Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket
-
@barbarian said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
They were too brazen, too stupid and they got caught.
Only reason this post got 7 likes so far
-
@chimoaus said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
Thanks for that, given how difficult it is to police should any amount of tampering be allowed? Or does the tampering simply make the game more interesting?
Outlawing it completely isn't really an option, purely because the ball naturally picks up dirt/grass during the game and a bowler sometimes has to clean that off to deliver a ball. Policing that seems overly officious.
I think you could make a pretty strong case to legalise ball tampering, on the proviso that players can't use any implements or tools to physically aid them. So you can scuff it, scratch it with your nails, throw it into the turf, suck on mints and shine it etc etc
That's probably a better outcome than prohibition, and easier to police.
-
@bovidae said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
@barbarian said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
Well there is ball tampering and there is ball tampering.
I was going to say the same thing regarding throws to the keeper. Players know when they want to bounce the ball in to cause some scuffing or keep the ball off the deck to maximise the shine on the ball.
Using foreign objects is a completely different level.
That is already outlawed now though, tightened up on in the last few years - deliberately throwing it into the ground on the way back to the keeper. But this is only really applied to an infielder throwing it in deliberately on the bounce. Not boundary-riders.
Personally think that ruling is a bit stupid. If a team want to scuff it up by letting it bounce I don't care much. Surely this in itself takes some skill (and risk if it also scuffs the shiny side)?
It has to be pretty blatant for an ump to call on this.
-
so far my favourite bit of all this is reading an article where Michael Clarke hasn't completely ruled out a comeback as the Aussie captain.
Me either Michael, me either
-
@mariner4life said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
so far my favourite bit of all this is reading an article where Michael Clarke hasn't completely ruled out a comeback as the Aussie captain.
Me either Michael, me either
I'm waiting for Smith to come out and say Clarke taught him everything he knows
-
@mariner4life said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
so far my favourite bit of all this is reading an article where Michael Clarke hasn't completely ruled out a comeback as the Aussie captain.
Me either Michael, me either
To think I thought Clarke was the biggest dickhead Aussie captain of recent memory....consider me reeducated...
-
-
Yes Astle!! Lovely bowling. Getting some really nice drift, set the batsmen up for he wrong'un, and then executed beautifully.
-
@no-quarter said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
Yes Astle!! Lovely bowling. Getting some really nice drift, set the batsmen up for he wrong'un, and then executed beautifully.
Umm wrong thread dude
-
@virgil said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
@no-quarter said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
Yes Astle!! Lovely bowling. Getting some really nice drift, set the batsmen up for he wrong'un, and then executed beautifully.
Umm wrong thread dude
Was just providing an example to the Aussies on how to take wickets with smart cricket instead of cheating...
-
I feel like we have been camped in this thread the past 24 hours or so
-
@Virgil bro it's your turn for the marshmallow run
-
Inquiry findings due on Wednesday | cricket.com.au
Cricket Australia CEO to join colleagues in South Africa, findings of internal investigation to be...
Cricket Australia Chief Executive James Sutherland is heading to South Africa today as part of the investigation into the ball tampering controversy that has engulfed the Test team with an update on the progress of that inquiry expected on Wednesday. CA chairman David Peever said the board of directors had been fully briefed on the issue as it stands, and he expected there would be information to share publicly within 48 hours. “The Cricket Australia Board has been fully updated on the issue and supports James travelling to South Africa to manage the response to the investigation currently underway,” Peever said. “We expect to be able to fully update the Australian public on the findings on Wednesday morning (Tuesday evening in Johannesburg). -
Where’s Boof? The guy is yet to front and his body language during the whole thing when the cameras were on Bancroft and the umpire exchanges was interesting to say the least.
Sutherland has been pretty weak as well.
-
All interesting watching this unravel - rather OTT if you ask me, and against all the grain, I think the ICC bans are about right. A couple of comments though on things that have irked me a bit ...
SA said that they suspected ball tampering so they instructed the cameramen to look for it ... I don't think that's fair. Home advantage isn't about your team having all the broadcasters on your side is it? And how does that work on the contrary ... they spot the home team tampering does that get the same treatment?
The ICC bans here (which I've written above I agree with) do make the initial Rabada ban look rather silly ... Cheat, bring the game into disrepute ... 1 game .. brush somebody when giving them a send-off ... 2?
Smith took some incredibly bad PR advice in his initial reaction. It's one thing to take responsibility and fully fess up, but to then talk about moving forwards straight away ... hmmm. Judge, jury and executioner decide that one I'm afraid buddy.
I think more people would be much more understanding if not for all the histrionics earlier in the series. Although they had a point, that all seems a bit rich now.
-
@act-crusader said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
Where’s Boof? The guy is yet to front and his body language during the whole thing when the cameras were on Bancroft and the umpire exchanges was interesting to say the least.
Sutherland has been pretty weak as well.
-
@booboo said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
Top troll from Broad ...
Broad, speaking after the fourth day of the first Test against New Zealand in Auckland, said: “I saw Steve Smith in his press conference say it’s the first time they’ve tried it, which to me seems really surprising they’ve changed a method that’s been working.
“Look at the Ashes series we’ve just played, look through all of those Test matches and they reverse swing the ball sometimes in conditions you wouldn’t expect the ball to reverse. So I don’t understand why they’ve changed their method for this one game?”
Interesting comments coming out of SA that they too had suspicions due to how quick the Convicts were getting reverse. So much so that they asked the camera guys to hunt it out. Seems it isn't quite as easy to spot as we all suspect and it took a fair bit of patience to catch them.
-
@majorrage said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
All interesting watching this unravel - rather OTT if you ask me, and against all the grain, I think the ICC bans are about right. A couple of comments though on things that have irked me a bit ...
SA said that they suspected ball tampering so they instructed the cameramen to look for it ... I don't think that's fair. Home advantage isn't about your team having all the broadcasters on your side is it? And how does that work on the contrary ... they spot the home team tampering does that get the same treatment?
The ICC bans here (which I've written above I agree with) do make the initial Rabada ban look rather silly ... Cheat, bring the game into disrepute ... 1 game .. brush somebody when giving them a send-off ... 2?
Smith took some incredibly bad PR advice in his initial reaction. It's one thing to take responsibility and fully fess up, but to then talk about moving forwards straight away ... hmmm. Judge, jury and executioner decide that one I'm afraid buddy.
I think more people would be much more understanding if not for all the histrionics earlier in the series. Although they had a point, that all seems a bit rich now.
With Rabada it was an accumulation of demerits though. They stay on your record for two years and get added to anything new. They don't disappear after a punishment.
Smith will be carrying a few now, so much so that any transgression will re-activate a ban.I suspect that the bad PR advice was on the back of instructions from CA and it backfired badly. They spent an hour or so getting the story lined up before fronting, which I initially suspected was to protect Boof. I think now that they took advice from home on what to do considering the TV deals under negotiation and were told to try to look good by confessing and saying it was a 'one off, won't happen again'. A little bit of arrogance in that regard produced results they didn't see coming.
