Cricket

[Ewood Ace]

1 minute ago, Ianrally said:

The football style fans referred to by some on here didn’t start in this country. 

But it is in this country now. Bar a few grounds over the last decade Test cricket has become terrible to watch live in this country, as it is in Australia on the whole.

[Ianrally]

Well I still love watching test cricket and above all else, ashes tests both here and Oz.

[Dreams of 1995]

17 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

It's not whataboutery because I don't think Australia did anything wrong as I have clearly said on here. You say two wrongs don't make a right but I have no problem with McCullum's run's against Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe, for me there is nothing wrong with them the only players to blame just like with Bairstow on Sunday is a dozy batsman. I'm am just pointing out McCullum's hypocrisy.

On 32/33 I used that in response to a poster saying that it was always Australia who were guilty of I think the phrase was 'bending the rules' or something like that and I was just saying that an Australian might point to England bending the laws first when they used leg theory. I personally have no problem with leg theory bowling I think it was a piece of tactical genius from Jardine that got the best out a genuinely fast bowling attacking, limited the greatest player the game will ever see, beat a very very strong Australia team in their own backyard and delivered perhaps England's greatest ever series victory.

As for MCC members I was just pointing out to someone who was championing the spirit of cricket when criticising Australia that it was rather at odds for him to also be championing MCC members shouting abuse at Australia players in the long room. Is that really in the spirit of the game? It's certainly not in the spirit of crowds that I have sat in for 60 odd years.

It's good of you to tell me I'm welcome to my opinion. I must have missed you becoming a moderator congrats on that. 

All you have done is repeat the same stuff you have posted before

Nobody cares about Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe or the 1930s. I am lost why you keep repeating it to be honest

The current topic is whether or not Bairstow's wicket was unsportsmanlike. Whatever happened before is irrelevant. You have took it upon yourself to be the defender of Carey and the Australian team. Quite why I don't know. If you think the wicket was within the spirit of the game then say it with chest; it doesn't need to be about what has happened before. As though that somehow excuses Carey and Cricket Australia's actions

For every incident you bring up of McCullum or the England team there is a similar incident, or worse, performed by Cricket Australia

The last sentence is just silly. Not what this thread is about really. It's a civil place here

It is a crying shame that this piece of poor sportsmanship has overshadowed an otherwise great game of test cricket. These last 10 pages could have been spent discussing the good of cricket. Instead, once again Cricket Australia find themselves in the middle of a debate around the bad side of the sport

[Dreams of 1995]

3 hours ago, Gav said:

Ironically he told one poster to stop living in the past when discussing cheating and sandpaper…..

Hope you enjoyed the weekend Dreams, despite the result. 

Cheers Gav. It was a great weekend. Beans on toast for the next month though....London has gotten even more expensive than I remember

£50 for 2 glasses of wine and 2 beers at the Lyceum Theatre. We kept the receipt as a momento

[Ewood Ace]

13 minutes ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

All you have done is repeat the same stuff you have posted before

Nobody cares about Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe or the 1930s. I am lost why you keep repeating it to be honest

The current topic is whether or not Bairstow's wicket was unsportsmanlike. Whatever happened before is irrelevant. You have took it upon yourself to be the defender of Carey and the Australian team. Quite why I don't know. If you think the wicket was within the spirit of the game then say it with chest; it doesn't need to be about what has happened before. As though that somehow excuses Carey and Cricket Australia's actions

For every incident you bring up of McCullum or the England team there is a similar incident, or worse, performed by Cricket Australia

The last sentence is just silly. Not what this thread is about really. It's a civil place here

It is a crying shame that this piece of poor sportsmanship has overshadowed an otherwise great game of test cricket. These last 10 pages could have been spent discussing the good of cricket. Instead, once again Cricket Australia find themselves in the middle of a debate around the bad side of the sport

I offered you an explanation of why I mentioned them if you can't comprehend that explanation that's not my problem. I'm not defending Carey because Carey doesn't need defending he did nothing wrong if he did the then Bairstow would not have been given out.

I think I've been quite clear that I think that there was nothing untoward with the wicket again if you have not been able to comprehend that from my posts that is not my problems. The only person to blame for the dismissal was dozy Bairstow and the wicket rather summed up England's attitude to batting in this series, lax.

I think the spirit of the game is a myth personally because surely if something is within the laws of the game then it is within the spirit. Surely playing by the laws of the game is upholding the spirit of it?

Edited July 4, 2023 by Ewood Ace

[oldjamfan1]

7 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

I offered you an explanation of why I mentioned them if you can't comprehend that explanation that's not my problem. I'm not defending Carey because Carey doesn't need defending he did nothing wrong if he did the then Bairstow would not have been given out. I think the spirit of the game is a myth personally because surely if something is within the laws of the game then it is within the spirit.

You don't actually believe this nonsense do you? There are literally dozens of examples of things that are within the laws of the game that aren't within the spirit of cricket. Mankadding someone without giving them prior warning about leaving their ground being the most obvious. 

Edited July 4, 2023 by oldjamfan1

[Ewood Ace]

1 minute ago, oldjamfan1 said:

You don't actually believe this nonsense do you? There are literally dozens of examples of things that are within the laws of the game that aren't within the spirit of cricket. Mankadding someone without giving them prior warning about leaving their ground being the most obvious. 

I have no problem with Makading. The only player cheating there and not playing within the laws of the game is the batsman who is trying to steal ground.

 

[jim mk2]

Anyone who thinks Australia are in the wrong over this incident should read the convict press.

Even their prime minister has joined the attack

[Ianrally]

8 minutes ago, oldjamfan1 said:

You don't actually believe this nonsense do you? There are literally dozens of examples of things that are within the laws of the game that aren't within the spirit of cricket. Mankadding someone without giving them prior warning about leaving their ground being the most obvious. 

Exactly what I posted earlier on here. If Broad comes in first ball at Headingley and whips off the bails without giving prior warning then, although within the laws, it is unsportsmanlike. I bet the Aussies would have something to say then. 

Edited July 4, 2023 by Ianrally

[Ianrally]

1 minute ago, jim mk2 said:

Anyone who thinks Australia are in the wrong over this incident should read the convict press.

Even their prime minister has joined the attack

They are republicans and want all ties with the Motherland axed. 

[Dreams of 1995]

9 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

I offered you an explanation of why I mentioned them if you can't comprehend that explanation that's not my problem. I'm not defending Carey because Carey doesn't need defending he did nothing wrong if he did the then Bairstow would not have been given out.

I think I've been quite clear that I think that there was nothing untoward with the wicket again if you have not been able to comprehend that from my posts that is not my problems. The only person to blame for the dismissal was dozy Bairstow and the wicket rather summed up England's attitude to batting in this series, lax.

I think the spirit of the game is a myth personally because surely if something is within the laws of the game then it is within the spirit. Surely playing by the laws of the game is upholding the spirit of it?

Your 'explanation' is not anything difficult to comprehend. It isn't some fantastical insight into the sport of cricket; it is just pointless whataboutery in my opinion

The Australian team has two calculated cheaters in their team. They relish it. It is about time England started acting the same way and give it back

 

[Gav]

1 hour ago, Ianrally said:

Well I still love watching test cricket and above all else, ashes tests both here and Oz.

Amen to that Ian 🙏

Test cricket in this country has never been so popular.

[Mattyblue]

1 hour ago, Ewood Ace said:

But it is in this country now. Bar a few grounds over the last decade Test cricket has become terrible to watch live in this country, as it is in Australia on the whole.

Depends where you sit I find. As long as you avoid the 'party stands' - so Hollies at Edgbaston, Western Terrace at Headingley, that scaffolding monstrosity at OT etc you're fine.

[Silas]

1 hour ago, Ewood Ace said:

I think the spirit of the game is a myth personally because surely if something is within the laws of the game then it is within the spirit. Surely playing by the laws of the game is upholding the spirit of it?

You seem to be ignoring the reverse aspect of this stance that's been mentioned various times in this thread.

So, next season an opposition player gets their leg broken, their team kicks it out. After the player has been given gas and air for 10 mins and stretchered off, we fling the throw in to Gallagher, who does a Cruyff turn followed by a rainbow flick, and then smashes it in the top corner. You celebrating that goal and win then?

Same thing in the Euros Final against Italy. Are you proud of that trophy we've finally achieved after 56 years of hurt.

It's all within the laws of the game, so that's fine right. Well done us!

[Ewood Ace]

4 minutes ago, Silas said:

You seem to be ignoring the reverse aspect of this stance that's been mentioned various times in this thread.

So, next season an opposition player gets their leg broken, their team kicks it out. After the player has been given gas and air for 10 mins and stretchered off, we fling the throw in to Gallagher, who does a Cruyff turn followed by a rainbow flick, and then smashes it in the top corner. You celebrating that goal and win then?

Same thing in the Euros Final against Italy. Are you proud of that trophy we've finally achieved after 56 years of hurt.

It's all within the laws of the game, so that's fine right. Well done us!

You are comparing two separate sports and completely different scenarios. Johnny Bairstow didn't have his leg broken he just wasn't paying attention and dozily walked out of his before the ball was dead.

[Silas]

28 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

You are comparing two separate sports and completely different scenarios. 

So, I'm taking it it's only cricket where being within the laws is keeping the spirit of the sport. 

I've already mentioned golf and snooker. Wait till we get to tennis and smashing the ball directly at your opponent's body. Totally legal in the rule book, but if you try that on Wimbledon Centre Court this week you'll get booed off pretty fast. 

I'd argue there's barely a sport in the World that doesn't have 'unwritten rules'. Seems like you think cricket is perhaps the only one. 

[jim mk2]

Sports such as snooker and golf have a very strict etiquette. Crickey used to have such an etiquette - for instance, fast bowlers never, ever used to bowl bouncers at their fellow fast bowlers (the fast bowlers union) but like the genteel crowds that clapped and did not boo, that has gone out of the window.

Unfortunately we've adopted many convict habits

 

[Ewood Ace]

31 minutes ago, Silas said:

So, I'm taking it it's only cricket where being within the laws is keeping the spirit of the sport. 

Your comparison with someone breaking their leg had no relevance whatsoever to what happened at Lords on Sunday. Bairstow wasn't injured, he didn't break his leg he just dozily walked out of his crease (and not for the first time) thinking that the ball was dead had he looked around to see if it was he would have seen the ball coming towards the stumps because Carey released the ball whilst Bairstow was still in his crease.

I mean I had no problem with England bowling bouncers at Lyon for me if he goes out to bat he is fair game but given that he was actually injured and basically batting on one leg can I assume that you think that England were not bowling within the spirit of the sport? Because some would say that.

Edited July 4, 2023 by Ewood Ace

[wilsdenrover]

1 hour ago, Silas said:

You seem to be ignoring the reverse aspect of this stance that's been mentioned various times in this thread.

So, next season an opposition player gets their leg broken, their team kicks it out. After the player has been given gas and air for 10 mins and stretchered off, we fling the throw in to Gallagher, who does a Cruyff turn followed by a rainbow flick, and then smashes it in the top corner. You celebrating that goal and win then?

Same thing in the Euros Final against Italy. Are you proud of that trophy we've finally achieved after 56 years of hurt.

It's all within the laws of the game, so that's fine right. Well done us!

I wouldn’t be celebrating -  I’d have fainted from seeing Gallagher do that! 😁

[Silas]

3 hours ago, Ewood Ace said:

Surely playing by the laws of the game is upholding the spirit of it?

You asked a question.

The answer is no, categorically. 

I've given you several examples that illustrate this.

You appear to be deflecting and going off on tangents instead of debating in good faith. Fine, I'll move on then.

But finally, the actual phrase spirit of the game wouldn't exist would it, if it just meant within the laws of the game. Think about it. 

[Ewood Ace]

Just now, Silas said:

You asked a question.

The answer is no, categorically. 

I've given you several examples that illustrate this.

You appear to be deflecting and going off on tangents instead of debating in good faith. Fine, I'll move on then.

But finally, the actual phrase spirit of the game wouldn't exist would it, if it just meant within the laws of the game. Think about it. 

But what is the spirit of the game? It is nothing more than opinion and usually brought up by people on the wrong side of something.

I notice you are moving before answer my question about whether bowling bouncers and an injured tailender batting on one leg is within the spirit of the game? As I said I have no problem with it just like I didn't with the Bairstow dismissal but some people would take issue with both and that is where the spirit of the game becomes nothing more than a myth because it is simply peoples opinions. 

[oldjamfan1]

3 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

But what is the spirit of the game? It is nothing more than opinion and usually brought up by people on the wrong side of something.

I notice you are moving before answer my question about whether bowling bouncers and an injured tailender batting on one leg is within the spirit of the game? As I said I have no problem with it just like I didn't with the Bairstow dismissal but some people would take issue with both and that is where the spirit of the game becomes nothing more than a myth because it is simply peoples opinions. 

Aside from the fact they should have been bowling Yorkers to Lyon anyway to get him out I actually don’t think it was in the spirit of the game to send down the short pitched stuff, but I will concede that I might be in the minority on that one.

[Ewood Ace]

This is a great piece from Jonathan Liew.

Our shared values deserve better than a pointless term like ‘spirit of cricket’ | Cricket | The Guardian

[Ewood Ace]

11 minutes ago, oldjamfan1 said:

Aside from the fact they should have been bowling Yorkers to Lyon anyway to get him out I actually don’t think it was in the spirit of the game to send down the short pitched stuff, but I will concede that I might be in the minority on that one.

I certainly agree with your first bit I couldn't understand the sense in bowling short to Lyon. But I had no moral issue with England bowling short at him if he chooses to go out and bat then he is just another batsman to my mind.

But this is where the spirit of cricket is such a clouded thing as it is basically just someone's opinion. I have no problem with bowling short to Lyon or Carey's stumping, you have issues with both, whereas Ben Stokes thought the stumping was not in the spirit but that bowling short to Lyon was. Three different people 3 different positions and in the end we are all right because the spirit of cricket isn't a real thing.

Edited July 4, 2023 by Ewood Ace

[AllRoverAsia]

Mr Liew produced a long piece of anti English propaganda using cricket as a tool.

His perceived English exceptionalism was the target.

Don't fall for shit like this from a writer with chips on both shoulders.