would be happy with that .

As far as 'Spirit of the game' goes , Let the Officials (match umpires) recall Bairstowe if something was not right and the they're worried about 'Spirit of the game' . It's their decision that he's OUT in the first place ???  ... so call him back if something is inappropriate ? .....  Everyone should /could/would be happy with that.  

Shouldn't be the 'players' making decisions like that on who's 'out' and who's not . That just not cricket 😂

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I have not seen commented on, in terms of the spirit of the game, and I have seen or heard every wanker and his dog, most who wouldn't have a clue about cricket commenting on, is

Bairstow was technically outside the laws of the game, so had to be given out

But he was not trying to gain an advantage.  When Trevor Chappell bowled his underarmer, an advantage was trying to be attained.  When a batsman is dismissed 'Mankad' style, the batsmen is trying to gain an advantage.

Bairstow was not trying to gain an advantage, so that is why it is against the spirit of the game

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a clip going around showing Bairstow playing keeper for Yorkshire against  Nottinghamshire. Bairstow up close to the stumps for a spin bowler, batman plays and misses, Bairstow takes and waits 4/5 seconds. Batsmen in his crease lifts his back foot to balance himself and Bairstow  whips the bails off! Commentators praise Bairstow!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/8/2023 at 9:51 AM, Hesi said:

Bairstow was not trying to gain an advantage, so that is why it is against the spirit of the game

Bollocks. He made an elementary mistake and didn't wait to hear the umpire declare over ,over. He wasn't trying to gain anything apart from thinking (quite wrongly) the over was over and time to confer with his partner at the other end of the wicket.   Where is the distinction between spirit of the game and hard and fast rules . I'm surprised we are still talking about this .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Hesi said:

 

Bairstow was praised and rightly so....the batsman left his crease momentarily and was stumped fair and square. That is not cheating, nor is it outside the ''sprit of the game'. Overbalancing and raising the back foot/toe off the ground is no different in principle than walking down the wicket to get to the pitch of the ball - that's the batsman's challenge every delivery: 'how am I going to play this ball to help my team?' First, make sure you dont get out; second score from it.

MM

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Max was barracking for the Pomeranians overnight, just to keep the Series alive. Wonderful match, so many twists and turns.

Two things the Poms should have learned: Bairstow is a liability behind the stumps; and Wood's pace is a lethal weapon against Australia.

Max's X11 for the Poms for Manchester; (assuming Pope is out and Foakes is available)Yes, folks, 

Crawley, Duckett, Brook, Root, Bairstow, Stokes, Ali, Foakes, Woakes, Wood, Broad, Anderson

Yes, folks, it's the Stokes, Woakes and Foakes show.

MM

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Hesi said:

And Ali at 3 is a waste of time

Michael Vaughan doesn't agree with you.

I like teams that do things for the here and now that are a bit out of the box. I love to see cricket teams cleverly think about those tactical manouevres to help the team. Moeen Ali batting at three was one of those. On the face of it it didn’t work: he only scored five. But Moeen’s move meant that Brook could revert back to five, where he’s much more comfortable.

It wouldn’t worry me if Moeen stayed batting at three. Ben Stokes could also bat at three — but after what he’s done at six so far this series, I’d rather he stayed there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Vaughan related to the All Black coach, wanting to play everyone out of position lol

Ali has good technique, but No 3 is usually reserved for your best batsmen, hopefully to face a slightly blunted opening speed attack.

Ali is not the best batsmen by a long way in that team

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is why it is called Test cricket.  Each team, every player is put to the test for 5 days, nowhere to hide.

It is not ODI or the hit and giggle T20

Those destined for greatness, get the opportunity (Ben Stokes)

Extreme pressure, not the time to be experimenting with batting order, other than night watchmen.

All Black rugby is much the same, those destined for greatness shine when the pressure is on in the big games.  I'm not sure if Foster understands that.  Each game the players introduce themselves, I'm playing outside you this week.lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just watched the final day highlights. Brilliant day of cricket.

Young Harry Brook is a star in the making.

Be great if England win the next one to set up a series decider. I'll be in the UK for the last test(just thought I'd mention that!).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...