Mens ICC Cricket World Cup, India 2023.

[whufc]

Without looking, it's happened four times in first class cricket. Vasbert Drakes was one of them in the Windies domestic comp. Now it just leaves hit the ball twice as the only dismissal to not have happened at international level.

Certainly Shakib is a hot head, and I don't think he would care the potential shitstorm something like that would cause.

Controversy seems to follow Shakib so of course this happens on his watch.

I think us Aussies are the last to be critical of teams playing the game to the exact letter of the law. We happily took the Bairstow run out and defended Starc for looking for a mankad in the first over of a game.

Can’t then be critical of a team enforcing a rule based on a batsmen mistake.

[dedja]

Correct weight.

The Laws of Cricket are easily found, but I’m yet to sight an offical published version of the Spirit of the Game.

[spell_check]

Wonder if CA will request the players do not play the upcoming match against Afghanistan as per their protest against Afghanistan (Taliban) in January this year.

No need to, Cricket Australia has made it's point in relation to the Talibans treatment of women. Good on them. Afghanistan remain the only ICC member that doesn't have a womens cricket program. Maybe the ICC could show some leadership on this issue.

Yeah nah

CA are no lone rangers but once again sporting bodies/clubs prove they are willing to ‘take a stand’ on a political issue until the impact of the sporting result is to great, then the political issue they are so passionate about takes a back seat

We saw this with the football World Cup and teams protesting about Qatar as hosts, yet none of them had the guts to not attend the World Cup.

Another example why sports bodies should stay away from politics.

The cynic in me suggests thing like that (amongst other things sporting bodies decide) are marketing exercises, not actual ethical decisions. Have a look at CA and women's cricket and equality, yet some of the WBBL matches telecasts are stream level quality only, for one thing.

[whufc]

Wonder if CA will request the players do not play the upcoming match against Afghanistan as per their protest against Afghanistan (Taliban) in January this year.

No need to, Cricket Australia has made it's point in relation to the Talibans treatment of women. Good on them. Afghanistan remain the only ICC member that doesn't have a womens cricket program. Maybe the ICC could show some leadership on this issue.

Yeah nah

CA are no lone rangers but once again sporting bodies/clubs prove they are willing to ‘take a stand’ on a political issue until the impact of the sporting result is to great, then the political issue they are so passionate about takes a back seat

We saw this with the football World Cup and teams protesting about Qatar as hosts, yet none of them had the guts to not attend the World Cup.

Another example why sports bodies should stay away from politics.

The cynic in me suggests thing like that (amongst other things sporting bodies decide) are marketing exercises, not actual ethical decisions. Have a look at CA and women's cricket and equality, yet some of the WBBL matches are stream level quality only, for one thing.

Bang on! That’s 100% what they are.

[spell_check]

Correct weight.

The Laws of Cricket are easily found, but I’m yet to sight an offical published version of the Spirit of the Game.

Absolutely. If anyone doesn't like the laws, campaign to have them changed/rewritten, instead of hiding behind the 'spirit of the game' line.

[whufc]

Correct weight.

The Laws of Cricket are easily found, but I’m yet to sight an offical published version of the Spirit of the Game.

Absolutely. If anyone doesn't like the laws, campaign to have them changed/rewritten, instead of hiding behind the 'spirit of the game' line.

I’m a big believer in the ‘spirit of the game’ eg I don’t think the timed out rule was invented for equipment failure once on the oval, same as I didn’t think the stumping of Bairstow was in the laws for a batsmen who thought the ball was dead and wasn’t attempting to take a run.

But can’t have you cake and eat it to…..already seeing friends on the socials call out Bangladesh for being embarrassing and not playing within the spirit. Which is a laugh given they stood up for Australia over the last 5 years.

[spell_check]

Correct weight.

The Laws of Cricket are easily found, but I’m yet to sight an offical published version of the Spirit of the Game.

Absolutely. If anyone doesn't like the laws, campaign to have them changed/rewritten, instead of hiding behind the 'spirit of the game' line.

I’m a big believer in the ‘spirit of the game’ eg I don’t think the timed out rule was invented for equipment failure once on the oval, same as I didn’t think the stumping of Bairstow was in the laws for a batsmen who thought the ball was dead and wasn’t attempting to take a run.

But can’t have you cake and eat it to…..already seeing friends on the socials call out Bangladesh for being embarrassing and not playing within the spirit. Which is a laugh given they stood up for Australia over the last 5 years.

That's what I mean, if there's loopholes etc some players will drive a bus through them. As was said during the commentary though, did Mathews go to the umpire and say, my helmet strap is stuffed, can I change the helmet? It doesn't sound like he did. Only when he was told he was being given out did he say so. As far as I can see he could have taken guard and then pulled away as that wouldn't have been given out because he was ready to face...until the helmet did a number.

[whufc]

Yeah spinner bowling, could have faced a ball and called for a new helmet and the game goes on with no controversy.

Obviously when laws are written they sometimes can’t pre-empt every single way that rule may come to fruition in the game which is why I think the ‘spirit of cricket’ is important.

[dedja]

It’s fairly clear that he didn’t know or understand the Law, so didn’t have the awareness to do what you suggest (which would have been reasonable).

By the time he realised what had happened it was all over.

[spell_check]

It’s fairly clear that he didn’t know or understand the Law, so didn’t have the awareness to do what you suggest (which would have been reasonable).

By the time he realised what had happened it was all over.

That's right, I'd always wanted to see it happen in international cricket because it would be a first, so it's almost zero people to really know the ins and outs regarding the law. I also was looking to see the reactions it caused (hey, it spiced up this virtual dead rubber as far as this tournament goes!)

[Lightning McQueen]

It’s always important to make sure you have your own helmet in your hand when you’re about to have a bat.

[dedja]

True.

That stumping could have been another controversy, but the keeper had the awareness to ensure that there was no doubt. Also helps when the batsman gives up so you have an eternity to clean up your mess.

[spell_check]

women's cricket and equality, yet some of the WBBL matches telecasts are stream level quality only, for one thing.

Isn't that amazing, because I thought about this with the Wellington dismissal in the WBBL the other day, now Mushfiqur Rahim stumps de Silva in the correct manner!

[mal]

The way I saw the Matthews timed out
He tried to strap up his helmet at the batting crease and the strap became/loose broken - and he needed another helmet
Should not be given out

Stuff the laws , the laws of common sense should prevail

[DOC]

I wonder why the next batsmen was not appealed for the same thing?

[RB]

Another example why sports bodies should stay away from politics.

How far are you willing to take that one?

Were the ICC and national boards wrong to isolate South Africa from international cricket?

Were the actions of the 200m medallists at the 1968 Olympic medal ceremony wrong?

Would you be OK if this World Cup were, if there no were security issues, held in Afghanistan?

Sport and politics have always been mixed whether we like it or not.

I think CA did what they thought was right with the Afghanistan series, and no doubt it wasn't an easy decision. I don't think that means they're obliged to boycott a World Cup match. Good on them for showing some leadership which it seems is sorely lacking from other nations.

[jackpot jim]

The way I saw the Matthews timed out
He tried to strap up his helmet at the batting crease and the strap became/loose broken - and he needed another helmet
Should not be given out

Stuff the laws , the laws of common sense should prevail

100% Agree !

[mal]

Matthews bowling to Shaqib
First ball beaten outside off stump
Second ball Shaqib with a poor and shot dropped at cover

Soon after Shaqib with a well TIMED hook hits Chameera for 6

[The Dark Knight]

Without looking, it's happened four times in first class cricket. Vasbert Drakes was one of them in the Windies domestic comp. Now it just leaves hit the ball twice as the only dismissal to not have happened at international level.

Certainly Shakib is a hot head, and I don't think he would care the potential shitstorm something like that would cause.

Controversy seems to follow Shakib so of course this happens on his watch.

I think us Aussies are the last to be critical of teams playing the game to the exact letter of the law. We happily took the Bairstow run out and defended Starc for looking for a mankad in the first over of a game.

Can’t then be critical of a team enforcing a rule based on a batsmen mistake.

What are you on about here? I wasn't being critical or commenting on how a team is playing to the exact letter of the law at all, I was just saying that controversy follows Shakib, have a look at the range of controversies that he's been involved in throughout his career (including his most recent disagreement with Tamim Iqbal) and again he finds himself in the middle of another one now.

[am Bays]

It’s been reported the 2 min we’re up before he started fiddling with his helmet

It’s in the laws it’s out

IMO it’s against the spirit of cricket to:
A) partake in slow play/not be ready to face up when you’re supposed to
B) not know the laws of the game