Custom Bats Cricket Forum
General Cricket => Players => Topic started by: AJ2014 on April 15, 2021, 07:50:23 AM
-
https://www.thecricketer.com/Topics/banner/lewis_mcmanus_incident_stigmatise_hampshire_leicestershire_county_cricket.html (https://www.thecricketer.com/Topics/banner/lewis_mcmanus_incident_stigmatise_hampshire_leicestershire_county_cricket.html)
-
Should be banned for a few FC games at the least and any white ball games in between (as that will hurt him and the team more). Dock all match pts from the game and award some to the losing side to ensure Hampshire get the message that cheaters in their ranks won’t be tolerated
Of course, I expect bigger all to happen.. few poxy words from the ecb.. something about lvl 1 pts and ‘nothing to see here, we are happy with having gamesmanship like football now ‘ sells init
With QDK also cheating recently it’s just proving that sadly, WAAC is ahead of playing fair.. it’s trickled into amateur cricket through football and will only get worse and worse unless felt with harshly
-
Should be banned for a year. Blatant cheating that the likes of Warner and Smith would be proud of.
-
Should be banned for a year. Blatant cheating that the likes of Warner and Smith would be proud of.
It's not quite the same though is it? Smith, Warner and Bancroft were pre-meditated actions, this was a spur of the moment thing where he should have owned up to the error when he realised the stumping had been given. IMO It is worthy of some sort of sanction but it isn't as serious as the Aussie incident.
-
Its times like these when the character of a sportsman is revealed. Any honest cricketer would have just come forward and said himself that it isnt out.
It does beg the question....dont these matches have a third umpire? Surely they must have one at the county level for close run out calls. If there was one, why didnt he just let the on field umpires know what had happened.
-
It's not quite the same though is it? Smith, Warner and Bancroft were pre-meditated actions, this was a spur of the moment thing where he should have owned up to the error when he realised the stumping had been given. IMO It is worthy of some sort of sanction but it isn't as serious as the Aussie incident.
Disagree. If you are a keeper you are fully aware of the rules regarding needing to have the ball in the correct hand. He knowingly took the bails off with the wrong hand, knowingly appealed having taken the bails off with the wrong hand, and then didn’t say a word until it was revealed in grainy slow motion replays that he had cheated and was bang to rights. He had so many opportunities to do the right thing, and failed to take any of those opportunities. To me, it’s the same blatant disregard for the rules as sandpaper-gate, the only difference is the lack of pre-meditation.
-
How is this different to not walking when you know you have snicked off? But in these cases people seem to think it’s ok to leave the decision up to the umpire.
-
He’s playing today. I hope the Middlesexians give him hell when he comes in to bat.
-
Think the fact it wasn't premeditated is pretty significant, not just a technicality. If you go out with a plan to cheat, IMO that is much worse than doing something wrong in the heat of the moment.
-
Think the fact it wasn't premeditated is pretty significant, not just a technicality. If you go out with a plan to cheat, IMO that is much worse than doing something wrong in the heat of the moment.
Yes agreed. It was intentional cheating. It was one of those spur of the moment things. Having said that, he fully knew what he did and he could have been honest about it on the field which he didnt. That was poor.
-
Think the fact it wasn't premeditated is pretty significant, not just a technicality. If you go out with a plan to cheat, IMO that is much worse than doing something wrong in the heat of the moment.
Perhaps. However, it’s how you deal with it. All he had to do was say to the batter, his captain or one of the umpires that it wasn’t out (which he would have known immediately), and the batter would have continued, and McManus would have been applauded for his honesty. He failed to do so, and now rightly has a reputation as a cheat, which will be incredibly hard to shift. He may not have gone out with a plan to cheat, but the way he dealt with the whole situation tells you a lot about his character.
-
i feel like this is the first time he's been caught, rather than the first time he has done it. No way did he not know the rules, nor was he unaware the ball wasnt in the hand.
-
1 of the batsman who always walked, not waited for umpire's finger🙂 is Majid Khan.
Except for his last inning when didn't walk but was given out, we all were convinced that's he's out!
Which batters do you know who always walked?
Are they less cheaters than LM?
-
1 of the batsman who always walked, not waited for umpire's finger🙂 is Majid Khan.
Except for his last inning when didn't walk but was given out, we all were convinced that's he's out!
Which batters do you know who always walked?
Are they less cheaters than LM?
Yes they are, as they are leaving it in the hands of the umpires to make a decision. Not walking isn’t cheating IMO. For a better comparison, I’d perhaps ask about bowlers who appeal for caught behind, knowing full well that the batter hadn’t hit it.
-
How is this different to not walking when you know you have snicked off? But in these cases people seem to think it’s ok to leave the decision up to the umpire.
This is a very good point.
-
Yes they are, as they are leaving it in the hands of the umpires to make a decision. Not walking isn’t cheating IMO. For a better comparison, I’d perhaps ask about bowlers who appeal for caught behind, knowing full well that the batter hadn’t hit it.
Neither of the comparisons are accurate imo. I would compare it to a fielder claiming a catch fully knowing that it bounced or a fielder touching the boundary line and not indicating that it is a boundary. If you know something for sure and hide it, that's cheating.
-
For me, batsmen are the biggest cheaters!
As they always want to bat on and on and on!
This "drive" make them stay at the crease and look at the umpires, hoping not to be given out! Otherwise there's no other answer for batters staying in there, while they're definitely out
I hate "Fake" appealing, hoping that when I do appeal, that will be more convincing!
-
There’s one huge difference between batsmen who don’t walk, and the fielding side claiming a false catch or stumping... the fielding side is the one who appeals - they are the “aggressor” (the ones proactively seeking a dismissal). If, in a bizarre world, the batsman got to say “not out” or “out” after every ball, then perhaps you could equate the two. The fielder can proactively tell the umpire that the catch is not clean...the batsman can’t tell the umpire that he didn’t edge the ball (for a caught behind appeal) or that there was an inside edge onto the pad (lbw appeal).
So, because the fielding side is the aggressor (ie they alone have the power to initiate an appeal and communicate with the umpire), it is totally unacceptable and inappropriate for them to claim a false catch / stumping, and totally acceptable and appropriate for the batsman to stand his/her ground until the umpire gives them out.
-
the character of a sportsman Person is revealed.
-
How is this different to not walking when you know you have snicked off? But in these cases SOME people seem to think it’s ok to leave the decision up to the umpire.
corrected for you
-
i feel like this is the first time he's been caught, rather than the first time he has done it.
and this is why you can't let people off lightly. it makes it worth cheating again
-
Yes they are, as they are leaving it in the hands of the umpires to make a decision. Not walking isn’t cheating IMO. For a better comparison, I’d perhaps ask about bowlers who appeal for caught behind, knowing full well that the batter hadn’t hit it.
Not walking when you know you're out IS cheating.
Appealing as a bowler just on the off chance is also cheating
appealing from square leg, gully, point when you have NO IDEA what's what is also realistically.. an attempt to cheat
-
There’s one huge difference between batsmen who don’t walk, and the fielding side claiming a false catch or stumping... the fielding side is the one who appeals - they are the “aggressor” (the ones proactively seeking a dismissal). If, in a bizarre world, the batsman got to say “not out” or “out” after every ball, then perhaps you could equate the two. The fielder can proactively tell the umpire that the catch is not clean...the batsman can’t tell the umpire that he didn’t edge the ball (for a caught behind appeal) or that there was an inside edge onto the pad (lbw appeal).
So, because the fielding side is the aggressor (ie they alone have the power to initiate an appeal and communicate with the umpire), it is totally unacceptable and inappropriate for them to claim a false catch / stumping, and totally acceptable and appropriate for the batsman to stand his/her ground until the umpire gives them out.
That's a batsman talking here
A batsman knows 99% of the times he's nicked it or not.
Not talking about lbw, run out etc which comes with a doubt.
Jeffery Boycott said: when a batsman looks behind, that means he's nicked it!
-
A batsman knows 99.9% of the times he's snicked it or not.
I know every single time if I've hit it or not.. without fail. Not walking is cheating (so is appealing for LBW's when you also know it's not out though!!! - just cause it's league or club umpires and they love a trigger)
-
I know every single time if I've hit it or not.. without fail. Not walking is cheating (so is appealing for LBW's when you also know it's not out though!!! - just cause it's league or club umpires and they love a trigger)
I've heard at least a million times 😀: any trick/cheat is allowed in Love and War!
Are we in Love or in War?
-
I've heard at least a million times 😀: any trick/cheat is allowed in Love and War!
Are we in Love or in War?
sport isn't war, not even close
-
That's a batsman talking here
A batsman knows 99% of the times he's nicked it or not.
Not talking about lbw, run out etc which comes with a doubt.
Jeffery Boycott said: when a batsman looks behind, that means he's nicked it!
Yes but the batsman cannot tell the umpire whether he’s nicked it or not. The fielder/keeper CAN tell the umpire if the catch/stumping is clean or not.
-
Yes but the batsman cannot tell the umpire whether he’s nicked it or not. The fielder/keeper CAN tell the umpire if the catch/stumping is clean or not.
Do you every time walk, when you nick it?
before umpire's finger🤔
-
I'm no chest but I don't walk ever it the umpire job to give me out not mine.
Call it cheating whatever them the rules my job to bat his is to make a decision however there one cabiat.. never moan about a bad decison as it his job and like players umpires make mistakes too
-
I know every single time if I've hit it or not.. without fail. Not walking is cheating (so is appealing for LBW's when you also know it's not out though!!! - just cause it's league or club umpires and they love a trigger)
I imagine if we put this to a test with hotspot, snicko, etc we would find this is nonsense.
Only need to watch a few games worth of highlights to find batsmen reviewing ones they've feathered, do you think they believe they can 'beat' the technology? Or do you believe you're the only person in the history of the game who has never nicked one and not realised?
-
Do you every time walk, when you nick it?
before umpire's finger🤔
Yes
As soon as you know the catch is taken waddle off
-
I imagine if we put this to a test with hotspot, snicko, etc we would find this is nonsense.
Only need to watch a few games worth of highlights to find batsmen reviewing ones they've feathered, do you think they believe they can 'beat' the technology? Or do you believe you're the only person in the history of the game who has never nicked one and not realised?
Usually they think they’ve hit it (ground, pad).
Still, this sadly is one of the things that people are ether happy to stand, appeal etc or play honestly. It divides the game and can be muted as a reason why games turn nasty or put people off playing.
So simple to fix too
-
I don't think we can say that not walking is cheating since there is no law stating that if a batsman believes he has hit the ball he must walk.
What we have here is a morality issue and we all live our lives very differently. What is black and white for one person is a grey area for another and if there is no specific law governing the act, it can't be labelled as cheating.
Personally, I'm a walker. Always have been and always will be. If I know 100% (and as others have stated you can't always be but if I'm certain) that I hit it, gloved it.... whatever and the umpire doesn't give it, I'm still walking because I know that I am out.
McManus must have known what he was doing but carried it through, he had a chance to call the bat back. For me it is not exactly the same as someone [knowingly] snicking one and not walking. Whilst I feel that both are immoral acts, one is cheating and the other is just poor sportsmanship.
-
Usually they think they’ve hit it (ground, pad).
Still, this sadly is one of the things that people are ether happy to stand, appeal etc or play honestly. It divides the game and can be muted as a reason why games turn nasty or put people off playing.
So simple to fix too
You think it should there should be something written into the laws?
-
Usually they think they’ve hit it (ground, pad).
Still, this sadly is one of the things that people are ether happy to stand, appeal etc or play honestly. It divides the game and can be muted as a reason why games turn nasty or put people off playing.
So simple to fix too
So you're acknowledging that elite cricketers who play for a living don't always know whether they've hit the ball or not?
-
I have heard some some that they always know. And even suggest that anyone saying otherwise is lying.
I think it would be possible to feather a ball without knowing, but it would be a very rare occurance.
-
Yes
As soon as you know the catch is taken waddle off
Same here, good thing about this is that oppos appreciate it and you feel good, even getting out 😀
-
I don't think we can say that not walking is cheating since there is no law stating that if a batsman believes he has hit the ball he must walk.
What we have here is a morality issue and we all live our lives very differently. What is black and white for one person is a grey area for another and if there is no specific law governing the act, it can't be labelled as cheating.
Personally, I'm a walker. Always have been and always will be. If I know 100% (and as others have stated you can't always be but if I'm certain) that I hit it, gloved it.... whatever and the umpire doesn't give it, I'm still walking because I know that I am out.
McManus must have known what he was doing but carried it through, he had a chance to call the bat back. For me it is not exactly the same as someone [knowingly] snicking one and not walking. Whilst I feel that both are immoral acts, one is cheating and the other is just poor sportsmanship.
Well said 👍
-
I think it would be possible to feather a ball without knowing, but it would be a very rare occurance.
Agree, 99% of the time you know you've nicked it or not. But I remember this one time when I was given out for nicking while driving and I was absolutely shocked cause I felt like I definitely hadn't nicked it but even my partner said I did so yeah.
-
I have heard some some that they always know. And even suggest that anyone saying otherwise is lying.
I think it would be possible to feather a ball without knowing, but it would be a very rare occurance.
It might be that the keeper sees the ball so close to the bar and thinks it's a nick and goes in the air for a caught behind, while it's not nicked.
Otherwise it seems very unlikely that a batsman doesn't know that he hasn't nicked it.
In other words, according to Jeffrey Boycott, if a batsman doesn't look behind he's not nicked it!
-
I'm no chest but I don't walk ever it the umpire job to give me out not mine.
Call it cheating whatever them the rules my job to bat his is to make a decision however there one cabiat.. never moan about a bad decison as it his job and like players umpires make mistakes too
That's one way of doing things 🙂
-
At club level,
do you think it has to do with playing games:
1x week or 3/4x week?
-
That's one way of doing things 🙂
We'll put it this way if I'm smoking them at practice feeling balanced with good movement and striking and in Saturday I feather one with no appeal I'm not walking not a chance. How many times have people seen somebody just walk off without an appeal !!!
-
Flipside of the walking argument in club cricket, how often do you get an absolute stinker of a decision when you know you're not out? IMO, let the umpire make the decision, don't cause a scene when you get a bad one, accept that in the long run it will probably balance itself out.
-
If you've nicked it and everyone in the field is appealing, and you're still looking for umpire's decision? Don't think that's right attitude.
-
It is interesting to know what wicket keepers think on here think about all this.
-
If you've nicked it and everyone in the field is appealing, and you're still looking for umpire's decision? Don't think that's right attitude.
When point goes up for a LBW and your given on the 3 strike rule either.
Does that mean every time a bowler goes up and doesn't get the decision he is cheating ???
As a keeper I don't go up for rubbish at all as I don't like the thought of cheating somebody out but nicks are nicks and the umpire has a job.
My job is to score runs and catch the ball in games not make decisions on who in or owt he the one being "paid" to make decisions not me..
As Jumbo puts it I have had enough bad decisions so bugger it make a decision or I'm not out..
-
If you've nicked it and everyone in the field is appealing, and you're still looking for umpire's decision? Don't think that's right attitude.
"Everyone is appealing" is not a good judge of whether you're out in club cricket. See it all the time, hits the pads about a foot outside leg stump and the entire oppo team is screaming for it.
As has been pointed out, you're entitled to wait for the umpire to make a decision. The important part is that you accept the decision whether it's in your favour or not.
-
It is interesting to know what wicket keepers think on here think about all this.
Nothing is more annoying as a keeper when you are robbed of a dismissal let me tell you that. Iv played at all levels as a keeper from Prem leagues down and let me tell you I reckon it’s about 5-10% that walk if that and it’s practically zero in players under 30 from my experience.
The bad this about this incident that’s being talked about is in the professional game this should have been picked up by match liaison officer, umpire etc, also the keeper should have called him back and spoke up in huddle
-
Nothing is more annoying as a keeper when you are robbed of a dismissal let me tell you that. Iv played at all levels as a keeper from Prem leagues down and let me tell you I reckon it’s about 5-10% that walk if that and it’s practically zero in players under 30 from my experience.
The bad this about this incident that’s being talked about is in the professional game this should have been picked up by match liaison officer, umpire etc, also the keeper should have called him back and spoke up in huddle
Agree with this although I’d like to think it is a higher %. It’s always uncomfortable when you know the batsman was out and he knows damn well that you know too.
The one that makes my blood boil is when a clear stumping is not given. Usually when the foot is taken back after the bails are broken. I’m a couple of feet away and can see the foot out of the crease when I make the stumping, foot gets moved back an instant later.... umpire who is 40 feet away, Not Out! Really gets me every time.
-
Nothing is more annoying as a keeper when you are robbed of a dismissal let me tell you that. Iv played at all levels as a keeper from Prem leagues down and let me tell you I reckon it’s about 5-10% that walk if that and it’s practically zero in players under 30 from my experience.
The bad this about this incident that’s being talked about is in the professional game this should have been picked up by match liaison officer, umpire etc, also the keeper should have called him back and spoke up in huddle
I'm sure your figures are correct.
Then this question rises, at club level, where at least one umpire is standing who is paid by your club?
Let alone your own team mates!
-
It's all an un-winnable argument on both sides. The game is split. IF you have technology and decent umpires (rare) then you can trust that things even themselves out etc etc... If, like most you have old farts, failing eyes and ears (paid league umpires or club ones) who like to be in the game..
then you have batsmen who are trying to steal a few extra runs by not walking
you have bowlers trying to steal a wicket by appealing anytime they can even though they know full well it isn't out
you have wk, slips, point, fine leg all appealing like it's stone dead when it's 90-10
there is no answer. accepting bad decisions is all good if EVERYONE plays in the same way, same spirit of win at all costs. It's amateur cricket, so that's just not going to happen as the majority pay to play, give up a massive amount of time in a week so won't accept it week in week out anymore..
Hence it putting people off the game.. The game can't afford to keep losing players on something that could be fixed by simply making it laws (and get umpires to apply them of course!!) to not over appeal (by that , any time it hits a pad go up.. no team appeals (lets face it.... only the bowler and wk have any idea, the rest should keep the gobs shut), batsmen walk or if given out.. lose 5 runs maybe (not really practical but would make standing there risky)
or
just leave it as it is and the game will keep losing people as only a small handful of the great many who play Saturday/sunday's are willing to keep giving up time as the participation figures show (many other reasons for not playing, time, energy, money, travel, mrs's/Mr's, social lives, changing lifestyles)
I know I am struggling again this year to get any excitement for playing cricket. I'm just not sure I can face dire WEPL umpires firing left right and centre, teams abusing verbally from ball one week in week out, appeals every time it hits a pad even though you know it's a stupid call (and yet, always have a fear the dire umpire will go 'you got'.. that's before I add in the time, effort and money cost of rocking up on a Saturday
Netting though.. love it.. can't play the game enough and love improving .. so it's not cricket that's the problem.. it's either me (not the only one losing the will to play though if you just take participation figures as a guide) or it's the way we play the game that's putting people off.
Not sure how or IF you can fix it..
the 100 isn't he answer though :) :) :)
-
It's all an un-winnable argument on both sides. The game is split. IF you have technology and decent umpires (rare) then you can trust that things even themselves out etc etc... If, like most you have old farts, failing eyes and ears (paid league umpires or club ones) who like to be in the game..
then you have batsmen who are trying to steal a few extra runs by not walking
you have bowlers trying to steal a wicket by appealing anytime they can even though they know full well it isn't out
you have wk, slips, point, fine leg all appealing like it's stone dead when it's 90-10
there is no answer. accepting bad decisions is all good if EVERYONE plays in the same way, same spirit of win at all costs. It's amateur cricket, so that's just not going to happen as the majority pay to play, give up a massive amount of time in a week so won't accept it week in week out anymore..
Hence it putting people off the game.. The game can't afford to keep losing players on something that could be fixed by simply making it laws (and get umpires to apply them of course!!) to not over appeal (by that , any time it hits a pad go up.. no team appeals (lets face it.... only the bowler and wk have any idea, the rest should keep the gobs shut), batsmen walk or if given out.. lose 5 runs maybe (not really practical but would make standing there risky)
or
just leave it as it is and the game will keep losing people as only a small handful of the great many who play Saturday/sunday's are willing to keep giving up time as the participation figures show (many other reasons for not playing, time, energy, money, travel, mrs's/Mr's, social lives, changing lifestyles)
I know I am struggling again this year to get any excitement for playing cricket. I'm just not sure I can face dire WEPL umpires firing left right and centre, teams abusing verbally from ball one week in week out, appeals every time it hits a pad even though you know it's a stupid call (and yet, always have a fear the dire umpire will go 'you got'.. that's before I add in the time, effort and money cost of rocking up on a Saturday
Netting though.. love it.. can't play the game enough and love improving .. so it's not cricket that's the problem.. it's either me (not the only one losing the will to play though if you just take participation figures as a guide) or it's the way we play the game that's putting people off.
Not sure how or IF you can fix it..
the 100 isn't he answer though :) :) :)
Well said!
Problems arrive when standing umpire are not impartial, and you can see that straight away!
-
Well said!
Problems arrive when standing umpire are not impartial, and you can see that straight away!
Neutral umpires are not the panacea either. 'League' umpires are generally terrible.. Club umpires are generally cheats and player umpires are generally... well, you at least know you're not getting anything I suppose