Yes, I am back after a pretty long hiatus.. Thanks to a cricketing controversy raging in forums all over the world.
Stuart Broad nicked one and was given not out by the umpire and gotten himself a half century in the process, and against who? The Aussies! Probably one of the greatest hypocritical teams to have ever played Cricket.
There are no rules about walking. For those who don't quite understand what walking is - It means that a batsman can choose to walk away from the pitch if he knows he is out. Honesty. The gentlemanly nature it is said.
A few cricketers do walk if they know they are out. It is not mandatory that every cricketer must do so. I applaud honesty in the cricketing field when there is one. Particularly if it comes from an Aussie. And Adam Gilchrist walked. I did admire him for doing so whenever he did it. There was a semi-final at stake, a place in yet another final in a major ICC tournament and he walked. All those who watched him play know the kind of destruction he can unleash with his bat on any given day. And he walked in a semi-final.
People accused him of starting a "walking-crusade" but then each man's integrity is his own. And speaking of integrity. Michael Clarke played under a man known for his great integrity - Ricky Ponting And Clarke for one should remember the Sydney Test of 2008 when the entire Australian team was very honest. There's a saying "people living in glass houses shouldn't throw stones at others." This will apply to Captain Clarke as well.
In my opinion, a batsman is entitled to wait for the umpire's decision regardless. After all, the ICC pays umpires like Aleem Dar, Marais Erasmus and Kumar Dharmasena (Umpire of the year), who are professionals to do a job, just like working people like you and me are paid to do a job. As far as honesty and integrity are concerned, it would be great to see honest people in Cricket after all that's happening around us - match fixing, spot fixing, corruption, et al. And yes, I do admire such a quality in any cricketer.
One of my friends wrote a status message that Broad should have walked as it was a thick edge and not just a faint nick. Well, I agree, but again - what was the umpire doing? The batsman is always well within his rights to wait for the umpire to make a call. And considering that Australia had used up their reviews, they couldn't review that. Also, there should have been communication from the third umpire saying "that was out", which apparently did not happen.
So, all points considered and given that ICC laws do not say anything that batsmen must walk if they know they are out, I would say the umpires are more at fault than Broad himself. Of course, the bowler would be a little disgruntled, since he has lost the battle anyway.
Oh, BTW - Chris Broad, Stuart Broad's father and ICC Match Referee had suspended Dinesh Ramdin, Windies 'keeper for claiming a catch that wasn't, and what would he have told his son now? Food for thought.
Stuart Broad nicked one and was given not out by the umpire and gotten himself a half century in the process, and against who? The Aussies! Probably one of the greatest hypocritical teams to have ever played Cricket.
There are no rules about walking. For those who don't quite understand what walking is - It means that a batsman can choose to walk away from the pitch if he knows he is out. Honesty. The gentlemanly nature it is said.
A few cricketers do walk if they know they are out. It is not mandatory that every cricketer must do so. I applaud honesty in the cricketing field when there is one. Particularly if it comes from an Aussie. And Adam Gilchrist walked. I did admire him for doing so whenever he did it. There was a semi-final at stake, a place in yet another final in a major ICC tournament and he walked. All those who watched him play know the kind of destruction he can unleash with his bat on any given day. And he walked in a semi-final.
People accused him of starting a "walking-crusade" but then each man's integrity is his own. And speaking of integrity. Michael Clarke played under a man known for his great integrity - Ricky Ponting And Clarke for one should remember the Sydney Test of 2008 when the entire Australian team was very honest. There's a saying "people living in glass houses shouldn't throw stones at others." This will apply to Captain Clarke as well.
In my opinion, a batsman is entitled to wait for the umpire's decision regardless. After all, the ICC pays umpires like Aleem Dar, Marais Erasmus and Kumar Dharmasena (Umpire of the year), who are professionals to do a job, just like working people like you and me are paid to do a job. As far as honesty and integrity are concerned, it would be great to see honest people in Cricket after all that's happening around us - match fixing, spot fixing, corruption, et al. And yes, I do admire such a quality in any cricketer.
One of my friends wrote a status message that Broad should have walked as it was a thick edge and not just a faint nick. Well, I agree, but again - what was the umpire doing? The batsman is always well within his rights to wait for the umpire to make a call. And considering that Australia had used up their reviews, they couldn't review that. Also, there should have been communication from the third umpire saying "that was out", which apparently did not happen.
So, all points considered and given that ICC laws do not say anything that batsmen must walk if they know they are out, I would say the umpires are more at fault than Broad himself. Of course, the bowler would be a little disgruntled, since he has lost the battle anyway.
Oh, BTW - Chris Broad, Stuart Broad's father and ICC Match Referee had suspended Dinesh Ramdin, Windies 'keeper for claiming a catch that wasn't, and what would he have told his son now? Food for thought.
