Sportsmanship or Stupidity from Cronjie

Sportsmanship or Stupidity from Cronjie

Post by Mad Hami » Mon, 26 Jan 1998 04:00:00


        Was is sportsmanship or stupidity form Cronjie when he withdrew the
appeal against Warne for interfering with the field?

        It was definately sporting of him to withdraw the appeal but looking at
it I believe that Warne was willfully interfering with the fielding team.

****************************************************************************
The Politician's Slogan
'You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all
of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.
Fortunately only a simple majority is required.'
****************************************************************************

Mad Hamish

Hamish Laws


 
 
 

Sportsmanship or Stupidity from Cronjie

Post by Bea » Mon, 26 Jan 1998 04:00:00

Quote:
>    Was is sportsmanship or stupidity form Cronjie when he withdrew the
>appeal against Warne for interfering with the field?

I actually think he withdrew it because he felt the game was won.
Warne did interfere with the field but the way the public acts, Cronje
would have been made out to be a whinger etc by the papers.

I think that things might have been different had the game been closer
(2-3 runs to win) and the appeal would not have been retracted. That
said, most captains would not have retracted it regardless and Cronje
should be applauded for doing so, whatever hiis reason.

Shane Warne hitting Donald for 2 fours or a six?? Not likely.

 
 
 

Sportsmanship or Stupidity from Cronjie

Post by Cape » Tue, 27 Jan 1998 04:00:00


Quote:

> >       Was is sportsmanship or stupidity form Cronjie when he withdrew the
> >appeal against Warne for interfering with the field?
> Shane Warne hitting Donald for 2 fours or a six?? Not likely.

Impossible actually.  Donald had already completed his 10 overs.  Pollock
was the bowler.  But your point stands.  It was highly unlikely that Warne
would have been able to put away the first two balls that he faced in the
match.

 
 
 

Sportsmanship or Stupidity from Cronjie

Post by Alan R Tuffe » Tue, 27 Jan 1998 04:00:00

Quote:


> >         Was is sportsmanship or stupidity form Cronjie when he withdrew the
> > appeal against Warne for interfering with the field?

> >         It was definately sporting of him to withdraw the appeal but
looking at
> > it I believe that Warne was willfully interfering with the fielding team.
[snip]
> By the way - any major player ever given out for intereference?

> Cheers
> Lou

Yes, Len Hutton famously obstructed a catch by wk Endean (1954 IIRC).
However, I can't think of a case like the Warne incident you describe.

Alan

--
[http:www.internet-design.ie/cricket-umpiring]

 
 
 

Sportsmanship or Stupidity from Cronjie

Post by Lou » Tue, 27 Jan 1998 04:00:00

Quote:

>         Was is sportsmanship or stupidity form Cronjie when he withdrew the
> appeal against Warne for interfering with the field?

>         It was definately sporting of him to withdraw the appeal but looking at
> it I believe that Warne was willfully interfering with the fielding team.

It was not possible to see as the really effective and non-partisan
Ausie TV team showed it only once. They however, saw fit to show the
missed catches by Bevan, Pollock and Donald at least 4 times each. But
far be it from us to cast any shadow Mr. Warne's integrity as a cricket
player and gentleman. :|

Cronje probably knew that the umpires could only react in favour of
Warne and that waiting would have weakend his teams concentration. And
imagine this newsgroup if they had given Warne out for interference.

By the way - any major player ever given out for intereference?

Cheers
Lou

 
 
 

Sportsmanship or Stupidity from Cronjie

Post by Jack Brama » Tue, 27 Jan 1998 04:00:00


writes

Quote:

>>         Was is sportsmanship or stupidity form Cronjie when he withdrew the
>> appeal against Warne for interfering with the field?

>>         It was definately sporting of him to withdraw the appeal but looking
>at
>> it I believe that Warne was willfully interfering with the fielding team.

>It was not possible to see as the really effective and non-partisan
>Ausie TV team showed it only once. They however, saw fit to show the
>missed catches by Bevan, Pollock and Donald at least 4 times each. But
>far be it from us to cast any shadow Mr. Warne's integrity as a cricket
>player and gentleman. :|

>Cronje probably knew that the umpires could only react in favour of
>Warne and that waiting would have weakend his teams concentration. And
>imagine this newsgroup if they had given Warne out for interference.

>By the way - any major player ever given out for intereference?

>Cheers
>Lou

Len Hutton was in a test match once upon a time - I don't have a Wisden
handy to tell you when that was though. I vaguely remember that it has
happened a couple more times in tests (Wisden keeps a section on Test
dismissals by the rare modes of dismissal - e.g. Hit Ball Twice,
Obstructing the Field, Handling the Ball, Timed Out, etc. and there's
probably only about ten in total between the lot of them)
--

Ser galego mis ca nacer en Galicia

 
 
 

Sportsmanship or Stupidity from Cronjie

Post by Ron Knig » Tue, 27 Jan 1998 04:00:00



|
|[snip]
|> By the way - any major player ever given out for intereference?
|>
|
|Yes, Len Hutton famously obstructed a catch by wk Endean (1954 IIRC).
|However, I can't think of a case like the Warne incident you describe.
|
Obstructing the Field as a mode of dismissal requires a determination
by the Umpire of wilfulness--specific intent to obstruct the fielding
side.  The only exception to this is when the Striker in attempting
to guard his wicket with his bat or other lawful part of his person
(he has already hit the ball once) obstructs a catch by the Wicket-
Keeper.  In that one case, a Striker can be out Obstructing the Field
even though there was no wilful intent to obstruct the field.  I don't
have my Wisden handy here, but I believe the Hutton incident was the
only *Test* dismissal for OTF (many more in *first-class* cricket).
I wouldn't be surprised if all, or almost all, of the first-class
dismissals for OTF were for obstructing a catch by the Wicket-Keeper.
To be out OTF at any other time requires that the Umpire have no
doubt of wicked intent in your heart, and if the Umpire ever formed
that certainty it would be in direct contradiction of the very
necessary assumption that all players are good sportsmen who would
not wilfully besmirch cricket.  

Although Umpires at my level can form such opinions and act upon
them, it is a very serious thing at the international level to
accuse a player of deliberate cheating, which is really what
OTF is, except for the balking of the Wicket-Keeper in making a
catch.

Although I am tacking this onto Alan's post I am of course not
attempting to instruct him; I am expanding upon his post for the
newsgroup, not so much responding to him.

Take it easy,
--

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill  
I can't speak for UNC-CH, and UNC-CH can't speak for me.
It's better for both of us.

 
 
 

Sportsmanship or Stupidity from Cronjie

Post by Mad Hami » Tue, 27 Jan 1998 04:00:00


Quote:

>> >   Was is sportsmanship or stupidity form Cronjie when he withdrew the
>> >appeal against Warne for interfering with the field?

>> Shane Warne hitting Donald for 2 fours or a six?? Not likely.

>Impossible actually.  Donald had already completed his 10 overs.  Pollock
>was the bowler.  But your point stands.  It was highly unlikely that Warne
>would have been able to put away the first two balls that he faced in the
>match.

Of course Bichel managed to hit his first ball for 4 a month or two back. Let's
not forget the actions of another captain when the oppositon needed 6 to tie the
match off the last ball (note some sources say win but in any case..), first
ball to a number 10 batsman wasn't it?

****************************************************************************
The Politician's Slogan
'You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all
of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.
Fortunately only a simple majority is required.'
****************************************************************************

Mad Hamish

Hamish Laws


 
 
 

Sportsmanship or Stupidity from Cronjie

Post by Joshua Saunder » Wed, 28 Jan 1998 04:00:00


Quote:



>>> >       Was is sportsmanship or stupidity form Cronjie when he withdrew the
>>> >appeal against Warne for interfering with the field?

>>> Shane Warne hitting Donald for 2 fours or a six?? Not likely.

>>Impossible actually.  Donald had already completed his 10 overs.  Pollock
>>was the bowler.  But your point stands.  It was highly unlikely that Warne
>>would have been able to put away the first two balls that he faced in the
>>match.

>Of course Bichel managed to hit his first ball for 4 a month or two back. Let's
>not forget the actions of another captain when the oppositon needed 6 to tie the
>match off the last ball (note some sources say win but in any case..), first
>ball to a number 10 batsman wasn't it?

There's no doubt at all that Cronje was very sporting. We'll move on.
There's no doubt at all that G Chappell was unsporting (McKechnie was the
#11 though), and the rules were changed as a result. Brearley otoh, as we
all know, was merely playing within the rules as they then stood, when he
put all 10 fielders on the boundary. The fact that the rules were later
changed does not make Brearley's action illegitimate.

Hoho.

Josh

 
 
 

Sportsmanship or Stupidity from Cronjie

Post by Kip » Wed, 28 Jan 1998 04:00:00



Quote:

> writes

> >By the way - any major player ever given out for intereference?

> Len Hutton was in a test match once upon a time - I don't have a Wisden
> handy to tell you when that was though. I vaguely remember that it has
> happened a couple more times in tests (Wisden keeps a section on Test
> dismissals by the rare modes of dismissal - e.g. Hit Ball Twice,
> Obstructing the Field, Handling the Ball, Timed Out, etc. and there's
> probably only about ten in total between the lot of them)

In fact (for those who don't have a Wisden) obstructing the field has only
happened once, Len Hutton obstructed Endean in the 1951 Test Match at The
Oval.  Wrt the others, Handled the ball has happened 5 times, Hit ball
Twice never and Timed out (to the best of my knowledge - I'm not 100%
certain wrt this one) likewise never.  I didn't check the Wisden (didn't
have one with me) but don't recall seeing any.  I do however recall there
being quite a number of these above occurances in 1st class cricket
although it's not a lot relative to the amount of matches that have been
played.
Regards Kip
 
 
 

Sportsmanship or Stupidity from Cronjie

Post by Mad Hami » Thu, 29 Jan 1998 04:00:00



Quote:

>writes

>>By the way - any major player ever given out for intereference?

>>Cheers
>>Lou
>Len Hutton was in a test match once upon a time - I don't have a Wisden
>handy to tell you when that was though. I vaguely remember that it has
>happened a couple more times in tests (Wisden keeps a section on Test
>dismissals by the rare modes of dismissal - e.g. Hit Ball Twice,
>Obstructing the Field, Handling the Ball, Timed Out, etc. and there's
>probably only about ten in total between the lot of them)

Len Hutton's case is somewhat different.

Hutton somehow popped the ball up off the bat or gloves and knocked it away
thinking that it endangered the stumps, however the keeper was standing up and
Hutton was ruled to have interfered with the keeper catching him.

****************************************************************************
The Politician's Slogan
'You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all
of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.
Fortunately only a simple majority is required.'
****************************************************************************

Mad Hamish

Hamish Laws