posted Jun 25, 2008

Alls well that ends well - lets face it in big football matches everyone cheats and bad decisions are made and they move on...Amazing thatfor the third time in ten days a fairly unique 'incident' occurs that challenges the common sense and natural order of this great game - on the positive side 50 over cricket is most certainly alive and well

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

jinius wrote:


"Another point, whitehallwasp says why didn't the umpire give the player not out if he was disgusted? Simple, he is not there to decide what is right or wrong"

sorry that's wrong - the umpire can still call dead ball.

i think

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

How can you blame Swann? It was poor backing up by Bell and Broad that lost the game. Bell especially, who is England's second best fielder, could've have stopped that even if it had to stop it with his leg.

----------------------------------
I did the exact same thing as Swann and although it wasn't 100% his fault he could of easily rolled it along the floor as

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

Total incompetence from England!

as to the run out - there was no injury, no suggestion the collision was deliberate, the batsman hadn't made his ground - the umpire gas to follow the letter of the law.
It was down to Collingwood - and the choice definitely wasn't cricket...

Elliot would've easily made his ground without the collision.

Unfortunately, Collingwood's position as captain has to come into question.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

I'm sure that somewhere, Murali is sitting back and looking very satisfied indeed.

I don't agree with what Collingwood did, even though I'm a die-hard England fan, but New Zealand simply cannot complain after the Murali/McCullum incident - you reap what you sow.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

How sad that a sport of gentlemen has almost reached footballing proportions.

Win at any cost.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 26, 2008

Unless the umpire thought that the collision was deliberate, he has no right to make the decision 'not out'. What Mark Benson obviously and correctly did do was to take Collingwood to 1 side. He probably explained to Colly that it was his decision whether or not to withdraw the appeal, based on the spirit of the game. Strictly speaking I don't think a 'dead ball' was an option either, it was either a run or out, so this may have influenced Colly's decision in such a tight game. I think a 'dead ball' without the ball being bowled again, would have been a fair compromise.

Colly's comment about a split second decision is a stupid cop-out, he had plenty of time before the batsman was able to walk off, and plenty of advice from the umpire.

I'm glad NZ won the game and applaud their restraint after the game, but I do wonder how things would be different if England hadn't made such a mess of the last ball and the result had been different

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 26, 2008

The Murali incident was totally different. The ball was still live when Murali decided to go walkabout, completely his own fault. Batsmen know they shouldn't leave their crease until they're sure the ball is dead, in this case it hadn't even been returned from the deep. When the ball becomes dead can be a grey area, but not in this case.

add comment | complain about this comment