Hats off to Boucher

Hats off to Boucher

Post by JM » Fri, 30 Dec 2005 19:19:15



Quote:




>> JM says...

>> > I must need the full video, sports news showed the dismissal but I
>> > still
>> > didn't see anyone rushing Rauf.

>> I'm sure Ponting did.

> He took a few steps down the pitch but I wouldn't call it rushing the
> umpire.  Meanwhile the umpire gestured that the batsman was already
> walking
> off so the assorted fieldsmen could stop appealing.  It seemed that the
> latter didn't at first understand the umpire's gesture and hence continued
> their appeal.

> Nothing worth making a fuss about - it appeared to me that the umpire knew
> the batsman was out but felt he didn't need to raise his finger because
> the
> batsman was already walking.  However today's Test cricketer has been
> taught
> that they should always appeal rather than celebrate prematurely and in
> doing so, were not aware of the batsman leaving as their attention was
> directed wholly at the umpire.

> The whole incident would have been best avoided by the umpire raising his
> finger.

> Andrew

Cool, glad someone else saw it the way I saw it happen.  I just couldn't
believe the commentators on 9 making such a big deal over it.  The players
were certain he was out, hence the big appeal.  1-2 years ago Warne would
have appealed and not even looked at the umpire - and that is part of the
game which I believe the authorities are trying to get rid of - so he and
the rest of the team does the right thing in appealing to the umpire, and he
can't even make the correct hand motion (even after seeing the player walk)
and then Ian & Tony start crapping on about aussie appeals (i.e. why are you
still appealing? look at the batter walking off - who are they appealing to
Tony? The batter or the umpire?)
 
 
 

Hats off to Boucher

Post by JM » Fri, 30 Dec 2005 19:24:19

Quote:

>***heads squared.  Grieg never had it and Chappel seems more and more to
> want to bag current day cricketers.  He may become the next Neil Harvey.
> Personally I thought it funny that they thought they didn't get the
> decision.

LOL.  Chappel has always seemed a little anti-australian.  Who was it again
who ordered the 'under-arm delivery' ?  I think Trevor bowled it, but wasn't
it Ian who suggested it?  Can't think why Ian would think his generation was
any better sportsmanship-wise than what is going around today.

If the country that received the under-arm delivery wasn't NZ then i'd
nearly feel sorry for them :) ha ha kiwi's :D.  BTW, don't see many Kiwi's
commenting in this NG - do they have the internet over there yet?

 
 
 

Hats off to Boucher

Post by JM » Fri, 30 Dec 2005 19:26:49


Quote:



>> Vicky:
>> [Although it is stupid in a professional sport....]

> Walked knowing he was going to be given out WOW, next you will be praising
> Rudolph and Gibbs for walking

I'm not all that certain that Rauf was gonna give him out (which would have
been the 1st mistake I saw him make in this test - haven't been able to
watch all the game, don't know about other decisions)

 
 
 

Hats off to Boucher

Post by Jamm » Fri, 30 Dec 2005 19:27:13


Quote:

>>***heads squared.  Grieg never had it and Chappel seems more and more to
>> want to bag current day cricketers.  He may become the next Neil Harvey.
>> Personally I thought it funny that they thought they didn't get the
>> decision.

> LOL.  Chappel has always seemed a little anti-australian.  Who was it
> again who ordered the 'under-arm delivery' ?  I think Trevor bowled it,
> but wasn't it Ian who suggested it?  Can't think why Ian would think his
> generation was any better sportsmanship-wise than what is going around
> today.

> If the country that received the under-arm delivery wasn't NZ then i'd
> nearly feel sorry for them :) ha ha kiwi's :D.  BTW, don't see many Kiwi's
> commenting in this NG - do they have the internet over there yet?

I think it was Greg who ordered it.
 
 
 

Hats off to Boucher

Post by JM » Fri, 30 Dec 2005 19:36:33


Quote:



>>>***heads squared.  Grieg never had it and Chappel seems more and more
>>> to want to bag current day cricketers.  He may become the next Neil
>>> Harvey. Personally I thought it funny that they thought they didn't get
>>> the decision.

>> LOL.  Chappel has always seemed a little anti-australian.  Who was it
>> again who ordered the 'under-arm delivery' ?  I think Trevor bowled it,
>> but wasn't it Ian who suggested it?  Can't think why Ian would think his
>> generation was any better sportsmanship-wise than what is going around
>> today.

>> If the country that received the under-arm delivery wasn't NZ then i'd
>> nearly feel sorry for them :) ha ha kiwi's :D.  BTW, don't see many
>> Kiwi's commenting in this NG - do they have the internet over there yet?

> I think it was Greg who ordered it.

Must look that up.  All three Chappell's were in the game right? I would
have guessed that while Ian & Greg were in the same team that Ian would have
been the captain... Just going from memory here, only ever seen replays -
was too young at the time to remember seeing it on tv.
 
 
 

Hats off to Boucher

Post by JM » Fri, 30 Dec 2005 19:40:52


Quote:





>>>>***heads squared.  Grieg never had it and Chappel seems more and more
>>>> to want to bag current day cricketers.  He may become the next Neil
>>>> Harvey. Personally I thought it funny that they thought they didn't get
>>>> the decision.

>>> LOL.  Chappel has always seemed a little anti-australian.  Who was it
>>> again who ordered the 'under-arm delivery' ?  I think Trevor bowled it,
>>> but wasn't it Ian who suggested it?  Can't think why Ian would think his
>>> generation was any better sportsmanship-wise than what is going around
>>> today.

>>> If the country that received the under-arm delivery wasn't NZ then i'd
>>> nearly feel sorry for them :) ha ha kiwi's :D.  BTW, don't see many
>>> Kiwi's commenting in this NG - do they have the internet over there yet?

>> I think it was Greg who ordered it.

> Must look that up.  All three Chappell's were in the game right? I would
> have guessed that while Ian & Greg were in the same team that Ian would
> have been the captain... Just going from memory here, only ever seen
> replays - was too young at the time to remember seeing it on tv.

My bad.....

http://SportToday.org/

It was wrong, but still funny :)

Thank god they've outlawed underarm bowling and throwing...... whoops..
outlawed underarm bowling i mean.

 
 
 

Hats off to Boucher

Post by denj.. » Fri, 30 Dec 2005 19:45:46

Quote:
>>> LOL.  Chappel has always seemed a little anti-australian.  Who was it
>>> again who ordered the 'under-arm delivery' ?  I think Trevor bowled it,
>>> but wasn't it Ian who suggested it?  Can't think why Ian would think his
>>> generation was any better sportsmanship-wise than what is going around
>>> today.

>> I think it was Greg who ordered it.

> Must look that up.  All three Chappell's were in the game right? I would
> have guessed that while Ian & Greg were in the same team that Ian would have
> been the captain... Just going from memory here, only ever seen replays -
> was too young at the time to remember seeing it on tv.

Greg did the ordering.  From
http://www.mcg.org.au/default.asp?pg=historydisplay&articleid=194 :

"Australian skipper Greg Chappell (Trevor|s older brother) ordered
that he deliver the ball underarm, and informed umpire Don Weser of his
intentions. At this point underarm bowling was not specifically
prohibited by the laws of the game. To the disgust of McKechnie and the
obvious dismay of several Australian players, Trevor Chappell rolled
the ball down the pitch carpet bowls-style. The batsman blocked the
ball then threw his bat away. Edgar at the non-striker|s end made a
two-fingered gesture to the bowler, and Kiwi skipper Geoff Howarth ran
on to remonstrate with the umpires."

Of course these days, such actions (throwing the bat away, making
two-fingered gestures, running on to the field to remonstrate with the
umpires) would result in hefty fines, if not suspensions...

John Dennis

 
 
 

Hats off to Boucher

Post by Andrew Dunfor » Fri, 30 Dec 2005 20:17:56


Quote:





> >>>***heads squared.  Grieg never had it and Chappel seems more and more
> >>> to want to bag current day cricketers.  He may become the next Neil
> >>> Harvey. Personally I thought it funny that they thought they didn't
get
> >>> the decision.

> >> LOL.  Chappel has always seemed a little anti-australian.  Who was it
> >> again who ordered the 'under-arm delivery' ?  I think Trevor bowled it,
> >> but wasn't it Ian who suggested it?  Can't think why Ian would think
his
> >> generation was any better sportsmanship-wise than what is going around
> >> today.

> >> If the country that received the under-arm delivery wasn't NZ then i'd
> >> nearly feel sorry for them :) ha ha kiwi's :D.  BTW, don't see many
> >> Kiwi's commenting in this NG - do they have the internet over there
yet?

> > I think it was Greg who ordered it.

> Must look that up.  All three Chappell's were in the game right? I would
> have guessed that while Ian & Greg were in the same team that Ian would
have
> been the captain... Just going from memory here, only ever seen replays -
> was too young at the time to remember seeing it on tv.

Easy mistake to make given the amount of in-breeding.

Andrew

 
 
 

Hats off to Boucher

Post by Mang » Fri, 30 Dec 2005 21:00:06


Quote:





>>>>***heads squared.  Grieg never had it and Chappel seems more and more
>>>> to want to bag current day cricketers.  He may become the next Neil
>>>> Harvey. Personally I thought it funny that they thought they didn't get
>>>> the decision.

>>> LOL.  Chappel has always seemed a little anti-australian.  Who was it
>>> again who ordered the 'under-arm delivery' ?  I think Trevor bowled it,
>>> but wasn't it Ian who suggested it?  Can't think why Ian would think his
>>> generation was any better sportsmanship-wise than what is going around
>>> today.

>>> If the country that received the under-arm delivery wasn't NZ then i'd
>>> nearly feel sorry for them :) ha ha kiwi's :D.  BTW, don't see many
>>> Kiwi's commenting in this NG - do they have the internet over there yet?

>> I think it was Greg who ordered it.

> Must look that up.  All three Chappell's were in the game right? I would
> have guessed that while Ian & Greg were in the same team that Ian would
> have been the captain... Just going from memory here, only ever seen
> replays - was too young at the time to remember seeing it on tv.

Ian was a commentator then.  He didn't approve of what was done.

- Show quoted text -

 
 
 

Hats off to Boucher

Post by JM » Fri, 30 Dec 2005 21:07:24


Quote:







>>>>>***heads squared.  Grieg never had it and Chappel seems more and more
>>>>> to want to bag current day cricketers.  He may become the next Neil
>>>>> Harvey. Personally I thought it funny that they thought they didn't
>>>>> get the decision.

>>>> LOL.  Chappel has always seemed a little anti-australian.  Who was it
>>>> again who ordered the 'under-arm delivery' ?  I think Trevor bowled it,
>>>> but wasn't it Ian who suggested it?  Can't think why Ian would think
>>>> his generation was any better sportsmanship-wise than what is going
>>>> around today.

>>>> If the country that received the under-arm delivery wasn't NZ then i'd
>>>> nearly feel sorry for them :) ha ha kiwi's :D.  BTW, don't see many
>>>> Kiwi's commenting in this NG - do they have the internet over there
>>>> yet?

>>> I think it was Greg who ordered it.

>> Must look that up.  All three Chappell's were in the game right? I would
>> have guessed that while Ian & Greg were in the same team that Ian would
>> have been the captain... Just going from memory here, only ever seen
>> replays - was too young at the time to remember seeing it on tv.

> Ian was a commentator then.  He didn't approve of what was done.

Oh so Ian didn't approve of something done by Australians in a cricket
game - so that's where it started?
 
 
 

Hats off to Boucher

Post by RodP » Sat, 31 Dec 2005 04:49:29


Mango says...

Quote:
> >> I must need the full video, sports news showed the dismissal but I still
> >> didn't see anyone rushing Rauf.

> > I'm sure Ponting did.

> Ponting took a couple of steps forward and ended up next to Warne.  The
> umpire was a good 15 metres away from them.

Moving towards the umpire is what's considered rushing these days. I
wasn't implying that what Ponting did was bad, just that there was
movement towards the umpire.

--
Cheers,
Rod.

 
 
 

Hats off to Boucher

Post by hirvo.. » Sat, 31 Dec 2005 06:46:11

Quote:

> I'm not all that certain that Rauf was gonna give him out (which would have
> been the 1st mistake I saw him make in this test - haven't been able to
> watch all the game, don't know about other decisions)

I agree - I think the umpire did exactly the correct thing.

My opinion is that he had not seen the snick, which is why he did not
raise his finger immediately following the appeal (nothing to consider
as in LBW, either you saw contact with the bat or you didn't). Then the
batsman walks as the (denied) appeal continues - what should the umpire
do in this situation? The raising of the finger suggests a decision of
"out" has been made by the umpire - not the correct thing for him to be
doing as his initial decision may well have been "not out"! Therefore
he did all he could do - almost as a courtesy to the Aus players -
gestured to the appealing side that the batsman had walked. Great
control and thinking under pressure from a rookie test umpire. He even
had the presence of mind to increment his ball counter while all this
was going on! I for one hope his career continues in this vein.

Markko

 
 
 

Hats off to Boucher

Post by Mang » Sat, 31 Dec 2005 07:10:16


Quote:

> Mango says...

>> >> I must need the full video, sports news showed the dismissal but I
>> >> still
>> >> didn't see anyone rushing Rauf.

>> > I'm sure Ponting did.

>> Ponting took a couple of steps forward and ended up next to Warne.  The
>> umpire was a good 15 metres away from them.

> Moving towards the umpire is what's considered rushing these days. I
> wasn't implying that what Ponting did was bad, just that there was
> movement towards the umpire.

Rushing towards means two things.  Firstly rushing, Ponting did not rush.
He took a couple of steps but did not rush.  Secondly it means heading
towards.  He ended up next to Warne 15 metres from the umpire.  If he was
heading towards anyone it was Warne.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:
> --
> Cheers,
> Rod.

 
 
 

Hats off to Boucher

Post by Mang » Sat, 31 Dec 2005 07:11:29


Quote:









>>>>>>***heads squared.  Grieg never had it and Chappel seems more and
>>>>>> more to want to bag current day cricketers.  He may become the next
>>>>>> Neil Harvey. Personally I thought it funny that they thought they
>>>>>> didn't get the decision.

>>>>> LOL.  Chappel has always seemed a little anti-australian.  Who was it
>>>>> again who ordered the 'under-arm delivery' ?  I think Trevor bowled
>>>>> it, but wasn't it Ian who suggested it?  Can't think why Ian would
>>>>> think his generation was any better sportsmanship-wise than what is
>>>>> going around today.

>>>>> If the country that received the under-arm delivery wasn't NZ then i'd
>>>>> nearly feel sorry for them :) ha ha kiwi's :D.  BTW, don't see many
>>>>> Kiwi's commenting in this NG - do they have the internet over there
>>>>> yet?

>>>> I think it was Greg who ordered it.

>>> Must look that up.  All three Chappell's were in the game right? I would
>>> have guessed that while Ian & Greg were in the same team that Ian would
>>> have been the captain... Just going from memory here, only ever seen
>>> replays - was too young at the time to remember seeing it on tv.

>> Ian was a commentator then.  He didn't approve of what was done.

> Oh so Ian didn't approve of something done by Australians in a cricket
> game - so that's where it started?

This is your comment, not mine.

- Show quoted text -

 
 
 

Hats off to Boucher

Post by dechuck » Sat, 31 Dec 2005 12:20:29


Quote:





>>> Vicky:
>>> [Although it is stupid in a professional sport....]

>> Walked knowing he was going to be given out WOW, next you will be
>> praising Rudolph and Gibbs for walking

> I'm not all that certain that Rauf was gonna give him out (which would
> have been the 1st mistake I saw him make in this test - haven't been able
> to watch all the game, don't know about other decisions)

I have seen many a time in test when the umpire doesn't raise the finger
when the everybody  knows the batsman is out. Love it when there is a big
snick and the batsman waits for the umpires decision ( which is fair enough)
and than the Umpire has to sheepishly put the finger up