Cullinan was given out HTB in the current ODI vs WI. Anyone got any
details of this, please?
Alan
by Alan Tuffe » Thu, 28 Jan 1999 04:00:00
Alan
by Rohan Chandr » Thu, 28 Jan 1999 04:00:00
Anyway, Cullinan played the ball into the ground, caught it as it
bounced up and passed it to a fielder. It was nowhere near his stumps
or anything. Everyone got on with the game, except Mr Lara, who walked
up to the umpire and appealed. The umpire asked if he was really
appealing, he said yes, and the umpire had no choice.
Of course, it's the letter of the Law, so I expect that certain
elements on this group will think that's absolutely reasonable!
Rohan [ as unimpressed by Lara as ever ]
by Sridha » Thu, 28 Jan 1999 04:00:00
> >Cullinan was given out HTB in the current ODI vs WI. Anyone got any
> >details of this, please?
> A truly classy incident, from the one and only Brian Lara - the great
> sportsman that he is (excuse my cynicism, but people keep insisting
> that he's a walker, when he isn't, and that bugs me :-) ).
\begin{seinfeld-mode}
a non-walker never walks, like a non-smoker never smokes.
if you're not a non-smoker, you're a smoker. if you're not a
non-walker, you're a walker. you don't have to be a serial walker
to be considered a walker, like you don't have to be a chain smoker
to be considered a smoker.
\end{seinfeld-mode}
> Anyway, Cullinan played the ball into the ground, caught it as it
> bounced up and passed it to a fielder. It was nowhere near his stumps
> or anything. Everyone got on with the game, except Mr Lara, who walked
> up to the umpire and appealed. The umpire asked if he was really
> appealing, he said yes, and the umpire had no choice.
> Of course, it's the letter of the Law, so I expect that certain
> elements on this group will think that's absolutely reasonable!
> Rohan [ as unimpressed by Lara as ever ]
by Stephen Devau » Thu, 28 Jan 1999 04:00:00
> >Cullinan was given out HTB in the current ODI vs WI. Anyone got any
> >details of this, please?
> A truly classy incident, from the one and only Brian Lara - the great
> sportsman that he is (excuse my cynicism, but people keep insisting
> that he's a walker, when he isn't, and that bugs me :-) ).
> Anyway, Cullinan played the ball into the ground, caught it as it
> bounced up and passed it to a fielder. It was nowhere near his stumps
> or anything. Everyone got on with the game, except Mr Lara, who walked
> up to the umpire and appealed. The umpire asked if he was really
> appealing, he said yes, and the umpire had no choice.
> Of course, it's the letter of the Law, so I expect that certain
> elements on this group will think that's absolutely reasonable!
> Rohan [ as unimpressed by Lara as ever ]
(Traditional non-Arkansan definition of "is" being used above.)
Fraternally in cricket,
Steve the Bajan
by Cage Rattle » Thu, 28 Jan 1999 04:00:00
>> >Cullinan was given out HTB in the current ODI vs WI. Anyone got any
>> >details of this, please?
>> A truly classy incident, from the one and only Brian Lara - the great
>> sportsman that he is (excuse my cynicism, but people keep insisting
>> that he's a walker, when he isn't, and that bugs me :-) ).
>he has walked at times. i recall one incident at mohali in '94 very
>clearly when he walked before venkat gave him out - in fact venkat
>initially turned the appeal down and put his finger up only after
>lara began to walk.
>what i'm trying to get at is ..... if he walks even occasionally,
>like 1 in 3 times, he should be regarded a walker.
>\begin{seinfeld-mode}
>a non-walker never walks, like a non-smoker never smokes.
>if you're not a non-smoker, you're a smoker. if you're not a
>non-walker, you're a walker. you don't have to be a serial walker
>to be considered a walker, like you don't have to be a chain smoker
>to be considered a smoker.
>\end{seinfeld-mode}
>> Anyway, Cullinan played the ball into the ground, caught it as it
>> bounced up and passed it to a fielder. It was nowhere near his stumps
>> or anything. Everyone got on with the game, except Mr Lara, who walked
>> up to the umpire and appealed. The umpire asked if he was really
>> appealing, he said yes, and the umpire had no choice.
>> Of course, it's the letter of the Law, so I expect that certain
>> elements on this group will think that's absolutely reasonable!
>> Rohan [ as unimpressed by Lara as ever ]
by Harish Chandramou » Thu, 28 Jan 1999 04:00:00
Lara may be petulant and he may be spoilt, but to me, he's never come
across as the sort who'd engage in an action that is as opposed to the
spirit in which the game is played as this one clearly comes across
as being -- and to that end, I find myself skeptical that he would
have done what you claim he did, without having been initially
provoked, first.
Pretty shocking stuff, either way, though.
Cheers,
Harish
by Rory Campbe » Fri, 29 Jan 1999 04:00:00
> A truly classy incident, from the one and only Brian Lara - the great
> sportsman that he is (excuse my cynicism, but people keep insisting
> that he's a walker, when he isn't, and that bugs me :-) ).
> Anyway, Cullinan played the ball into the ground, caught it as it
> bounced up and passed it to a fielder. It was nowhere near his stumps
> or anything. Everyone got on with the game, except Mr Lara, who walked
> up to the umpire and appealed. The umpire asked if he was really
> appealing, he said yes, and the umpire had no choice.
> Of course, it's the letter of the Law, so I expect that certain
> elements on this group will think that's absolutely reasonable!
> Rohan [ as unimpressed by Lara as ever ]
-Rory
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
by kdw » Fri, 29 Jan 1999 04:00:00
>A truly classy incident, from the one and only Brian Lara - the great
>sportsman that he is (excuse my cynicism, but people keep insisting
>that he's a walker, when he isn't, and that bugs me :-) ).
>Anyway, Cullinan played the ball into the ground, caught it as it
>bounced up and passed it to a fielder. It was nowhere near his stumps
>or anything. Everyone got on with the game, except Mr Lara, who walked
>up to the umpire and appealed. The umpire asked if he was really
>appealing, he said yes, and the umpire had no choice.
>Of course, it's the letter of the Law, so I expect that certain
>elements on this group will think that's absolutely reasonable!
>Rohan [ as unimpressed by Lara as ever ]
What's the history between him and Cullinan? Was it personal or just Brian
being a complete bastard?
by kdw » Fri, 29 Jan 1999 04:00:00
>A truly classy incident, from the one and only Brian Lara - the great
>sportsman that he is (excuse my cynicism, but people keep insisting
>that he's a walker, when he isn't, and that bugs me :-) ).
>Anyway, Cullinan played the ball into the ground, caught it as it
>bounced up and passed it to a fielder. It was nowhere near his stumps
>or anything. Everyone got on with the game, except Mr Lara, who walked
>up to the umpire and appealed. The umpire asked if he was really
>appealing, he said yes, and the umpire had no choice.
>Of course, it's the letter of the Law, so I expect that certain
>elements on this group will think that's absolutely reasonable!
>Rohan [ as unimpressed by Lara as ever ]
by Mark Wilso » Fri, 29 Jan 1999 04:00:00
> A truly classy incident, from the one and only Brian Lara - the great
> sportsman that he is (excuse my cynicism, but people keep insisting
> that he's a walker, when he isn't, and that bugs me :-) ).
> Anyway, Cullinan played the ball into the ground, caught it as it
> bounced up and passed it to a fielder. It was nowhere near his stumps
> or anything. Everyone got on with the game, except Mr Lara, who walked
> up to the umpire and appealed. The umpire asked if he was really
> appealing, he said yes, and the umpire had no choice.
I am far from an apologist for Lara (can't stand the way he goes on), but
from the footage I saw (particularly the side on footage) there was some
reasonable chance that the ball would have spun back into his stumps. This
is nothing like the Sarfraz farce, which, to this day remains the most
disgraceful thing I've seen in 1st class cricket.
Cheers
Mark
by graylo.. » Fri, 29 Jan 1999 04:00:00
> \begin{seinfeld-mode}
> a non-walker never walks, like a non-smoker never smokes.
> if you're not a non-smoker, you're a smoker. if you're not a
> non-walker, you're a walker. you don't have to be a serial walker
> to be considered a walker, like you don't have to be a chain smoker
> to be considered a smoker.
> \end{seinfeld-mode}
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
by Ian Galbrai » Fri, 29 Jan 1999 04:00:00
:The ball was played straight into the ground and bounced up about 8 or 9
:feet in the air, such that Cullinan was able to catch it in his normal
:batting stance. Unfortunately, there was some chance of the ball spinning
:back into his stumps. It is the second bounce of the ball in these
:situations that has the most effective spin (largely because as the ball
:first hit the ground it is travelling too quickly to grip). Cullinan lost
:his concentration, but I don't really think he can complain about his
:dismissal.
I obviously wasn't looking at it carefully enough. Mind you I did think it
was Rhodes at first.
:I am far from an apologist for Lara (can't stand the way he goes on), but
:from the footage I saw (particularly the side on footage) there was some
:reasonable chance that the ball would have spun back into his stumps. This
:is nothing like the Sarfraz farce, which, to this day remains the most
:disgraceful thing I've seen in 1st class cricket.
I think the Viv Richards run out of Dean Jones on a no ball runs it pretty
close. I lost all respect for Richards on that day.
--
Ian Galbraith
"To say that these men paid their shillings to watch twenty-two hirelings
kick a ball is merely to say that a violin is wood and catgut, that
Hamlet is so much paper and ink. For a shilling the Bruddersford United
AFC offered you conflict and art." - J.B. Priestley
by Ian Galbrai » Fri, 29 Jan 1999 04:00:00
:>Cullinan was given out HTB in the current ODI vs WI. Anyone got any
:>details of this, please?
:A truly classy incident, from the one and only Brian Lara - the great
:sportsman that he is (excuse my cynicism, but people keep insisting
:that he's a walker, when he isn't, and that bugs me :-) ).
:Anyway, Cullinan played the ball into the ground, caught it as it
:bounced up and passed it to a fielder. It was nowhere near his stumps
:or anything. Everyone got on with the game, except Mr Lara, who walked
:up to the umpire and appealed. The umpire asked if he was really
:appealing, he said yes, and the umpire had no choice.
Are you sure about that? From the replay I saw it looped up off the bat and
Cullinan caught it in the air. The replay I saw was from side on so I
couldn't see the line of the ball, but it looked a reasonable appeal and
decision to me. If it was a possible catch the close in fieldsman probably
could have caught it.
[snip]
--
Ian Galbraith
"To say that these men paid their shillings to watch twenty-two hirelings
kick a ball is merely to say that a violin is wood and catgut, that
Hamlet is so much paper and ink. For a shilling the Bruddersford United
AFC offered you conflict and art." - J.B. Priestley
by Matthew O'Neil » Fri, 29 Jan 1999 04:00:00
This dismissal or the countless times Warne made a mess of him.
Cheers,
Matt.
by Stephen Tjasin » Fri, 29 Jan 1999 04:00:00
> So, which one is right? would it have been caught or not? A bit rude sinking
> the boot into a hopelessly out of form Brian if so.
Stephen
--
Vermillion -\
| University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
-==UDHISS==- |
| For Space Quest fans: http://www.cs.uct.ac.za/~stjasink/sq/
-==UDIC==- |
\ For Bubble Bobble fans: http://www.cs.uct.ac.za/~stjasink/bb/ ---- \/
-----/