The Cricket Thread

[RichA]

I can and I am, as are many others.

Bairstow was trying to keep Labuschagne from batting outside of his crease, as he is entitled to try to do.

Carey was trying to catch Bairstow outside of the crease before the ball is dead as he is entitled to try to do.

Both are clearly well within the rules but only one came off.

They aren't the same.
Labuschagne was out of his ground, playing the ball and it was still very much live.
Bairstow only left his crease thinking the ball was dead. The umpires had to go upstairs as they had also assumed the ball was dead and weren't paying attention. Crucially, they hadn't called over and Carey was not treating it as dead - his right as WK. I'm not disputing that he was out - I just think it was unsporting. But as long as you've got Stuart Broad in your team and fellow batters who don't walk when they know they've hit the ball you can't bleat about spirit of cricket.

 

[Steve Wilkes]

They aren't the same.
Labuschagne was out of his ground, playing the ball and it was still very much live.
Bairstow only left his crease thinking the ball was dead. The umpires had to go upstairs as they had also assumed the ball was dead and weren't paying attention. Crucially, they hadn't called over and Carey was not treating it as dead - his right as WK. I'm not disputing that he was out - I just think it was unsporting. But as long as you've got Stuart Broad in your team and fellow batters who don't walk when they know they've hit the ball you can't bleat about spirit of cricket.

Did the Australians not review the Broad edge at the time, or was it before the introduction of the review system, if so nobody walked before that

 

[RichA]

Hopefully, this will be another lesson learned for the England team and they'll protect their wickets a little more jealously over the next 3 tests.
The only change I'd like to see is English batsmen waiting until they've exceeded their personal test batting average before going Bazball. Even a village cricket tail-end hacker like me knows you don't need to try to launch every ball over cow corner when you're ticking along at 5 an over.

 

[RichA]

Did the Australians not review the Broad edge at the time, or was it before the introduction of the review system, if so nobody walked before that

From memory, I think they'd already used their reviews - but I'm not certain.
As a lifelong player and follower of cricket, in terms of life before DRS batsmen (obviously not all) have always walked - even many Aussies in Ashes tests.

 

[TimShady]

Tell me that you don't understand cricket without telling me that you don't understand cricket.

Labuschagne was trying to gain an advantage by batting out of his crease, Barstow wasn't. Completely different situations.

I understand cricket very well and had a fair few matches standing in as wicket keeper back when my knees were in better condition.

People saying things about “getting an advantage” are quoting from the famous unwritten rule book.

Labuschagne was trying to get an advantage by batting out of his crease. Correct.

Carey was trying to get an advantage by stumping/running out Bairstow.

If there is any ire to be aimed at anyone here, it is the umpires for not calling over or Bairstow for not waiting until said call.

 

[JonnyGutteridge]

I do think it’s a ridiculous dismissal… I think the Aussies were plain cheating with the two “catches” (Smith and Starc) as they clearly grounded the ball on both occasions and it’s absolutely disgraceful to try to claim either as a catch.

However, I’m a bit more “on the fence” about the Bairstow dismissal. Carey pre-empted it, he didn’t throw for the stumps after Bairstow went wondering… Ultimately it’s incredibly amateurish by Bairstow in a big moment and probably cost us.

In golf terms… it’s kind of like scooping your ball up in matchplay before the opponent has given you the putt (pros do this all the time)… You’ve played this sport all of your life and you should know better. It’s not hard to have some basic discipline.

Think we’ll see a nasty side of this Ashes series now, Australia were probably regretting firing up England and the crowd yesterday before they eventually won, and think this incident will fire England up… which was probably needed!

 

[Billysboots]

The thing is Bairstow clearly thought the ball was dead

No doubt because, Bairstow having done precisely the same for the previous three deliveries, the Australians had made no attempt to break the stumps. It seems pretty clear on that basis that Bairstow thought all concerned believed the ball to be dead when he scraped his foot behind the crease.

And comparing this to Bairstow trying to stump Labuschagne is a bit of a nonsense. On that occasion the ‘keeper was clearly trying to stop the batter seeking an advantage as Labuschagne was batting outside his crease to negate any swing.

Bairstow was seeking to gain no advantage at the end of Greens’s over. Any suggestion that he was is codswallop.

 

[MACM85]

Unless the umpire called over then the ball is still live. Bairstow just had a brain fart moment. Sure it didn't sit well getting a dismissal of that sort. However it is out.

 

[ColchesterFC]

I understand cricket very well and had a fair few matches standing in as wicket keeper back when my knees were in better condition.

People saying things about “getting an advantage” are quoting from the famous unwritten rule book.

Labuschagne was trying to get an advantage by batting out of his crease. Correct.

Carey was trying to get an advantage by stumping/running out Bairstow.

If there is any ire to be aimed at anyone here, it is the umpires for not calling over or Bairstow for not waiting until said call.

So by your own admission one incident is a batsman trying to gain an advantage and the other is a wicketkeeper trying to gain an advantage and yet you claim they're the same.

 

[RichA]

I do think it’s a ridiculous dismissal… I think the Aussies were plain cheating with the two “catches” (Smith and Starc) as they clearly grounded the ball on both occasions and it’s absolutely disgraceful to try to claim either as a catch.

However, I’m a bit more “on the fence” about the Bairstow dismissal. Carey pre-empted it, he didn’t throw for the stumps after Bairstow went wondering… Ultimately it’s incredibly amateurish by Bairstow in a big moment and probably cost us.

In golf terms… it’s kind of like scooping your ball up in matchplay before the opponent has given you the putt (pros do this all the time)… You’ve played this sport all of your life and you should know better. It’s not hard to have some basic discipline.

Think we’ll see a nasty side of this Ashes series now, Australia were probably regretting firing up England and the crowd yesterday before they eventually won, and think this incident will fire England up… which was probably needed!

Starc's using the ball to break his fall then claiming the catch was comical.
Smith's was a very good and valid catch. His fingers were clearly between ball and ground. The tops of a few blades of grass touching the ball between his fingers doesn't equate to grounded.

 

[TimShady]

So by your own admission one incident is a batsman trying to gain an advantage and the other is a wicketkeeper trying to gain an advantage and yet you claim they're the same.

Yes they’re the same. If Labuschagne had been run out, I’d have said it’s a fair dismissal.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Yes they’re the same. If Labuschagne had been run out, I’d have said it’s a fair dismissal.

Labuschagne would have been stumped as opposed to run out - Marnus was out of his ground as a result of the shot he played - stumping , Bairstow was out of his ground after the shot was completed and went for a walk - run out

 

[TimShady]

Labuschagne would have been stumped as opposed to run out - Marnus was out of his ground as a result of the shot he played - stumping , Bairstow was out of his ground after the shot was completed and went for a walk - run out

A stumping is a type of run out and changes nothing in my point.

 

[JonnyGutteridge]

Starc's using the ball to break his fall then claiming the catch was comical.
Smith's was a very good and valid catch. His fingers were clearly between ball and ground. The tops of a few blades of grass touching the ball between his fingers doesn't equate to grounded.

It’s an incredible take by Smith but I firmly believe the ball is very clearing resting on the ground in the below picture.

It looked that way live, it looked that way from the very first replay and I haven’t seen any angle yet where it shows a clean catch.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

A stumping is a type of run out and changes nothing in my point.

It’s different

Marnus was looking to gain an advantage by advancing down the pitch to adjust the length of the delivery etc -

Bairstow was advancing down the pitch to chat to Stokes because he thought the over was done

Now by the rules he is out through his own stupidity but it could have been handled differently- umpire could have had a chat with Stokes , Bairstow and Cummings to assess Bairstows intentions and then give Cummins the choice to follow through with appeal or use it as a warning to Bairstow - I know which way Stokes would have gone

 

[ColchesterFC]

It’s different

Marnus was looking to gain an advantage by advancing down the pitch to adjust the length of the delivery etc -

Bairstow was advancing down the pitch to chat to Stokes because he thought the over was done

Now by the rules he is out through his own stupidity but it could have been handled differently- umpire could have had a chat with Stokes , Bairstow and Cummings to assess Bairstows intentions and then give Cummins the choice to follow through with appeal or use it as a warning to Bairstow - I know which way Stokes would have gone

You might as well give up LP, I have. He admitted in an earlier post that one situation was the batsman trying to gain an advantage and the other was the keeper trying to gain an advantage and yet despite that keeps insisting that they are the same.

 

[RichA]

It’s an incredible take by Smith but I firmly believe the ball is very clearing resting on the ground in the below picture.

It looked that way live, it looked that way from the very first replay and I haven’t seen any angle yet where it shows a clean catch.

Wisden explain it pretty well here...

Explained: Fingers Underneath Vs Complete Control - What The Laws Say About The Steve Smith Lord's Catch Debate

Steve Smith's tumbling grab to dismiss Joe Root in the Lord's Ashes Test has kicked up a controversy over whether the catch was a fair one or not.

wisden.com

 

[TimShady]

You might as well give up LP, I have. He admitted in an earlier post that one situation was the batsman trying to gain an advantage and the other was the keeper trying to gain an advantage and yet despite that keeps insisting that they are the same.

Are only batsmen allowed to try to gain an advantage?

When someone bowls they are trying to take a wicket or deprive runs, usually, both of which are advantageous to their team.

Watch

fb.watch

Should this have cost the fielding team five runs or not?

 

[Mudball]

Looks like the Long Room was not the only place the Aussies were heckled

https://twitter.com/x/status/1675513019210559489

 

[Hobbit]

They aren't the same.
Labuschagne was out of his ground, playing the ball and it was still very much live.
Bairstow only left his crease thinking the ball was dead. The umpires had to go upstairs as they had also assumed the ball was dead and weren't paying attention. Crucially, they hadn't called over and Carey was not treating it as dead - his right as WK. I'm not disputing that he was out - I just think it was unsporting. But as long as you've got Stuart Broad in your team and fellow batters who don't walk when they know they've hit the ball you can't bleat about spirit of cricket.

I think you should always bleat about the spirit of the game irrespective of who does what in your team. I dare say there’s the odd Aussie who’s embarrassed by that stumping. The alternative is every player plays to the lowest common denominator, and no one walks. If that happens the game loses a bit of its gloss.

As for the Smith & Starc catches, the rules have complicated things. Just don’t ground the ball, it’s that simple. Personally, on the issue of who was in control etc, under the current rules I’d have given the Starc catch but not the Smith catch. That’s what happens when a judgement needs to be made about control when the ball contacts the ground. If it were ground it, it’s not out, it would have made the decision on both catches easier.