The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

Here’s a subject that should get some of you all fired up. What happened to cricket being a gentleman’s game, a gentleman’s sport. Seems like sportsmanship in the game is a long forgotten part of it, as shown in the latest controversial happening. This latest might be lawful according to the rules of the game but to my way of thinking ‘it’s not cricket’. Should it have been allowed?

By the way, I have lived away from the country for many years but I still barrack for dear old England, so it doesn’t matter to me what anyone says.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

I put it down to money Dotti. There's so much money at stake in sport these days which has led to so called gentlemanly conduct and possibly ladylike conduct going out of the window. I used to love any sport but increasingly I only find myself enjoying it away from the top levels where people are still playing for the love of the game.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

I think you are absolutely right, Lost in Cornwall.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

I also think it is down to money, but also the Ashes are iconic and I feel that the Australian cricketers do not have the British sense of FairPlay.
They have instead, the ethos of ‘we must win at any cost’ and will employ whatever is necessary to ensure that they win.
We have seen in past Ashes matches the stitching being unpicked on cricket balls…balls being scuffed and other questionable tactics including sledging.

I am not a fan of any kind of sport, but I do not respect those who do not play the game in a fair way, because they are cheats.
They cheat themselves, they cheat their country and they cheat the supporters when they do not play fairly.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

[QUOTE=Margaret Pilkington;1272877]I also think it is down to money, but also the Ashes are iconic and I feel that the Australian cricketers do not have the British sense of FairPlay.
They have instead, the ethos of ‘we must win at any cost’ and will employ whatever is necessary to ensure that they win.
We have seen in past Ashes matches the stitching being unpicked on cricket balls…balls being scuffed and other questionable tactics including sledging.

I am not a fan of any kind of sport, but I do not respect those who do not play the game in a fair way, because they are cheats.
They cheat themselves, they cheat their country and they cheat the supporters when they do not play fairly.

Marge, as you know I was always into sports at woodnook school, I was the goal keeper for the school and the deputy keeper for Accrington schoolboys, I was also the wicket keeper for woodnook, even at fourteen or fifteen years of age, Milton Suthers, remember him ? taught us that until the ball was called "out of play", then it was still (in play) but then again maybe because of the mega bucks that they get paid today they have forgotten the rules in order to win at any (COST).

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

P.S The Aussie wicket keeper was perfectly Within the rules.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

If that is the case then why were those MCC members calling the Aussie team ‘cheats’?
were they just being sour losers? You would think that these members of the MCC would be fully aware of the rules.
My limited understanding of this was that Bairstow thought the over was over (a dead ball situation)and left his crease…the wicket keeper saw the main chance and stumped him.
So while it might have been a legal declaration I doubt that it was ‘fair’.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

The point I was trying to make is that winning at all costs seems to have overtaken sportsmanship in cricket, once known as the sport of gentlemen. Yes, the latest incident is allowable according to the rule book but does not come under the heading of sportsmanship. A misunderstanding by the batsman was, in my opinion, unfairly taken advantage of.

Personally I do not watch cricket these days as it can be very boring. The exciting time in cricket was when such players as Sir Viv Richards and Clive Lloyd showed their brilliance. Now that was cricket worth watching – especially the one-day matches.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

Yes. The Australians actions were within the rules but outside what I would call sportsmanship. There seems to be evidence that similar things have happened in the past following which the team claiming the wicket changed their mind on the basis that good relationships were better than slavishly sticking to the rules. Winning at all costs sees to have overtaken this. Although done in a completely different way there was a similar incident in the womens World Cup Final where an England player was run out whilst backing up. Polite procedure says she should have been warned first but winning at all costs overuled this.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

[QUOTE=Margaret Pilkington;1272888]If that is the case then why were those MCC members calling the Aussie team ‘cheats’?
were they just being sour losers? You would think that these members of the MCC would be fully aware of the rules.
My limited understanding of this was that Bairstow thought the over was over (a dead ball situation)and left his crease…the wicket keeper saw the main chance and stumped him.
So while it might have been a legal declaration I doubt that it was ‘fair’.

Marge, Fair or not rules are rules and as I said earlier, Milton Suthers, drummed the rules of football and cricket into us at 14/15 years of age, sorry Marge but Bairstow was at fault not the keeper.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

yep but it was not sportsmanship simple as,the aussies will do anything to have a better chance of winning.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

Why do you keep on quoting Milton Sutherland Taddy…he is long gone.

And he knew what sportsmanship was. I believe that he would have been more sportsmanlike’ and he would have accepted that this was a ‘dead ball’ situation.

Yes the rules were adhered to, but as Dorothy said it is not the gentleman’s game that it once was.

I don’t care about the outcome of the Ashes, but I do believe it is no longer about the sport and more about the money.
I also believe that had it been an Aussie batsman and an English wicket keeper, the outcome would have been different.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

im damn sure it would be different,

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

That should read Milton Suthers, but my iPad thinks it knows what I want to say

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

[QUOTE=cashman;1272894]yep but it was not sportsmanship simple as,the aussies will do anything to have a better chance of winning.

When our English players of what ever sport are being paid "Squillions" of pounds in order to play a Hobby/ Game that they love, then at least they should know the rules, if I, not being a smart A---, was taught the rules at 15/16 years of age, (and can still remember them at 76 years of age) it does not bode well for our future in (any), Sport. It seems quite obvious to me Cashy
that you did not participate in any sport as a youngster but you are prepared to
watch sport of any kind and be prepared to criticize anyone who Actually Knows the rules, i.e. the umpires,
Kind regards, Taddy.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

[QUOTE=Margaret Pilkington;1272898]Why do you keep on quoting Milton Sutherland Taddy…he is long gone.

Marge, He was never called Sutherland, he lived on Burnley Road, Huncoat, in the village that I have lived in for one year short of 70 years, his name was Milton Suthers, and he was one of the best teachers that I have ever had, Whether it be Sports, Maths or whatever, he did not only teach the subjects that he was paid to do, he also taught his pupils how to live their life as a (grown up)

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

Taddy, you miss the point entirely.
Dottie already acknowledged that what happened was according to the rules…the rules were adhered to.
But it was not ‘sportsmanship’.
Sportsmanship has been killed off by money. When sport is governed by money it ceases to be sport, it becomes business….a transaction.

I KNOW the rules were followed, but it was just shabby of the Aussies to make mileage of an oversight by the batsman (who considered this to be the end of the over and as such a dead ball…one not able of being used to stump him).
Do umpires never make mistakes? If that is the case why do they use video equipment to corroborate the decisions?

Shabby, Shabby, Shabby….and just because you were a player of sports some fifty years ago does not influence me to change my opinion.
That was then, this is now.
Taddy I say this respectfully and as a person who thinks these sports are a waste of human effort.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

Taddy if you had looked carefully you would have seen that this was my iPad that changed the name and I had corrected this in post 14.
I know exactly what he was called he scared the bjasus out of me in Maths, because he not only did sport, he taught Maths too.
While he might have taught you how to live life as a grown up, that is not how I remember him.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

Taddy, I don’t know why you think Cashie has never played sport and that you have arrived at this conclusion because of his posts on this thread. I don’t get that impression at all. I would never presume to know more about a person than I actually do so for all I know Cashie might have excelled at sports and got medals to prove it, might know rulebooks inside out, but that has nothing to do with the subject of this thread.

It is good to know that you played sport and got enjoyment from it, didn’t most of us play sport at one time or another – I know I did. Of course we were all taught the rules otherwise how would we have known how to play the game. However we were also taught how to play the game fairly. In the case in point the batsman made an honest mistake, the wicket-keeper took advantage of this. Rule or no rule it was not in the name of good sportsmanship and that was the point I was making.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

By the way, Taddy, please don’t take offence but I’m a bit confused as to how you feel about what happened. Is it that you consider rules are rules and there’s no bending them whatever the occasion, or do you agree with the general consensus on this thread so far that irrespective of what the rule book says it really was bad sportsmanship?

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

well taddy seems to know everything, but i still dont care it was bad sportsmanship which i dont expect anyone that dont follow sport knows NOUT ABOUT,

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

Carlton Brewery has released a new version of Victoria Bitter (vBulletin for short) except this new version is called England Bitter.
Now doesn’t that say all about the Australian ethos, how they see their sports teams.
Not sporting and still Shabby.(no respect for the team they are playing against)

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

[QUOTE=dotti34;1272912]By the way, Taddy, please don’t take offence but I’m a bit confused as to how you feel about what happened. Is it that you consider rules are rules and there’s no bending them whatever the occasion, or do you agree with the general consensus on this thread so far that irrespective of what the rule book says it really was bad sportsmanship?

Dotti yes rules are rules, o/k we all tend to bend them to our own advantage now and again but in this case the wicket keeper was entirely within his rights under the laws of the game to do what he did and the batsman should have known that, just my opinion for what that is worth.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

[QUOTE=Margaret Pilkington;1272919]Carlton Brewery has released a new version of Victoria Bitter (vBulletin for short) except this new version is called England Bitter.
Now doesn’t that say all about the Australian ethos, how they see their sports teams.
Not sporting and still Shabby.(no respect for the team they are playing against)

Yes Marge I have just had a chuckle to myself after reading in the Daily Mail about this new "English Bitter". ;);)

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

[QUOTE=Margaret Pilkington;1272905]Taddy, you miss the point entirely.
Dottie already acknowledged that what happened was according to the
Shabby, Shabby, Shabby….and just because you were a player of sports some fifty years ago

Taddy I say this respectfully and as a person who thinks these sports are a waste of human effort

Marge, just to correct you, it was 60 years ago not fifty, :D

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

[QUOTE=cashman;1272917]well taddy seems to know everything, but i still dont care it was bad sportsmanship which i dont expect anyone that dont follow sport knows NOUT ABOUT,[/

Cashy if I thought that I knew everything I would called "Sir", Keir Starmer and I do follow sport but not football; watching 22 over paid Prima Donnas is not my cup of tea, (or pint of ale).

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

Fifty or sixty…
What I was saying is, that it is a long long time ago…things change, but sportsmanship does not…it is what makes sport, sport rather than a business transaction.
Still shabby, still not in the SPIRIT of the game.
But because it is the rules then that is OK is it?
Even you seem to have agreed that sometimes the rules need to be bent.
This would have been one of those occasions.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

That should read V Bee(as in the letter B…not bulletin)
That was Accyweb changing what I posted rather then my iPad.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

With all this chatter lately about ‘the spirit’ of cricket, and how it was so much more ‘sporting’ in the ‘good old days’, it surprises me no one has brought up the name of Douglas Jardine.
He was the quintessential ‘gentleman’ cricketer, an amateur captain of England, schooled at Winchester (manners maketh the man) and Oxford, and played for that most refined county of Surrey.
But, ask any Aussie what he was and the response may be different - a cheating cad, who used ‘body line’ bowling (i.e. aiming at the leg stump and the batter’s body) in the ‘32-33 tour of Australia. This, ostensibly, to nullify the batting prowess of Donald Bradman, to some the best batsman ever to puck up a plank of willow.
It wasn’t the first time that type of bowling had been seen but, at the time in test matches, it was definitely not ‘cricket’, old boy.

Personally, whilst I enjoy watching cricket, it always seemed a dangerous way to spend an afternoon and had only the loosest connection to gentlemanly behaviour.
The idea that a batsman would be thinking about the ‘spirit’ of the game as he faced the bowling of Wes Hall at Thorneyholme Road always seemed fanciful, if not potentially fatal.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

Here’s a fun story to lighten this thread. Years ago my youngest daughter was doing a certificated course and she was the only female amongst a number of males. She organised cricket matches to be played in their lunch breaks but she also made up a rule which she called ‘out, boring’. Self-explanatory, if the way a batsman was playing was boring then that person had to walk. Now that would be a good one to add to cricket’s rule book….

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

....and yes, before you point it out, Taddy, I do know there is a penalty for slow overs.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

January 16 1933 at the Adelaide Oval,
Harold Larwood(who was related to my mothers family) bowled a body line ball at Bert Oldfield.
The batsman collapsed with a fractured skull and the crowd got very ‘restive’ or muderous would have been nearer the mark.
Harold Larwood said to his team mate Les Ames ‘you take the leg stump, I’ll take the middle stump if the come at us’

I don’t know if the crowd did ‘come at em’ was never told that bit of the story.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

Interesting, but not surprising given that period, that it was Harold Larwood, a miner’s son from Nottinghamshire, who suffered most of the opprobrium after the ‘body-line’ controversy and never played in another test.
Larwood refused to apologise for his bowling because it was done on the instructions of his ‘gentleman’ captain. Unlike his captain, cricket was Larwood’s job so this sanction was not without cost.

Jardine, however, went onto tour India but even he soon ‘retired’ from test and county cricket because of the ballyhoo over body line bowling.

But, by then, such bowling had been picked up by others, especially the West Indies, which, a few decades later, leads the story back to the likes of the mighty Wes Hall (and the terrifying Charlie Griffith at Burnley)…

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

I only know this story because my Grandma used to tell it…Harold was some relative of hers
She always seemed quite proud of his cricket career in spite of the adverse publicity.
I do not know what happened to the batsman who was hit by the ball.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

I have looked Bert Oldfield up on Wiki…the man died aged 81 so the fractured skull did not see him off.

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

I have to agree with Lost in Cornwall. Money is the root of all evil!

Since people started talking in terms of millions of pounds, whether it be wages, contracts, or just a bonus etc. I have lost all interest in sport.

Cheers

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

WATCH STANLEY. its not the same game as the moneymens. imho

Re: The Sport, or otherwise, of Cricket
 

Although I've been in Switzerland for the past 55 years, I still follow Stanley, and I'm also a Supporter Club member.
Cheers